Cosmic Book News: Comic Book Movie News, TV, Gaming and More

Review: Guardians of the Galaxy #6 (Bendis)

It’s really a shame that this book is called Guardians of the Galaxy when it’s such a pale imitation of all the preceding much better efforts using the same name. I wish Bendis, Brevoort, Wacker, Alonso, et al would just get it over with and re-name this book Space Avengers or, more accurately, Avengers in Low Earth Orbit, or my personal favorite: Holy Fark! Not ANOTHER Avengers Book!

Let’s face it; Bendis’ version of GotG is just another Avengers book. And even though the GotG is made up of people who actually have valuable knowledge about how the cosmos works, the politics of the local group of galaxies, and the advanced technology of the great powers of the local group – they’re relegated to wasting time protecting Earth from fairly minor threats while Earth’s protectors are in way over their heads out in the cosmos. Make any sense to you? Me neither.

So the woman who fought Ronan to a stand-still can’t take Angela? So the entire team that has fought The Magus, Thanos, The Phalanx, etc. (and won) can’t take Angela? But a single shot from Quill’s element gun lays her out? Right. Good one Bendis. And it only took you the entire issue to pull off that particular deus ex machina.

As usual, Iron Man is completely out of place, and Bendis writes most of the rest of the cast out of character – particularly Drax. At least he’s stopped trying to create stupid catch-phrases for Rocket. A great improvement in this book could be accomplished simply by dropping Iron Man from the cast and sending him back to Earth where he belongs.

“Editor” Wacker must shoulder a large part of the blame for the decline in Marvel Cosmic’s quality. He along with Bendis and Loeb seem hell-bent on erasing everything that made DnA’s revamping of cosmic into something worthy of a big budget movie, and replacing it with hackneyed storylines aimed squarely at the lowest common denominator of comic book readers. Thankfully we’re spared Wacker’s smarmy glad-handing of easily pleased non-cosmic fans as there’s no letters page to suffer through this issue. Coipel’s art is certainly respectable, but it’s not quite up to the bar set by Pichelli. It’s a shame the writing is not up to par with the art as Pichelli makes an excellent addition to the artists who render cosmic well. Ponsor’s colors remain at their usual eye-catching best. As usual, the art and coloring are the best things about this book.

I suppose the movie hype and the appeal to Avengers-zombies are the elements that keep this book selling as well as it does. That’s too bad as these characters deserve such better treatment than they’re now receiving. In the hands of a capable cosmic writer, GotG could be great again. As it is, Bendis’ GotG is just another Avengers-like glorification of mediocrity which is not truly written as cosmic and not truly meant for cosmic fans.

Comic Book News

Review: Jupiter’s Legacy #3

Your father is the greatest super hero that ever lived, but you will always be in his shadow. The worst part is that he reminds you of it constantly, you will never be good enough to up hold your legacy no matter what you do! But, what if you are not the only one that loathes and resents him for his arrogance? What if there are others out there that have had enough as well, others that are willing to band together to “remove” the obstacle that has always been holding you back?

That is the premise of the third issue of Mark Millar’s brutally honest look into the dark secrets of a superhero family. It is a story that has been told countless times, being felt across the ages as son strives to become a man worthy of his father respect, but Millar puts his patented spill of brutality on that classic coming of age tale and creates something wholly unique in the process.

Known for his over the top sensationalism, Mark Millar combines with superstar artist, Frank Quitely, in order to create one of the most brutal issues I have ever read. This issue is a non-stop blitzkrieg that will shock and astound you and, most definitely, leave you wanting more! But, it is not the overtly callous actions thrust upon a supreme family that makes this such a fantastic book, it is the underlying tale of treachery and deceit that truly holds sway over the reader. It is the slow prodding by a jealous uncle, the final push of a nephew over the point of no return that will resonate far longer as a great read than just the visual destruction of a family. Not that what happens to Brandon’s poor mother or his father’s final moments at his own hands won’t be with you for a VERY long time, but it is that old morality play done with a Millarian twist that will stay with you forever!

If you haven’t been reading this book, don’t start with this issue! I beseech you to travel far and wide to find all three issues and read them in one sitting in order to fully enjoy this mesmerizing tale before it jumps ahead nine years for issue #4! But remember, you don’t have to read this book, you NEED to!

Comic Book News

Review: Green Lantern #23.4: Sinestro

Told from the perspective of ex-Yellow Lantern, Lyssa Drak, Green Lantern #23.4 delves deep into the forbidden history of Sinestro in an attempt to keep the destroyed Book of Parallax preserved for future generations.

Matt Kindt writes a mesmerizing tale of one of the most interesting characters in the Green Lantern mythos — Sinestro! Although it has the makings of the tried and true “origin” story, the way Kindt tells the tale in a warped perspective from Lyssa Drak’s narrative and the actual events rendered through Dale Eaglesham’s glorious art, is both fresh and invigorating! It is an enthralling tale of Sinestro’s beginning to his bitter “end,” touching upon the most important events in his lifetime and pinpointing the exact moments where the presumed “hero” began to slide into the depths of fear. Not only does Kindt re-kindle our love/hate relationship with Sinestro with this book but he also brings the amazing character, Lyssa Drak, back to the forefront as well. Twisted and forever changed by the events of this book, Lyssa Drak, is a character to look out for in the coming months in the Green Lantern family of books. For, where she goes, the legend of Sinestro is sure to follow!

Creative and beautifully drawn, Green Lantern #23.4 is one of the best books to come out of this “all villains” month event. It is smart and engaging and I highly recommend it to anyone wanting to re-familiarize themselves with the greatest villain ever created in the history of Green Lantern!

Comic Book News

Review: Justice League #23.4: Secret Society

All in all, DC’s grand scheme to bring about a focus on their villains has been extremely flat. Most books have been only used to tell you what to buy next without giving you a story that would actually make you want to do so! Add to that, the negative hype regarding the 3D cover shortage and the dollar price hike and DC has really painted themselves into a corner.

There have, however, been a few exceptions to the rule and Justice League #23.4 is a shinning example of what this entire event should have been!

Geoff Johns and Sterling Gates give us a glance into the villainous world of Owlman and the alternate version of Alfred Pennyworth, in which evil reigns supreme and history is twisted. Bat fans will enjoy seeing the legend they love so much be shown in a completely different light, one where Thomas Wayne has taken up the mantle of the Bat and Alfred seems to be pulling the strings of the Dark Knight. Speckled with a myriad of Bat characters, this story has that subtle “Easter egg” feel to it, but it is the tale of Alfred and his inevitable change into the character wrecking so much havoc on the Justice League that is the most compelling.

This tale is by far the pinnacle of this “event” for DC. Where other books have failed to grab the reader, partially due to a ton of fill-in writers on the stories, Johns and Gates have created something that has depth and is truly character driven. Not only does their tale deliver on developing a marvelous “new” villain but it directly leads to pertinent storylines in the “Forever Evil” mini-series. Coupled with dark and gritty art by the fabulous Szymon Kudranski, this book is the overall best effort put out so far and it will actually make you want to continue with next month’s Forever Evil #2!

Movie News Reviews

Review: Grand Theft Auto 5

Great, But Not Perfect

A video game review of: Grand Theft Auto 5

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11309:]]

Let’s face facts. GTA5 is the frontrunner for 2013’s Game of the Year, and why not? First, it’s GTA, and its release means a cultural event far greater than the annual installment of CoD yielding plenty of media coverage showing kids craving ultra-violent entertainment, clueless parents acting shocked over “youthful corruption,” and plenty of knuckleheads out there acting out real world violence in the name of the game. Second, despite a number of excellent games in rotation right now like BioShock Infinite and The Last of Us, the hype for GTA5 has made many a gamer instantly set everything else aside to give this game its due. Third, we must recognize the sales, as in over $1 Billion dollars in three days, which cannot be ignored for any reason. Fourth, the game is, simply put, very good and very entertaining. Yes, GTA5 meets much of the hype by providing some of the most adult centric and intellectually stimulating content that Rockstar has delivered via this game series yet. No, this game will not make you a board member of Mensa, but the husky layers of social commentary regarding the state of the Western World are pretty thought provoking should the gamer take a brief hiatus from digital homicide and hooker beatings to read between the lines.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11310:]]

Presentation: Exquisite

This is easily the prettiest looking installment of GTA to date. Colors are vibrant, nightscapes are sleek, vehicles are exquisite and character models (specifically facial animation) are super smooth. The world of Los Santos is more alive than it’s ever been. I’ve not seen more detail in such an extensive sandbox game that one could literally donate hours of gameplay to simply walking around and taking in the views. The only thing that doesn’t look incredibly awesome in this game is the NPC population, which is totally justifiable seeing how you will be pulling them out of their cars, running them over, busting a cap in their *ss and subjecting them to various other nefarious activities that giving them all the same level of detail as the three protagonists (Franklin, Michael and Trevor) would be counter-productive. The whole environment is beautiful whether you’re hanging out in the countryside, driving around the city, parachuting from planes or deep sea diving.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11312:]]

Gameplay: Mixed Bag

Rockstar made a big deal about talking about how every control element of GTA5 would be a vast improvement over its much maligned predecessor. If such a thing existed, I certainly did not notice it. The fact of the matter is that the player’s avatar still moves like a tank while walking and running with virtually no lateral movement or ability to change course without throwing the camera angle for a loop. Snapping your character in and out of cover can be very frustrating if you aren’t ducking behind a flat surface. You’ll think you’ve pressed the button to get into cover, but the avatar does nothing because you aren’t close enough to an “appropriate” surface. I noticed a slight improvement in the targeting, but using the aim assist option can sometimes make your character target something your own eyes weren’t tracking at the time; true veterans will go to work without it. Driving also seems more forgiving as taking bumps from traffic and the environment at modest speeds will no longer send your vehicle into a somersault, but that does not apply to pushing super cars to their max speeds and trying to handle corners without a healthy application of the hand and regular brakes in tandem. Flying helicopters is much more user friendly, albeit an acquired skill to engage in smoother flights, but even errant waggles on the analog sticks will not send the vehicle careening into the closest skyscraper instantly. Flying planes is very fun (especially the fighter jet!), but landing them is a whole different story: practice makes perfect and take it VERY slow.

I loved and I mean LOVED the heist (or significant job) planning mechanic and mission based execution. Unfortunately, this isn’t used nearly as much as what the advertising for this game made it appear to be, and it pays out for your characters even less. The first moment for the player to experience this occurs fairly early in the game via the diamond heist, and it’s a bit of a red herring because it is extremely fun to set it up and execute, but the player will see this perfect balance of missions and rewards rarely before the story ends. I thought we were a crew of professionals taking scores like in Michael Mann’s Heat. Shouldn’t we be pulling more jobs than random BS chores from “strangers and freaks” that pay out precisely zilch?

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11313:]]

Functionality: Needs Patching

This is one of the biggest games, data-wise, that this counsel generation has been asked to digest, and as we enter only the second week of this game’s release, the gaming community is noticing a lot of issues. GTA5 is apparently making Xbox 360’s made prior to 2008 work too hard, forcing the game to crash fairly often. Players are noticing that vehicles stored in safe house garages and aircraft hangers will be erased spontaneously while progressing to story missions that instantly transport characters to a specific vehicle. I’ve personally run into several instances of the environment needing a few seconds to render back to normal fidelity upon exiting “skipped” taxi rides, which always makes me think the game is ready to crash before I get a chance to save my progress. Side missions seem to have an in-game shelf life as I’ve purposely put off doing some due to my increased interest in the story’s progression only to find side mission icons in the map to disappear permanently. That’s not to say all of the programming quirks are all bad. The very popular infinite money glitch involving sea exploration and swapping between two characters to reload money bags is a great way to acquire millions in the early game when money is fairly scarce.

I fully appreciate Rockstar’s desire to cram so much data into machines that almost need to over perform to get the job done, but giving them a complete pass on some of these significant issues is a mistake. I’m sure they will fix these issues in due time. My bet is a massive patch will come when we all download the GTA Online expansion next week.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11314:]]

Story: Immersive journey with a lackluster ending

If anyone had any apprehension about splitting this GTA narrative into the trials and tribulations of three characters coming from completely different backgrounds, I will have you know that this presentation is fresh, gives the player a greater feeling of control, and made me feel like I was actually forming an in-game GTA crew on par with any other faction in the game. A one man army against a world of opposition can only work for so long, and seeing how GTA5 is trending towards slightly more realism than a series like Saints Row is concerned with, being successful at taking scores requires being a member of a capable crew. The story doesn’t hang around any one character for too long as each one is fully fleshed out as an individual, but their balance and interplay as a group allows the player empathize with them all on a different level. My personal favorite is Franklin, despite Michael’s experience and Trevor’s crazy shenanigans.

Unfortunately, the ending of such an involved journey that GTA5 delivers is anti-climactic at best. There is a direct element of player choice that will determine three very different outcomes to the narrative, but in my opinion, there’s really only one option and I’ll leave that to the reader. The final sequence of missions is varied, interesting and filled with action, but the story leaves you (figuratively AND literally) at the side of a cliff left wondering, “That’s it?” Other games this year have delivered much more drama, but no one has been able to knock the ending out of the park.

Conclusion: Must-buy for adults. Parents beware. Peaks and valleys, despite the beauty. Budgets for many games seem to be spiraling out of control as every developer and publisher is going for AAA, Game of the Year money without having the staff, facilities and vision to produce such a product. This doesn’t apply to Take-Two and Rockstar as they have created another gem of a video game, but considering the time and money that went into this game’s development, anything less than what GTA5 is, would not be acceptable. I say this without factoring in any aspect of the online segment of this game as it’s yet to be released. Running around with an actual crew of your own buddies, online in the world of GTA has been a dream for many gamers and what seems to await us all on October 1 experience. But we don’t know quite yet what will be involved beyond the availability of “hundreds” of missions and micro transactions paving the way.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11315:]]

GTA5 really pushes the limit of the M-rating for video games as the excessive violence, pervasive nudity and relentless vulgarity are upstaged by the sheer adult content of the story and being able to understand why these characters are driven to the behavior they choose to engage in. Kids that are getting their mothers and grandmothers to buy this game for them should not be playing this because it’s much more involved than Call of Duty shooting. I say this because parents need to get smarter than their kids in regards to these kinds of games and because I don’t want these brats fouling up my online gameplay. Just kidding, but seriously, I don’t believe that video games turn kids into sociopaths, but immature people exposed to this kind of game without guidance might have their world outlook altered in unhealthy ways. Kids will find a way to play GTA5. It’s a fact. Parents need to be there for their kids to talk about it.

GTA5 is an excellent game that’s actually worthy of the $59.99 price point for a brand new copy, but by no means is it a “perfect” game. If I had to sum up its number one weakness (beyond the technical) it would be the restrictive controls and “feel” of the game, which is vintage Rockstar. Sure, the main characters are the furthest thing from trained ninjas, but I would have appreciated more precision to the overall control scheme. I also would have liked bank heists or high end robberies to be a larger presence throughout the game. I don’t think Rockstar would be concerned with stepping on the toes of a game like Payday 2, but as the player’s trio of protagonists attracts more heat, they aren’t exactly seeing the high reward for their high risk which results in fewer dollars to spend on stocks, property, vehicles and weapons to have even more fun with. Despite it all, GTA5 is just too much fun to pass on and the potential of GTA Online is as high as the sky, so my only recommendation to appropriate audiences is to pick this game up ASAP. Please, game responsibly.

Comic Book News

COVER SHOOT: The Top Five Comic Covers For 9/25/13

COVER SHOOT

By: Chris “DOC” Bushley

This weekly feature will take a look at THE most visually compelling comic book covers on the market today. Whether they be rare variant editions or just your standard fare, these are the top 5 covers that stand out amidst the bevy of books released each week. They say, “A picture is worth a thousand words” but these covers are worth more than that! No matter the storylines behind them, these covers compel you to at least check them out, which can be worth exponentially more than just words to the companies that publish them! Enjoy!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11258:]]

1. Artifacts #31 (Image): A stunning cosmic cover that exudes beauty, power and awesomeness! Stjephan Sejic is a true master of blending comic book concepts with high-res digital art to form perfect covers that astound the eye. This cover is so pristine that you can almost feel her fury crackle off the page!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11259:]]

2. Avengers Assemble #19 (Marvel): Jorge Molina is no stranger to drawing the female for but this cover transcends all his pervious attempts! A culmination of pencil, paint and great graphic design, this cover tells the story in a single image and yet, forces the eye to go beyond the central image and take in the gorgeous detail of the astounding background. Amazing stuff to behold!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11260:]]

3. Hellraiser: Dark Watch Vol. 1 TPB – Variant Edition- (BOOM! Studios): Not to be outdone by his color savvy competitors, Tom Garcia creates a beautifully eerie cover that is truly a work of art. The precise pencil lines make this cover pop off the page but it is the subtle blending of shadow and background images that make it so wonderful. It is an image that is both rich and haunting and is sure to be a stand out amongst it’s brethren.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11261:]]

4. Ame-Comi Girls Vol.1 (DC): Amanda Conner has a special place in the heart of the CBN offices and covers like this one is the reason why! Bleached background, graphic design and a simple layout image, combine to make a cover that is unlike anything else you will find on the shelves this week. Some may say that it too plain, too simplistic but anyone can plainly see that it is simply fantastic!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11262:]]

5. Guardians of the Galaxy #6 (Marvel): Say what you want about the writing, but this cover art will blow you away! Sara Pichelli gives us a classic comic cover layout with perfect lines and a color palette that dazzles the eyes. Strong and imposing, Sara’s Angela image is pitch perfect and I couldn’t ask for anything more. Well, maybe a story that is on caliber with this poster worthy, but that’s about it!

Movie News Reviews

Movie Review: Prisoners (2013)

Intense Excellence and an Emotional Toll

A Film review of Prisoners

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:11203:]]

What is a parent to do in an impossible situation? Your child is missing, but you also have a means of possibly finding out where your child might be and it directly involves doing something horrible. It’s a catch-22 between hell and the devil, and Prisoners is a film that puts the audience right into a parent’s worst nightmare in this exact scenario. This dramatic thriller plagues its cast and all those bearing witness with the impossible choice between the guilt of doing nothing and the demons of doing the unspeakable, and it is incredibly impressive how this is accomplished via the lens of religious morality and secular ethics without allowing the plot to spin out of control in either direction. Make no mistake; Prisoners is the first Oscar worthy film of the Fall thanks to a litany of marquee performances by a veteran cast and a story that that plunges its emotional tendrils into your soul and pushes the limits of your resolve.

Screenwriter Aaron Guzikowski certainly had plenty of material to draw from what with America’s media obsession with child abduction. So many families have been shattered. So many creepers have been thrust to the limelight. So many channels have reaped the ratings. As exploitive as the media may or may not be, it does provide an additional resource to get the word out to larger communities to join in an effort to find lost children, but its presence in this script is surprisingly absent. This helps the story immensely as the script is more concerned with making this fictional tragedy as personal as possible by highlighting those most directly involved with it. Scenes that play out within the victims’ families are written very realistically as self loathing and internal combustion are both fueled by anger, frustration and despair. Scenes that play out with the police are not quite as raw, but become so gradually which reflects how personal it can become for the men and women charged with finding children they have no relation to. What allows these scenes to intensify tenfold is that Guzikowski is constantly framing every conversation and argument within the ethics and morality of the situation at large which forces the audience to anchor at a personal level to what is happening in that instant. Amidst all of this drama, a very thought provoking crime conspiracy is playing out in the background and the balance amongst all the storytelling elements at work is simply masterful.

This film is a character and dialogue driven affair layered with elements of suspense. The fact that there isn’t a significant amount of action hurts the pacing a bit seeing how it runs for over two and a half hours, and the mood never sways from a negatively charged place. In addition to this general lack of movement, this film features one of the least interesting and brown scale color schemes a setting could provide any production. It is not an easy task for any director to look at these supposed handicaps and suddenly weave into an interesting film, but Denis Villeneueve chooses to allow the assets he does have at his disposal to lead the way, by staying out of theirs: the cast. More often than not (especially in films I’ve seen recently), actors have been horse-collared by script limitations that prevent interesting characters to be fleshed out and flat characters to remain so because the actors playing the leads are not as skilled as their costars. This is not the case for Prisoners. Every actor seems to reach perfect synergy with their characters and it takes a director that knows the script as well as his or her cast to achieve that kind of intimacy. The best directors are the least intrusive and provide leadership where necessary to complete the production.

Prisoners is a film that boasts one of the best supporting casts for a dramatic crime/thriller film. Terrence Howard and Viola Davis as the parents of one of the missing girls are exceptionally skilled at summoning tears on command. Maria Bello as the mother of the other missing girl produces a tragic train wreck of a woman shredded by despair. Paul Dano, once again, does what he apparently does best and will seemingly never escape: being extremely creepy. And let’s not forget Melissa Leo’s contributions as her prosthetic makeup conceals her identity, but her performance is anything but forgettable.

As much as Hugh Jackman has been promoted as the de facto Oscar candidate for the male lead in this film, Prisoners is every bit Jake Gyllenhaal’s baby as Jackman’s. Officer Loki is a detective clearly tormented by the utter filth that the worst human behavior has subjected him to as he is a loner, but somehow driven to continue to fight the good fight. Gyllenhaal’s transformation into a man that is almost driven to any means necessary to solve this crime and save lives is truly a sight to see because it doesn’t take someone in law enforcement to identify with helplessness, and the frustration that manifests in attempting to completely hold your emotions in check to get the job done. It will be quite easy for most to overlook Officer Loki because he’s still an average cop, but Gyllenhaal’s everyman approach to it makes his part less about the impersonal role of the law and more about seeking justice without bending the rules of law and order.

Intensity describes every aspect of Hugh Jackman’s performance as Keller Dover, the father of one of the missing girls. He is presented as a burly father and husband who is loving yet very particular about doing things his own way because it is the “right” way. He’s also a man who’s Christianity is clearly a significant contribution to his outlook on life. He’s more of an Old Testament, wrath of God type than a New Testament, turn the other cheek type. All of this sets the table for a man who has always been in control of life to be completely at its mercy, but he’s certainly not taking it lying down. We may have all seen Jackman’s anger and rage in his iconic performances as Wolverine, but he goes well beyond that level in Prisoners. It isn’t a berserker rage that demonstrates this new level of intimidation, but a depraved indifference for any target of his character’s personal investigation to the disappearance of his child through his chilling demeanor akin to a psychopathic serial killer. Keller Dover’s decent into darkness is the fundamental journey of this film, and it is as disturbing as it is stomach-turning. Jackman shows what it means when seemingly average people are pushed to their emotional and spiritual limit, but also the dangers that come with rationalizing the irrational through faith or any other means of justification.

Prisoners is an excellent film, but it makes you feel awful to know that you are a member of a species of life that is capable of doing what is shown in this film, which is a reflection from reality. Any parents new to the child raising game could take a few lessons from this movie regarding always knowing where they are and who they hang out with. They will also leave the theatre completely paranoid over the very real possibilities out there, and the fact that there’s no such thing as a community that’s safe without vigilance, concern and care. Prisoners is a film that poses the question when life puts you to the test, will you abandon high class ethics, doctrines of faith or base human decency when extreme tragedy comes to your doorstep? Are all of society’s rules and regulations meaningless words in certain situations? Are we all just looking for excuses to go feral? So many films are asking these kinds of questions these days, but very few reek as much emotional havoc on the audience as Prisoners.

Movie News Reviews

Movie Review: Riddick (2013)

Remixing History

A Film review of Riddick

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10901:]]

Anyone familiar with the Riddick Trilogy could have easily seen the trailers for this most recent installment and said, “Hey, I think I’ve seen that before,” and they would be absolutely correct. It seems as if the formula for this excruciatingly rigid character can find no wiggle room outside of stories strictly about being hunted by mercs. What I find most distasteful is the fact that Riddick returns to his roots with an almost exact, bullet point for bullet point, plot recreation of Pitch Black. Of course, this isn’t much of a big deal for those showing up late to the Riddick party, and I can completely understand seeing how these films never seemed to reach an audience outside a cult following. The fans, on the other hand, will be somewhat disappointed because despite the charisma of the character, the story is completely recycled and appears to be going nowhere fast.

Riddick is a film that had no business being made in the first place seeing how Universal and Vin Diesel had abandoned the franchise after the abysmal performance of The Chronicles of Riddick back in 2004 when that film’s global take at the box office was only $10 million dollars more than its production budget of $105 million. According to the Riddick Wiki page, Diesel and filmmaker David Twohy secured the rights to produce a sequel that promised to return to the basics, which in turn got Universal interested in distributing it. In order to finance this production’s near $40 million dollar budget, Diesel leveraged his own house, and what followed was a series of financial setbacks that sandbagged the whole production. Despite these clear red flags, the production managed to pull through and land in the can, and I have much respect for all the crew, production staff and cast that made the film a reality. But an “A for effort” does not a film worthy of your hard-earned dollars make, especially when the story was supposedly going to bigger and more interesting places. “Due to private funding and a limited budget, the ‘Underverse’ plot could not be continued.”

Clearly, the real world of dollars and cents encroached heavily on this page of Hollywood history, but when big bucks, bigger names and the best effects cannot be relied upon to deliver the spectacle; writing is the only gun you have left in the cabinet. Unfortunately for Riddick, this tale is shooting blanks. I completely understand looking to a franchise’s original film for inspiration in troubled times during a follow-up, but carbon copying the basics of that story is inexcusable. If writer/director David Twohy was so starved for creativity thanks to his distracting production woes and multiple responsibilities, he should have considered shamelessly rebooting the Furyan all together, and why not? Reboots are in. As it stands, the story picks up all but immediately where we left Riddick as the Lord Marshall of the Necromongers, the most powerful force in the galaxy. So naturally, we spend 5 minutes of Riddick taking all of that away from him and stranding old shiny eyes on yet another god forbidden planet. Insert the plot of Pitch Black here (mercs show up, precise killing, creepy crawlies target everyone, an uneasy alliance occurs, retrieving a ship’s power source to escape), and that’s Riddick in a nutshell. I couldn’t tell if the revisited story was more annoying than the awkward cursing by everyone that seemed too forced to overemphasize everyone’s status as a bad ass or the ever bland one-liners by Riddick himself whose quotes easily devolve to vintage Stallone/Schwarzenegger. I understand that certain conventions are inevitable in sci-fi/action films, but that wasn’t what made this franchise (and this character) unique in the first place. Playing around with themes of light vs. dark both literally and contextually through character, rooting for the supposed bad guy and a shoestring budget yielding a big picture look are all things that made Pitch Black unique. There’s nothing unique about Riddick.

I will give the production staff a lot of credit for making this film at least look the part of a big time Hollywood production. Detailed creature CG is sporadic, but very functional in wider angles. Gunplay is standard issue, but not particularly intense. Landscapes are bright, but rudimentary. Costumes are necessarily minimal and vehicles are easily the most impressive in how they move amidst the backdrops they are framed within. I am absolutely certain that Vin Diesel’s home is safe, and an opening weekend just under $19 million is certainly a step in the right direction. However, if the true purpose of this production was to transform this franchise into a more cost effective carrot to dangle in front of studios for future film development, the audience needs more than a good looking movie to spread that word of mouth like wildfire. $40 million dollars can only get you so far, but higher stakes, rounder characters and a unique plot would’ve brought more butts to the theatres.

Riddick is not a film that contains what anyone would refer to as a marquee performance by anyone, but considering its production woes, getting “average” out of anyone could be considered a major victory. Gone is the charm from the likes of Keith David and Judi Dench, and as nice as it was to see Karl Urban again as Vaako, his cameo is merely five minutes of interesting (and far too brief) exposition that connects this film to the last. The cast is basically a collection of tough guys and gals that are physical, intimidating and as flat as your kitchen table. That’s not a bad thing in and of itself, but plenty of action films in the past have had similar requirements of their casts and a number of them proved capable of doing more with less, performance-wise. This is Vin Diesel’s baby, and as much as I appreciate his efforts as a labor of love, he’s still Dominic Toretto with glowing eyes. Jason Statham plays Jason Statham like Michael Cera plays Michael Cera and so too is the same with Diesel. He’s a tough guy without the most staccato of line deliveries. He gives you everything you could possibly expect of him in Riddick.

I actually enjoyed Pitch Black and much of that was thanks to Diesel’s performance as Riddick. He cares about his character and he cares about these stories, and that is something that you just don’t see with most Hollywood productions (especially the big-budget-effect ones). Unfortunately, Riddick is simply not good enough to recommend to anyone paying any price for a general admission. This is a Netflix/On Demand situation all day long, and for all the money and effort that went into making this film, I can’t help but think it could have been more if the filmmakers hadn’t simply gone to ground with the safest, plausible scenario they could think up to make this franchise profitable again. You’d think a smaller budget with less corporate ties and interfering influences would help foster more spontaneity and courage in regards to story and character, but this was not the case for this film. Oh conventionalism, you truly are a silent killer. The audience covets your familiarity, but your lasting impression involves the individual thinking about all the other things he or she could have been doing rather than subjecting themselves to something else they’ve probably seen many times before. My suggestion: Put your $10 towards GTA 5 which comes out in just over a week.

Comic Book News

COVER SHOOT: The Top Five Comic Covers For 8/28/13

COVER SHOOT

By: Chris “DOC” Bushley

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10545:]]

1. American Vampire Anthology #1 – Variant Edition – (Vertigo/DC): This homage to the Godfather is a striking image that is sleek and beautiful in it’s simplicity. Rafael Albuquerque uses an ink wash to create this ode to the past but still manages to convey a high level of detail with such a fickle medium. His level of skill is unmatched and this cover proves it!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10546:]]

2. The Green Hornet #5 – Variant Edition – (Dynamite): Paolo Rivera gives us a “behind the scenes look” with this sketch cover which will surely draw your eye at the local comic shop! I always appreciate these kinds of covers, ones where we get to see the bare bones of the art in it’s pure, unaltered form. There is something awe-inspiring about seeing the artist concept formulated in high pencil detail prior to color and ink that makes you want to pick up a pencil yourself and give it a whirl!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10547:]]

3. Batman/Superman #3 – Variant Edition – (DC): Yes, Jae Lee appears on this list again, but give me one good reason why he shouldn’t! With the stark contrast in color between the background and the central characters — everything pops on this cover! There is so much detail and such a visually appealing layout, that the eye doesn’t know what to take in first. Plus, his rendition of Darkseid is PERFECT!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10548:]]

4. The Wake – Director’s Cut #1 (Vertigo/DC): Sean Cassidy did an amazing cover when this book was originally released, but this one far surpasses that! The bleached white background offsets the minimal color palette used and helps to accentuate the bold lines of the central image. It is truly enthralling and definitely creepy!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10549:]]

5. Uncanny Avengers #11 (Marvel): John Cassady creates a cover reminiscent of one of my favorite X-Men covers, Uncanny X-Men #249. Although his layout is completely different, his lack of color and placement of Wolverine as the central sacrifice, brings about the same feeling of dread that I felt all those years ago. The cover is rich in it’s simplicity but even more so it the feeling it conveys to the reader. Very nice work!

Movie News Reviews

Op-Ed: A Response To Ben Affleck Batman Nerd Rage & Why Heath Ledger Argument Doesn’t Work

This One is for Brandon

Responding to Affleck Love and Nerd Rage

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10480:]]

Oh internet; you truly are the last bastion of pure democracy. I suppose it makes sense to turn debating things as frivolous as casting calls into an absolute war of the words where no cheap shot will be left untaken and numerous lines will be crossed. The blanket of anonymity emboldens us all, and though it may give the individual courage to speak up where personal insecurities would otherwise keep the one mute, it has a tendency to inspire reckless behavior riddled with negative energy. Perhaps trashing other people’s opinions and perspectives acts as some twisted catharsis, but I’ve never felt pure glee by engaging in it.

Recently some readers took issue with my op-ed concerning my displeasure over Ben Affleck being cast as Batman for the Man of Steel sequel and presumably, all Justice League tie-ins for the foreseeable future.

First of all, that was (as this is) an op-ed which according to the Online Etymology Dictionary is defined as a page of a newspaper opposite the editorial page, usually devoted to personal opinion columns.
It was not an essay making an argument against sending financial aid to countries that appear to be acting against the interests of the US. It was a raw, emotional, soap box moment where I expressed a personal opinion that Affleck is not the right choice for Batman. A choice like that leaves too many questions for me regarding the future of these DC adaptations because the shear inclusion of that character in Superman’s sequel undercuts Kal-El’s own importance. That combined with the debacle that was Green Lantern plus the lack of some teaser, tie-in or reference to this new DC universe independent of Nolan’s trilogy at the end of Man of Steel makes me think there still is no master plan for the movement. Until that changes, “it’s the end” of those films for me.

Second, pinpointing The Town and Argo as proof positive that Affleck will clearly be an excellent Batman is as opinionated as my use of those examples to suggest the opposite.
In both of those productions, Affleck was placed in multiple seats of power and influence as a co-writer, director and lead actor. Is he somehow not going to use those opportunities to showcase himself in the best possible light? I liked both of those films, and I reviewed them here on Cosmic Book News, but until he has been confirmed as the director of Justice League and every other ancillary title where Batman will appear, he’ll have to start taking direction. Affleck and Snyder will certainly have moments of disagreement in their future endeavor as they are both bringing different experiences and ideas to the table. The danger lies in Affleck potentially responding in the way of the prima donna, and then press releases citing “creative differences” occur, people walk off sets and in the meantime, the production gets sandbagged. The Town and Argo are not proof that he can listen to someone else in authority over him to adjust a performance for the better of the film, not just the actor. He was the authority in those films.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10481:]]

Third, let’s examine the comparisons with Michael Keaton’s Batman and Heath Ledger’s Joker as further proof positive that Affleck’s Batman will be just as unexpectedly successful.
Tim Burton’s Batman may have followed Richard Donner’s Superman, but it is the Dark Knight’s adaptation in 1989 that created the contemporary model of using big Hollywood names in the active, title roles for superhero films in the future as opposed to only support roles like Marlon Brando’s Jor-El. “Big” defined every level of this production and for Tim Burton, a man whose previous production credits only included Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure (1985) and Beetlejuice (1988), it could be understood that the pressure was on. We could have wound up with Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Charlie Sheen, Pierce Brosnan, Tom Selleck or Bill Murray, but producer Jon Peters liked Keaton’s edginess, and Burton’s familiarity with the actor certainly didn’t hurt. Yes, the fans blew up back then as they are now, but the main difference in the situations (besides the history between the director and lead actor) is that the production hired Batman co-creator Bob Kane as a creative consultant. If you can’t trust the character’s creator, who can you trust? Batman/Superman should have similar DC heavy weights like Geoff Johns or Scott Snyder as regulars on set, in the writer’s room and right now researching plot development, but as of now, anyone else’s involvement in these DC films are rumored at best. Sure, Johns failed Green Lantern as a co-producer, but I believe Affleck would respect actual DC writers if not his own film’s staff if push came to shove. This production requires supervision and/or support.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10482:]]

As for Heath Ledger, the parallels are once again uncanny. Clearly he was cast against type where films like 10 Things I Hate About You, The Patriot and A Knight’s Tale had him on the path of the classic, Hollywood leading man. But then he starred in films like Monster’s Ball and Brokeback Mountain, and those were considerably riskier roles for a young actor who would eventually perish before his prime. Ben Affleck’s filmography is layered with classic, Hollywood leading male roles depicting him as the love interest, the tough guy or the arrogant power monger; i.e. fairly unchallenging work for a good looking dude to pull off. Nothing about the Joker as a role suggests the use of some formula for casting or performance in order for it to be successful, but then news reports concerning Ledger’s preparation process hit the press prior to his death which was equal parts disturbing and impressive. In an interview with Empire Magazine he stated, “I sat around in a hotel room in London for about a month, locked myself away, formed a little diary and experimented with voices . . . I ended up landing more in the realm of a psychopath – someone with very little to no conscience towards his acts.” That diary has since been revealed to the public demonstrating the obsessive immersion he subjected himself to so as to deliver the Joker unlike anyone before. Yes, working out two hours a day is impressive for Affleck to shape up for Batman, but his character will never be a physical match for Superman. I don’t expect his preparation to involve hanging out in caves or interviewing orphans who were victims of violent crimes, but something a little more mundane like researching with LA’s CSI would sway me more as to his seriousness for the role because it would at least get him in the right detective mindset (assuming that’s the kind of Batman we’ll even see).

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10483:]]

Fourth, I’d like to address my opinion of Ben Affleck in general based on his career’s mixed bag of roles, his overbearing personality that comes out in shows like Real Time with Bill Maher and his less than gracious Oscar acceptance speech with Matt Damon for Good Will Hunting.
I also don’t like the fact that his ability to direct has been identified as some transcendent skill set unique from any other director and has nothing to do with the all-star actors that fill his casts like Jeremy Renner, Chris Cooper, Jon Hamm, John Goodman and Alan Arkin. Before we’re all ready to crown Affleck as the next American Auteur, let’s recognize that his opportunity to direct is specifically due to his being cast as the star, and his star equates to very specific dollars and cents for studios. He’s the money choice. He’s the corporate choice, and that above every other reason is why he is the next Batman. You may not agree with any of these statements, but they are reasonable enough to not like anyone or anything in particular.

Not once did I say that I hate him. Not once did I make some bigoted comment regarding him personally. Not once did I incite anyone else to join in on dedicated bashing like signing that petition to President Obama to remove Affleck from Batman. Heck, I never even said he was a bad actor. He’s simply not my cup of tea and I feel he doesn’t have the intimidation factor and mature mind set needed for Batman. That’s not a fact, it’s an opinion. Facts are as follows: He is an actor, he gets paid lots of money and he will make so much more being Batman.

Now I’d like to take this opportunity to thank our live caller, Brandon for his comments and discussion during CosmicBookNews’ first live podcast. He represents the best of what debates over pop culture can be. His comments were intelligent, entertaining, and although we didn’t agree on everything, nothing got personal and nothing got nasty. I’m not even going to reference the negative comments to my own article in order to address real concerns over the death threats being issued on Facebook pages for Man of Steel concerning this casting situation. I honestly do not know what people are thinking by sinking to that level and it clearly represents the worst of what actual nerd rages are capable of. It’s just a comic book adaptation for crying out loud. Even if people are joking, and even if they don’t really mean it, that is totally out of bounds. Commentary like that is an embarrassment to civilized society. Change that. It’s not commentary; it’s verbal vomit. So once again, I say to Brandon good looks, we appreciate your opinions and invite you to join us again for another live podcast.

Movie News Reviews

Op-Ed: Ben Affleck As Batman Is The End Of DC

This is the END, DC!

Attempting to comprehend “Why?!?”

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10411:]]

It’s Thursday night, August 22, 2013, and I just found out that Ben Affleck will be the next Batman in the sequel to Man of Steel as well as what I presume will be DC’s efforts moving forward to culminate in Justice League. Let that sentence percolate for a moment. Ben F*CKING Affleck!?!? Here’s a pro tip: count to ten, take a breath, in the nose, out the mouth. Needless to say, but I am extremely disappointed in this decision. Nothing (and I mean NOTHING) in this actor’s repertoire indicates that he would, could or should be Batman in a serious adaptation of that character’s license on the silver screen. I’ll delve into my opinion about this debacle later, but first I need to make some predictions about what this means for DC shamelessly attempting to recapture The Avengers in a bottle.

1) Established media entities will universally praise this move.
Affleck, love him or hate him, happens to be an A-list, popular name whose attachment to any film production can send budgets through the roof and potential ticket sales of seemingly obscure films in the same direction. He’s a regular on GQ, he’s a tabloid darling, and thanks to Argo he not only has “street cred,” but finally something significant to distinguish himself from Matt Damon’s more esteemed body of work. DC, Dune Entertainment, Syncopy and Warner Bros. are making this decision entirely about money, but the false assumption is that Affleck has this effect for this kind of serious comic book adaptation. In the one, previous stint Affleck had with starring as a superhero: Daredevil, that production had a budget of $78 million dollars in 2003 and its GLOBAL take at the box office was just under $180 million. This is NOT an example of “showing me the money!”

2) Bat Fans, Bloggers, Fan Websites and anything else remotely grassroots will universally pan (or at least raise a serious eyebrow at) this move.
The die-hard fan (a.k.a. fanboy) is instrumental in turning these comic book movies into legit challengers to Avatar’s all time money record. They’re the ones that pump movies they like incessantly (and for free) on the internet, attend multiple screenings and contribute to a fever pitched word of mouth campaign to do the kind of things The Avengers did. Core fans don’t care very much for Affleck because everything about his persona reeks of Shannon who worked at The Fashionable Male in Mallrats. He’s comes off as arrogant, narcissistic, over privileged and completely devoid of an ounce of genuine humility. You know, he’s the kind of guy that beat up the comic book geeks and nerds in high school. Yeah, this decision should go over really well with them.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10413:]]

3) Superman vs. Batman and Justice League by extension will be out-earned, outperformed and out-classed by the Marvel Films.
DC is already at a distinct disadvantage with making Superman the center piece of their movement because that character’s godlike immunity makes him difficult to connect with contemporary audiences. Green Lantern was so awful that DC would rather have everyone completely forget that it ever happened. Nobody gives a damn about Aquaman. No woman (save for Lucy Lawless in her prime) could do Wonder Woman justice. And no one (outside of “the core”) knows about Flash, Martian Manhunter or Cyborg. DC’s most valuable character is the one they’ve already made seven movies with, and Christian Bale’s performance is recognized by many to be the “best Bat” to date. Oh, and Bale happens to be an Academy Award winning actor.

4) Zack Snyder is going to be constantly hitting every media outlet to pump up Affleck as Batman and tell nay-sayers to shut up.
“(Affleck) has the acting chops to create a layered portrayal of a man who is older and wiser than Clark Kent and bears the scars of a seasoned crime fighter, but retain the charm that the world sees in billionaire Bruce Wayne. I can’t wait to work with him.”
– Zack Snyder.

Expect to see unending remixes of this last statement for the next two years. By the way, if you were looking for a translation for that quote, it goes something like this: “Forget your apprehensions concerning this casting call; Ben Affleck is the perfect Batman because the studio told me so, and I couldn’t identify a real actor even if Hugh Jackman punched me in the face.” Okay, so that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but seriously, what was Snyder thinking with that? “Scars of a seasoned crime fighter,” implies the aforementioned humility factor that a career spent personifying arrogant bastards is pretty much incapable of depicting.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10414:]]

5) Everyone will suddenly pine for Superman snapping Batman’s neck in the movie.
This has a lot to do with prediction #2. Frank Miller’s, The Dark Knight Returns has that infamous showdown between Batman and Superman that has had every comic book aficionado salivating over Batman’s ability to overcome any odds and defeat any adversary put before him. People like Batman because he’s dark, deductive, mortal and flawed, and Superman was depicted as a brain-washed boy scout in that comic. Affleck is not an underdog though; he’s a front-runner and people want to see him get taken down a peg or two. Ergo, Henry Cavill needs to melt his face off with heat vision. Perhaps this is all an elaborate scheme by DC to make Superman their #1 guy in the eyes of the fans: by neutering Batman with Affleck.

I’m sure other things will happen like fans picketing theatres, or petitions to bring back Christian Bale. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if people hit up Kickstarter to put real money behind the serious opposition to this decision, but the fact of the matter is that this casting decision is the furthest from a slam dunk and it astounds me that no one calling the shots for DC’s film adaptations gave this a serious thought. Not once did I ever consider Affleck to be a legitimate contender for this role because he’s simply way too high-profile for it. What motivates an actor who’s already made millions and could give two shits if people don’t like his performance? I simply do not know, but actors who have neither of those are more likely to deliver a better performance and that’s what it should really be about.

The one thing I’d really like to know is what Affleck’s boy, Kevin Smith has to say about this. I’m sure he’s polishing his knee pads for the man now that the decision’s been made, and it’s out there for everyone to discuss, but I’d want to know what he’d say behind closed doors before any rumors concerning his casting were ever conceived.

I know I should be a more mature, reasonable and responsible journalist in regards to expressing my opinion on this matter, but I simply never cared for Ben Affleck, any of his films, his association with J-Lo, and his (generally speaking) smarmy attitude. I care even less for him now that he’s been tapped to be my favorite vigilante. I realize I should reserve all judgment until the film comes out, but that would be difficult seeing how I am giving serious thought to boycotting DC’s films from this point on.

Make mine Marvel!

Comic Book News Marvel

Review: Nova #7 (Wells)

I finally found something to like about NINO! Issue #7 cured my insomnia! Yup; soporific #7 is a cliché-filled snooze-fest. Sadly, it further sullies and denigrates the legacy of the true hero whose name and title were stolen to smear across the cover of this intelligence-insulting excuse for a “cosmic” comic book.

Staying true to his Ultimate Spider-Man cartoon roots, NINO is particularly annoying in this issue as he bumbles from one pointless “adventure” to another. Whether he’s misinterpreting a non-dangerous situation as dangerous or nearly botching another “hero’s” rescue of civilians from harm; he’s written as an ineffective “idiot” (Loeb’s words – not mine) in every sense of the word. I found myself agreeing with Spock’s advice to him to just go home and watch Justin Bieber. No teen screw-up cliché is missed. Just roll your eyes at each one between swigs of Pepto-Bismol.

In the introduction, we’re told that NINO’s mom gave him permission to use his powers. Question: Wouldn’t that constitute child endangerment? Both parents have given a 15-year-old “idiot” permission to use the powers of a Nova Centurion – essentially powers equivalent to a tactical nuclear weapon. Is that responsible parenting? I wouldn’t want the most mature 15-year-old handling tactical nukes – much less an “idiot” like NINO. Anybody got the number for Arizona Child Protective Services? I want to report the Alexander’s so their parental rights can be terminated for sending a minor into kill-or-be-killed combat. Maybe Arizona will confiscate the “magic helmet,” too, and we can be done with NINO forever. When I consider the difference between what we had with the Rich Rider Nova – a powerful, effective hero – and what we have with NINO – a bumbling, ineffective idiot – I just shake my head in disgust.

NINO is an embarrassment to the legacy of the Nova concepts.

Used car salesman…….er………I mean, “editor,” Stephen Wacker, returns to the letters page this month. As usual, he cherry picks and publishes almost exclusively letters of fawning praise sent by persons self-professed as having no prior knowledge of cosmic or of any previous incarnation of Nova. One fawning NINO fan asks about Rich and is told that answers are forthcoming. In response, I invoke the ancient comic book ululation, “Noooooooooooooooooooo!” I don’t want Wacker, Brevoort, Loeb, Bendis, et al, having anything to do with Rich Rider. They’ve proven they don’t understand cosmic, don’t care about the feelings of the fans, and don’t respect the Nova legacy in the slightest. They’re only interested in slinging out “pseudo-cosmic” versions of teen Spiderman and “pseudo-cosmic” Avengers in near Earth orbit in a cynical attempt to entice Spider-zombies and Avengers-zombies to buy NINO and Guardians of the Galaxy. I use the word pseudo-cosmic because the cosmic aspects of their storylines are incidental rather than central – and every storyline is Earthcentric. Substitute teen Peter Parker for NINO and any of the casts from any of the seemingly thousands of Avengers teams for the GotG cast, and the stories would read exactly the same.

As usual, the art and coloring are the only things that keep NINO from being a complete waste of glossy paper for which too many brave trees needlessly sacrificed their lives. Medina and Curiel deliver some eye-catching work. It’s not enough to save this hot mess of a concept though – so save your money and buy good and true cosmic – like the Warlord of Mars series or Invincible.

Movie News Reviews

Movie Review: Kick-Ass 2 (2013)

A Little Less Kick, But a Bit More Heart

A Film Review of Kick-Ass 2

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10249:]]

Mark Millar’s brain child, Kick-Ass, is a comic series known for its extreme use of violence, language and adult situations that would make most standard issue comic book characters blush. It is meant to be an over the top, some would even argue “depraved,” depiction of people trying to be super-heroes in the real world which means real consequences like pain, broken bones and death combined with a very irreverent, comedic tone that makes for some hilarious moments. Then incidents like the Sandy Hook massacre happen, and it instantly causes some people to reevaluate the use of violence as entertainment which led to Jim Carrey (Colonel Stars and Stripes in Kick-Ass 2) recanting his involvement in the project soon after. Mark Millar made a public response to Carrey’s comment that expressed disappointment over his second guessing, and that this film’s title demands a certain level of violence not meant to exploit tragedies in reality. When comparing Kick-Ass 2 to the original, I find a film that is much less absurd, random and reckless with its use of violence and adult content which definitely has a positive impact on the overall quality of this movie. I am uncertain if the final cut was compiled with Carrey’s comments and real-world incidents in mind, but it certainly feels like it.

Having said that, Kick Ass 2 picks up almost exactly where the first film left off two years ago, and the artist formerly known as the Red Mist (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) has got an axe to grind with Kick-Ass (Aaron Taylor-Johnson). Although this plot is the primary conflict that unites every character in this film, there is a much more personal journey of discovery that is happening for Hit-Girl (Chloë Grace Mortez). She’s growing up and seems to have more than her inordinately hyper (or masochistic) desire to protect the city motivating her life. Where Kick-Ass was the title character’s focus on the classic origin story, the sequel is more interested with everyone’s secret identities and how they inspire the alter-ego-vigilantism. The story promotes a strong theme of family and coming together as a group to achieve great things from both ends of the moral spectrum, but make no mistake; violence, inappropriate humor and a healthy amount of cussing remain as the principal tools to propel the plot forward which keeps the entertainment factor fairly high for the duration of the film. Writer/director Jeff Wadlow certainly took a more tempered approach on everything from plot points to dialogue to make this movie seem less like pornography and maybe that flies in the face of the comic books, but it does make for a better fiction on film. Character arcs (though pedestrian) pay off, the violence (though graphic at times) serves a purpose and the idea of the impracticality of real-life super heroes is constant.

The action in Kick-Ass 2 is carbon-copied from the first film. It is very focused on hand to hand combat and small arms gunplay, but stunt work is fairly light and explosions are few and far between. Special and visual effects are also relegated to mostly slow motion sequences, and with a budget of only $28 million dollars, you aren’t going to be witness to a grandiose spectacle this side of The Avengers, but of course, that’s the point. Kick-Ass 2 is a very efficiently produced action adventure that needs to be stingy with fights and compensates with dialogue. We’re talking about street level violence so there’s no real need for thunder gods and hulks. While the camera gets pretty close to the aforementioned action which delivers that staccato punch to the audience, let’s be clear that as overused as the word “epic” is tossed around anything and everything conceivably “Hollywood,” it can’t be used for Kick-Ass 2 in any way.

If anyone was curious what Aaron Taylor-Johnson has been up to in his spare time since 2010, guess what? He’s been living at the gym and slamming the weights, and the proof is the absolute beastly shape he’s in for this film. It actually is somewhat curious considering that his character, Kick-Ass, isn’t really the focal point for this story, but his efforts were not in vain. His action sequences are right on mark, and his performance is actually quite sincere and charismatic. He is every bit as loveable and naive as he was in the first film, and his onscreen chemistry with his costar, Ms. Moretz pays off for both actors.

You know who wasn’t hitting the gym? Christopher Mintz-Plasse. He continues to bank on the success of pseudo-acting thanks to a little character named McLovin, and if your production ever needs a scrawny smart-ass that spouts off random humor in a squeaky voice, Mintz-Plasse is your man. I’m not taking pot shots at the guy as I’m glad things worked out for his career, but roles like the one he plays in this film: The Motherf*cker, are custom built for his brand of comedy which isn’t too far removed from Jack Ass minus the painful pranks.

The rest of the supporting cast is a mixed bag of goodness. Jim Carrey, thankfully, doesn’t deliver a full-tilt “Riddler” performance as Colonel Stars and Stripes, and although this effectively caps the potential ridiculous nature of his comedy, he is still adequate in his role as the unofficial leader of “Justice Forever” and mentor to the younger heroes. The most underrated performance is that of John Leguizamo as Javier, the Mother F-er’s bodyguard, who attempts to dissuade his crazy quest for vengeance, but winds up enabling him all the same. Leguizamo’s performance is as serious and focused as Morris Chestnut’s who plays Hit-Girl’s guardian, and both men do a satisfactory job at being fatherly figures.

This film, however, is really all about Chloë Grace Mortez as Hit-Girl. She easily kicks the most ass (no pun intended) of any individual character as a combatant, but she continues to grow as an actress that has the ability to allow her demeanor and her words do the actual talking (as opposed to her fists). Despite being the youngest member of this cast, her leadership is undeniable in every scene. She has genuine chemistry with everyone, but she is the one who sets the tone. Every actor plays off her intensity so much so that it’s very easy to forget that this young lady was born in 1997.

Kick-Ass 2 is a film that keeps the exact tone from the original which is both good and bad. Familiarity is what allows a franchise to become a brand, but the sequel is a little too familiar at times leaving me starved for some form of evolution: higher stakes or bigger spectacles. This is a must-see for fans of the original, but please make note that this film isn’t quite as brazen an experience. It’s a fun little movie that once again visits the absurd notion of super-heroes in reality that are just regular people without training, unique abilities or resources. However, that too, is the point and a message concerning the real world’s desperate need for real heroes (i.e. decent people simply doing the right thing) is quite satisfying for the audience as they exit the theatre.

Movie News Reviews

Movie Review: Elysium (2013)

Metropolis Wanna-Be

A Film Review of Elysium

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:10139:]]

Neil Blomkamp, the writer/director from South Africa that created District 9 follows up with his second foray into spearheading a special F/X, Hollywood production with Elysium. The lead-up to this film certainly had me very excited in that it was a brand new idea that blended sci-fi and action while seeming to have a solid cast in addition to making some worthwhile social commentary all at the same time. This would definitely be my kind of movie, but at the same time seemed like an all too familiar experience from District 9. That film didn’t exactly resonate with the global masses mostly due to its lack of action for the majority of the film, and it seems that Elysium was made specifically to address that issue. As a matter of fact, there are so many similarities between these films in regards to plot and theme that I wonder if this film was simply a make-up for District 9’s deficiencies. This summer has been very average in terms of the blockbusters we’ve all seen and/or heard about, and as much as I wanted Elysium to be the best, it simply did not deliver that summer fun, impactful glee represented by 2012’s The Avengers and The Dark Knight Rises.

Elysium is a very good looking film. Set design, CG settings and costumes were extremely well done to create a very convincing portrayal of what Earth would be like in 2154. The setting where most of the movie takes place depicts an arid, desert-like environment that bottle necks the populace into dense slums similar to the Brazilian “favellas” we saw in Fast Five. Everyone and everything looks dusty and dirty and every step the viewer takes with the cast from the slums to the industrial sector screams “poverty” at every turn. All of these visual elements contrast beautifully with the pristine, tech-plasticity of everything and everyone on the space station known as Elysium. The color palate is strictly whites, blacks and metallic grays (with a little green for the fake grass they show in the residential areas). Everyone looks like they were just in a business meeting or exiting an Abercrombie & Fitch, and everyone has had plastic surgery. Elysium is disgustingly pretty, and the fact that these visuals are constantly colliding allows the audience a chance to really get into this fictional world in order to appreciate this futuristic reality of the “haves” versus the “have-nots.”

Elysium also demonstrates some fairly impressive visual and CG effects throughout that pays off with satisfaction during action sequences. I was particularly impressed with the fidelity of the robots used throughout this film in that their rudimentary design seemed practical and realistic enough to be within the grasp of current technology while their interaction with people in the environment seemed as real as someone wearing a robot suit on set. I also enjoyed the gunplay in this film which depicts slightly advanced ballistics on the planet, but then graduates to more laser/plasma ferocity on the space station. My one complaint is in regards to the hand to hand combat which is neither aesthetically pleasing, nor competently captured by the camera for the audience to appreciate. I understand that our combatants are wearing exo-skeleton suits that wouldn’t allow them a ballet-like fluidity to their punches and kicks, but the use of hand-held camera work to capture these moments makes it seems much faster than it really is and the audience misses a lot. This continues to be a standard Hollywood strategy that allows the cinematographer to cheat by pushing the frame as close as possible to the action and then shaking it incessantly so our eyes can’t catch up to what probably is uninspired fight choreography or shoddy execution. If you want to shoot action, then make sure the real work gets put in before deciding on angles and when the camera rolls.

As I mentioned before, the story of Elysium is very similar to the overall message and tone of the futuristic dystopia of District 9: the poor get poorer, the rich get richer, everything and everyone is exploitable for someone else, there’s no real sense of community or family and the concept of surviving requires feral desperation, despite the evolution of technology. All of this is well and good (and has been done by just about every sci-fi film ever), but Elysium really tries to focus on the class conflict and how it directly relates to the fragility and mortality of the human body. Our hero Max (Matt Damon) is set on a frantic path to the space station as the only way to save his own skin, but while doing so presents an opportunity for the rest of the planet to share in the rewards. Max, however, is not the most sympathetic character conceived on paper and when moments arise for him to think of others before himself, he always takes the selfish route. It’s difficult to cheer for this kind of character because his circumstances do not appear to realistically burden his journey; he simply demonstrates no interest. Eventually, Max’s character arc brings him around to redemption, but the value of his journey exposes a reality that may be true today: disease, famine and poverty will never be dealt with because they exist as an all-purpose means of controlling the majority of the species. The themes of the script are much more meaningful than the characters or the rather pedestrian plot. In my opinion, the rich context does not compensate for this story’s lack of charm and complexity.

If the characters weren’t particularly interesting, the performances didn’t do much more to vitalize them. It begins and ends with Matt Damon as Max. His strongest moments are his glib interactions with robots that are quite comical, yet fairly rare. His biggest weakness is the flaccid “romance” he shares with Alice Braga as Frey who is not demeaned as the token babe in your generic action/sci-fi flick, but whose subplot does little to enhance the development of the overall story. Damon puts forth a capable performance, but is clearly miles away from the Bourne Trilogy and light years away from Good Will Hunting. Even when his character is endowed with the exo-suit, he never really cuts loose to kick ass until the climactic battle which is quite satisfying, by the way, and a clear cut above every action sequence prior to in this film. Whatever emotional angle Damon was playing at needed more with the exception of desperation, of which there was plenty, but I need more than that to connect with a character.

And speaking of “lacking;” how about Jodie Foster’s return to big budget films? Playing Defense Minister Delacourt, she is the true antagonist of the movie by conspiring to gain total control of the space station, but her character’s lack of control and inability to intimidate severely limits her villainy. I also found whatever accent she was attempting to be annoying and inconsistent as she breaks frequently to her natural speaking voice and it was completely unnecessary. Perhaps her natural talk is too low-brow for a citizen of Elysium, but that just means someone else should have been cast in the first place.

The best performance, by far, was that of Sharlto Copley whom you’ll remember as Murdock from The A-Team and the lead in District 9. His character, Kruger, is the real threat to the hero in this film, and he is easily the best villain of the summer thanks to his brazen malevolence and mental instability. You might think that it is easy for an actor to sell “evil” when it is framed within “crazy,” but Jim Carey and Tommy Lee Jones both proved in Batman Forever that “crazy” can fall flat on its face. Copley and his natural eccentricity electrifies Kruger as a defiant nihilist that lives for violence and somehow gets the job done despite a fleeting ability to focus and his only motivations being “just ‘cause” and “why not?” Sure, Kruger is about one level higher than a caveman, but his unpredictability is actually a welcome element of chaos amidst the well ordered society of Elysium and its well orchestrated control of the planet below.

Elysium is not the best film of the summer, and I really thought that it would be. A weak main character combined with a poor man’s Metropolis plot doesn’t match the proficiency of its thematic tone, visual style or exceptional villain. This is not quite the “thinking person’s” film that District 9 was, nor is it as accessible as something like Olympus Has Fallen which is about as standard issue as action films get. There’s simply not enough intrigue to label this as a must see in theatres, but it’s definitely worth checking out at your earliest convenience on Netflix. I’m glad director Blomkamp didn’t sell out by making a shamelessly unnecessary 3D port of his film, but please viewers, don’t get tempted by the allure of the IMAX screen. If your weekend isn’t already spoken for children thanks to Planes and you really need something to do, don’t pay more than a regular admission for Elysium.

Movie News Reviews

Casting The Batman Reboot: The Dark Knight Then, Now and Beyond

Batman Then, Now and Beyond

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9970:]]

Comic book adaptations continue to take the world by storm, and Hollywood’s desperate need to use “superheroes” as a crutch won’t see that trend ending anytime soon. So we know (think) the Justice League adaptation is coming in an effort to mirror Marvel’s success with The Avengers, but no one seems to know how DC’s team of super folk ought to be adapted to the screen. Does everyone get their own film to establish origins as well as a following? Do we present the team first? Oh, and what do we do about Batman? Yes ladies and gentlemen, that last question is the one that’s truly plaguing the executive brass over at Warner Bros., and DC because Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy remains too familiar within the social consciousness of the present and a depiction of that character (DC’s most valuable license) that isn’t as proficient will directly translate to millions (if not billions) in lost profit all over the world.

I’ve never liked the concept of “rebooting” and I never will, but that’s not to say some efforts have been made in good faith to really deliver some marquee entertainment that attempts to show an audience something we haven’t quite seen before. Nolan’s trilogy is a perfect example of this, but if Justice League is to happen then Batman not only needs a new face to fill out the cowl, but he needs someone who will be as dedicated to the role as Henry Cavill is apparently for Superman, as Robert Downey Jr. is for Iron Man, and as Christian Bale was for Batman before. If Justice League was truly a project attempting to carbon copy The Avengers, this production should have considered recasting Bale as Batman to maintain some viewer familiarity with that role as Downey Jr. has for Tony Stark. Not everyone saw the Captain America, Incredible Hulk and Thor films, but most saw the Iron Man trilogy thanks mostly to the performance of the title role. Bale’s presence could pay similar dividends for JL, but Bale has solidified his Hollywood legacy, he’s won his Oscar and made tons of money; he’s going to take a break now.

So, what is the corporate conglomerate to do? Audiences liked Cavill enough through strong showings for Man of Steel at the box office so Superman is set. Everyone hated Green Lantern (and rightly so), but can JL afford recasting another emerald warrior in the form of a brand new Hal Jordon or swapping him out for Alan Scott, John Stewart, Kyle Rayner or (ugh!) Guy Gardner? That character is a toss-up. How about a CG Martian Manhunter? Possibly. Is Wonder Woman simply inconceivable to cast due to the need to make her as physically dominant, yet sexy, attractive and somewhat cute at the same time? Perhaps. Flash, Cyborg, Aquaman: does anyone even care about these guys? Maybe not. The point is that The League isn’t particularly stable, so the two pillars of this fictional franchise have got to work well (butting heads) onscreen. Whoever is given the power to choose the next Batman better not miss.

That being said, we will discuss some possibilities for actors who could potentially do the role (ahem) justice, but before we do, let’s glance at some of Batman’s past renditions to see if we can extract the elements of a performance that are vital to bringing this character back to life for Justice League and beyond.

Adam West

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9971:]]

What worked: He helped bring Batman to the mainstream in the late 60s with a very family friendly performance that employed a decent amount of action for television shows produced at that time. The show kept fresh by employing a number of his iconic rogue’s gallery for several episodes. Heck, they even all teamed up against him; Legion of Doom style and Mayor Adam West confronted them with as much dignity as he could muster.

What didn’t: It’s obvious isn’t it? It was campy and it was foolish, and West had no choice but to play it that way. Seriously? Shark repellent Bat spray??? West is only partially to blame as the man was simply following direction and reading off the script, but his smarmy chuckles, warm smile and Little House on the Prairie interpretation of fathering Robin is far off the beaten trail for this character.

What to keep: Despite the dated nature of this material, West showed that you can generate interest and an audience through shear charisma and the man certainly had that in spades for his Batman. A suave demeanor and face is the shortest route to an audience’s heart, so the next Batman must have this kind of likability because his clashing with Superman over JL decisions (as well as his personal brand of “justice”) might lead an audience to view him as a villain.

George Clooney/Val Kilmer

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9973:]][[wysiwyg_imageupload:9972:]]

What worked: I count both men as the same because the only real positive impact they had on this character is the fact that A-list recognition will bring the masses to the box office; completely independent of the story, production value and quality of the performances. It is the primary reason why “stars” fuel Hollywood’s engine in the first place.

What didn’t: There’s almost too much to mention here, but let’s try anyway! Joel Schumacher, anatomically correct rubber suits, dumb stories and stylized settings are only a few reasons why Batman Forever and Batman and Robin ought to remain in the Dark Knight’s closet. However, the number one, unforgivable offense for both of these actors is that neither truly bought in to this character to give it the seriousness it deserved. They treated these movies as only paycheck films and it showed onscreen.

What to keep: Before Robert Downey Jr.’s career took a hiatus thanks to substance abuse and rehab, he was already established, A-list talent that every media entity dubbed as one of the “next big things in Hollywood.” Of course, blow can derail anyone’s career, but he came back with a vengeance thanks to the Iron Man franchise, and he did it by fully investing in his character and it produced a performance that will forever be linked to this man’s legacy. Sure, Christopher Reeve did this as an unknown for Richard Donner’s Superman, but odds are that A-list talent has a higher batting average to hit one out of the park in any role for audiences.

Michael Keaton

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9974:]]

What worked: Tim Burton’s Batman in 1989 kick-started the contemporary love affair with and modern adaptations of comic book characters and stories. It had a big production budget, bigger stars and encapsulated it all within a very dark, brooding and serious plot that brought the character closer to its roots than ever before. Many were confounded with the casting of Keaton who was more established as a comic (ha-ha) actor at the time, but Burton witnessed this man’s ability when they worked together on Beetlejuice the year before. Keaton yielded a performance that no one could have possibly predicted thanks to his Bruce Wayne persona that matched the trends of his past roles and a distinct Batman persona that was decidedly solemn, gruff and cold. He also rarely flapped his lips in regards to anything while donning the cape.

What didn’t: Hollywood is good at faking a lot of things. It even made Michael Keaton look like he was some kind of martial arts master; well, kind of. Keaton never has and never will be described as an action star, but the next Batman will always have the need to be depicted as very physical on the screen through stunt work and combat sequences. It’s not necessarily that Keaton’s action didn’t work in ’89, but that it won’t work for Justice League moving forward.

What to keep: Michael Keaton represents the antithesis of the two men who followed in this role. When it comes to the nature of a performance, there’s clearly no equation to separate “successful” from “unsuccessful,” but this is why casting is a tricky art form in and of itself. One makes a decision to fill out a role based on an actor’s history of work and the energy he or she brings to an audition. Open-mindedness is the key lesson in appreciating Michael Keaton as Batman which applies to the casting of either established talent or a new face entirely. I also would like to see the resume of whoever will be charged as the casting director for Justice League because if movies like the Star Wars prequels, Ghost Rider and Daredevil are credited to this person, we should all brace ourselves for JL.

Christian Bale

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9975:]]

What worked: He’s easily the most skilled actor to ever play this role and outside of his natural talent, has an entire history of completely selling out for just about every role he plays as evidenced by the extremes in physical conditioning he has subjected his body to over the years. He made me fall in love with Batman again thanks to Christopher Nolan’s more realistic interpretation of the character. He’s an Academy Award winning actor who kicks ass onscreen. There really isn’t much of that going on in Hollywood; ever!

What didn’t: Oh dear, Bale’s “Batman” voice was awful! He stumbled on to it about halfway through Batman Begins and never let go for the rest of the trilogy. I understand the need for the character to obscure his identity, but could we get the man a vocal coach for that? “Swear to me!” Sheesh! It makes me cringe even now.

What to keep: When push comes to shove, the actor must make the character his or her own. It doesn’t take a great actor to yield a great performance, but it certainly takes a great effort to do so. JL’s Batman will have some big shoes to fill, and that person had better not be intimidated in the least, otherwise the performance will suffer and sour the entire franchise. Bale’s confidence as an actor is nigh unmatched, and while the next Batman doesn’t have to be as proficient, I’d like him to at least be on the same path as an accomplished actor. Desire and dedication are absolute musts here.

Kevin Conroy

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9976:]]

What worked: What? A voice-over actor you say? What’s he doing here? True Bat-Fans know this man as one of the most iconic voices for comic book characters next to his co-star Mark Hamill’s rendition of the Joker. He’s voiced the Dark Knight in Batman: The Animated Series, Justice League, Arkham City and Asylum, DC Universe Online, and most of the direct-to-video DC animated features like the most recent Justice League: The Flashpoint Paradox. The best voice-over actors are masters at manipulating their voice, and one of Conroy’s often overlooked skills was his distinct differentiation between Bruce Wayne’s voice and his alter ego’s. His voice brings so much life to Batman that it would be remiss to disregard his contributions to the character and is easily one of the best portrayals of Batman ever.

What didn’t: Animation is limiting due to the obvious nature of the medium, but in Conroy’s case, this is actually a benefit. The man looks nothing like Bruce Wayne/Batman. Voice-actors also have less say in the organic evolution of a performance as they are constantly being given direction over the headset in a sound booth. An actor can only control so much when they are being told to “do it this way,” as opposed to live action where several actors over the years have clashed with their directors/producers over creative differences because their embodiment of their characters gave them more political power during production.

What to keep: Never underestimate the importance of the voice. Christian Bale’s weakness is Kevin Conroy’s strength, and the next Batman has got to own intimidation, the bass, the staccato and the diction. No pressure.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9984:]]

That was the easy part. Now comes what websites all over the globe love to get into and that is the theoretical casting call for who the next Batman could and possibly should be for the Justice League franchise on film. It seems a daunting task because there really isn’t a clear cut choice in Hollywood, but that assumes no one in the current talent pool is capable of a quantum leap in ability and performance.

Here are five suggestions in no particular order:

Armie Hammer (The Lone Ranger, The Social Network)

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9983:]]

Strengths: I still can’t believe that this is his real name, but regardless, this actor has consistently been in the rumor mill for this role, and it’s pretty obvious for some reasons. Besides the fact he’s 6’5”, 220 and there’s two of him, the man clearly has the right kind of body to step into the cape. I felt that the dramatic acting he displayed in J. Edgar is proof enough that he has the ability to be as serious with a role as he wants to be. His face is also attractive enough to sell billionaire, playboy Bruce Wayne without selling out as a stereotypical Hollywood boy toy that loses Bat-Fans everywhere.

Concerns: The Lone Ranger tanked and he had Johnny Depp’s help. This doesn’t bode well for his ability to aid in the helming of a franchise. Taylor Kitsch knows exactly what I’m talking about, and this leads me to my primary concern for Armie. How much would he really want this role? I see desire as somewhat lacking in this actor because he’s already shown the ability to act in different genres, so who knows how much he would want to buy into a franchise that will monopolize his life for a number of years into the future. Armie Hammer makes a lot of sense on paper for the next Batman, but I’m not sold on his ability to truly commit to this role. Tonto knows what I’m talking about.

Joe Manganiello (Magic Mike, True Blood)

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9978:]]

Strengths: This gentleman will be the only member (ahem) of the cast of Magic Mike that should ever be seriously considered to be the next Batman due to the fact that his face, physicality, size, shape, voice and demeanor make him one of the few bodies out there that I could see standing toe to toe with Henry Cavill. He has all the tools needed to thrive in this role, and he has demonstrated the acting ability to be intense for both action and drama.

Concerns: But, can Joe pull said intensity inside to yield the wounded loner and solemn respectability? Can he project intelligence, stratagem, leadership and experience? Supposing Warner Bros. wants this type of Batman to contrast with Cavill’s youth and inexperience, I’m sure Joe is capable once he puts that costume on, but his repertoire is not quite on par with that of Christian Bale. Limited experience and ability are the main concerns here.

Karl Urban (Dredd, Star Trek)

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9979:]]

Strengths: Karl has a much better gruff voice than Bale could ever possibly wish for, and he certainly has the acting chops to pull off this role. His look is also right in line with both the Bruce Wayne and Batman personas. He also has a very respectable history of work in these types of action and CG-heavy films that would make him that much more comfortable on set. He owns the concept of deadpan intimidation.

Concerns: Dredd was not a homerun for me, and that character is pretty close to what most Hollywood productions will make Batman look like. Karl will also have to hit the gym to buff out a little because being tone might work for Star Fleet, but even Batman’s body armor needs a bit more. I would love for Urban to use Hugh Jackman’s work out regiment, but that kind of commitment might be outside of this actor’s asking price.

Michael C. Hall (Dexter, Gamer)

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9980:]]

Strengths: This gentleman’s name has been tossed around the internet in connection with this topic for a while, and I didn’t quite see the connection at first, but the shear deviousness he demonstrates in Dexter proves he has more than enough “dark” for the Dark Knight. He has also demonstrated the ability to project an ordered and scientific persona which relates to Batman quite well. The overall acting ability is there for Michael to be the next Batman.

Concerns: Michael has recently been undergoing treatment for Cancer and the disease is now in remission, but the physical requirements for this role may be too much of a burden for this actor. Even a modest training regiment could be unreasonable and that instantly hurts his chances. He also comes up a little short in the stature department as well as the look of his face. No offense to him personally, but I’ll come right out and say it: his ears are just too damn big!

Jon Hamm (Mad Men, The Town)

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9982:]]

Strengths: If I had to pick one man, right now, to be the next Batman, Jon is it. He’s got the total package: the looks, the ability and the size. He’s a little older than some of the other actors I’ve suggested here, but I’ve always felt Batman should be older than Superman because he’s always seemed to represent the voice of experience in the hero game when these two come together. Jon has the ability to be in any kind of movie he wants which is stunning how his appearances continue to seem limited to me. It could be he’s genuinely not interested in his offers or it could be AMC’s contractual situation has him chained in their basement. Either way, if I was casting, the role would be his if he wanted it. Who knows how to act like a suave debonair better than Don Draper?

Concerns: As good of shape as he is in; the gym is the first stop for Mr. Hamm. However, this is usually the case for just about any role in an action film and something to which I’m sure he’s accustomed. Being well into his acting career might demonstrate a lacking desire and or energy to get involved in such a project, but that would be something for him to decide. He’s also not had an opportunity to demonstrate physicality in terms of hand to hand fisticuffs in many of his projects, but good stunt choreography could address this.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9987:]]

This is not the be all and end all to Batman’s possibilities, and the questions will only begin to be answered when the cast for the Batman/Superman movie is announced. We can all hope that “the right decision” is made, but whoever gets tapped will only begin their challenging journey because the proof will be in the final product. For better or worse, this decision will be binding for Warner Bros. who could ill afforded a series of recasting in this iconic role which would be interpreted by the viewing public as stumbling into the Justice League franchise as opposed to marching in with heads held high as Marvel did for The Avengers.

As for the rest of the rumored actors in line to be the next Batman, I will make short-SHORT commentary in regards to why they should NOT be Batman:

Ryan Gosling (too mopey)

James Franco (too busy looking in the mirror)

Bradley Cooper (too eccentric)

Michael Fassbender (he’s Magneto)

Joseph Fiennes (too old and too British)

Wes Bentley (not enough talent)

Tom Cruise (WAY too crazy, and old)

Andrew Lincoln (too busy with The Walking Dead)

Stephen Dorff (too skinny)

Josh Holloway (isn’t he supposed to be Solid Snake?)

Matt Bomer (too pretty)

Channing Tatum (the male version of Megan Fox)

Sam Witwer (who?)

Hugh Jackman (he’s Wolverine)

Any Hemsworth boy (contractually inaccessible)

Johnny Depp (um, no)

Jason Statham (too bald and too interested in generic action films)

Joel Edgerton (his face is too fat)

Sam Worthington (owned by James Cameron)

Chris Pine (he’s Captain Kirk)

Joseph Gordon-Levitt (must have a Barry Bonds body transformation to apply)

Shia LaBeouf (come on, really?)

Ryan Reynolds (didn’t he already fail at a DC hero?)

Vin Diesel (not enough hair, talent or time)

Movie News Reviews

Movie Review: The Wolverine (2013)

Logan Can’t Protect His Women

A Film Review of The Wolverine

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9855:]]

So this was the Wolverine movie we were all waiting to see? Oh I get it: a Wolverine movie where there’s a high body count, gore, dismemberment, lots of action, intrigue, a final one-on-one grudge match against a marquee villain and a last minute tie-in to the ever evolving X-franchise? No, only having one of these elements doesn’t count. Director James Mangold and writers Mark Bomback and Scott Frank attempt to wipe away the visual stain that is X-Men Origins: Wolverine by taking the character back to basics: no X-affiliation, no team dynamics, just a simple re-origin tale where the most iconic X-Man finally deals with his inner demons amidst a rather pedestrian conflict. Although anyone in the audience can still follow the general plot of The Wolverine, in order to appreciate all the references as well as key character cameos, familiarity with the original X-trilogy is a necessity. As a result, this film cannot fully stand on its own considering the ultimate conflict of X-Men: The Last Stand is the key “demon” I previously mentioned that continues to dog Logan in this film. Perhaps this fact is what holds The Wolverine back, or perhaps it was the PG-13 rating because the Wolverine movie we’re all (still) waiting for is rated R.

The script represents a mixed bag in that the major plot points leave much to be desired when compared to other comic book adaptations, but the individual scenes deliver the best moment to moment depictions of Wolverine in a realistic world to date. Bomback and Frank did their homework by examining dialogue sequences from the original trilogy that cuts to the very core of Logan’s roguish personality and applied them here. Not one single line uttered by Wolverine sounds like forced exposition or contrived plot advancement. He is every bit the loner and every bit the wounded soul we all know and love him to be, and for the most part, his interactions with everyone are spot on. However, I found the plot points that lead Logan to Japan from his general state of self loathing to the details that keep him there for the duration of the film to be weak. Wolverine is known for having a very unique sense of justice that usually crosses the line to vengeance, and appealing to that aspect would be a practical way to snap him back to reality. The problem is that the messenger has to be someone more important to Logan than a vague voice from the distant past or someone he’s never met before. When the story evolves after he lands in Tokyo, few things would keep the Wolverine around when he has no reason to stay and everyone’s trying to kill him. Love would be a great reason, that is, if it was for someone he knew for more than a couple days. There are just too many points in this film where I thought Wolverine would have simply walked away because a good reason to stay never manifested. He hung around in the original trilogy mostly for his attraction to Jean and his protection of Rogue. The connections he makes in this film to produce an artificial “need” in his character feel circumstantial at best.

The other major disappointment I felt The Wolverine laid out for the viewer was the curious approach to the action and combat throughout. Mind you, this isn’t a criticism of the look of these sequences as they are all shot profoundly well. There are plenty of wide shots to keep the audience oriented and blurry camera tricks to purposely obscure problematic angles are never used. I’m specifically calling out the content of the action. Most of the opposition Logan faces throughout comes in the form of a number of Yakuza thugs, security guards and ninjas. A convenient plot device is used to level the playing field which makes these kinds of antagonists a viable threat to our hero, but that goes away at some point, yet he is still somehow kept in check by these non super-powered villains. The ninja village sequence embodies this kind of disappointment perfectly because the audience is clearly being setup for an incessantly violent moment where the infamous “berserker rage” is about to erupt; only it never does and the entire confrontation fizzles. The same criticism holds true for the climactic battle with the big bad of this film. It doesn’t come off as big of a surprise, as I’m sure the writers originally banked on, and it displays the smallest window of Logan’s repertoire as a pugilist in any conflict we’ve seen on screen thus far. If this is the Wolverine that will be a part of Days of Future Past, then I seriously question his worth as a combatant because he simply isn’t the best at what he does anymore.

The one thing I did respect about this production is the fact that this film approached the story from a more dramatic angle. As such, certain performances that took full advantage of very small pockets of screen time truly shined and gave the movie an emotional anchor that not every X-film can claim to have. One of the standouts was Hiroyuki Sanada’s enraged and embittered Shingen, the son of Yashida (the rich meyser who invites Logan to Japan in the first place). Although his character is given virtually no importance to the story, no other antagonist matches this actor’s intensity on the screen at ANY point. Rila Fukushima did an amazing job as Logan’s mutant sidekick/Japanese escort, Yukio, considering this woman is acting in her second movie ever. She isn’t stereotypically gorgeous, but her playful mannerisms and emotive facial expressions make her character the most charismatic by far. I’d also like to point out that Famke Janssen’s performance as the ghost of Jean Grey in this film is the best she’s ever performed as this character. I never particularly agreed with her casting in the first place, but her contributions here redeem her . . . somewhat.

There were also some severe misses. I didn’t care one bit for Hal Yamanouchi’s old Yashida, and my criticism is twofold for the character and his performance. When your character has severely restricted body language, the performance must compensate in other areas (such as vocal intonation) to stand out. Yamanouchi, perhaps, does too good of a job playing a man that is seconds away from death’s icy grasp and as such, Yashida is no more important than a standard crusty old rich man with nefarious ends. The other villain that was an absolute waste of time was the mutant Viper, played by Svetlana Khodchenkova. I understand that she was going for a femme fatale, but she was not particularly sexy, wasn’t very maniacal, and never seemed threatening on the screen. I don’t know what else a performance can do to screw up the presentation of a villain, but at least she was thorough at it.

Like Robert Downey Jr. playing Tony Stark – Hugh Jackman IS Wolverine. His dedication to physical conditioning and the seriousness and preparation he approaches this character with is the essence of what it means to be a truly professional actor, and he is a credit to his calling.

The Wolverine is not as awful as some make it out to be, but it is also nowhere close to being the definitive visual presentation of a story that fully embraces this character as the mainstream media has determined it to be. I repeat: this is NOT the Wolverine movie we were all waiting for, but that’s not to take anything away from Hugh Jackman who still gave his all, but that same effort could not save Wolverine’s first solo outing. This film cost slightly less than Origins to make, but it has also come up a tad short on its initial weekend at the box office despite opening at number one. The Wolverine is yet another summer “blockbuster” that loses its luster for not having that “IT” factor that makes it a must see. It is a good movie, but doesn’t feature the best action in the world, nor does it tote the best use of its licensed property; which is why people go to see comic book adaptations in the first place. Chalk this one up to another that fell short of the hype despite being filled with potential.

Comic Book News Marvel

Review: Thanos Rising #4

It’s faint praise, but this is the best and most tolerable issue of this series thus far. I wasn’t left wanting to throw it against the wall in disgust. That’s really the best I can say about it.

That being said, simply put – this storyline will make you disrespect Thanos in nearly every way. Whereas before Thanos has been written as a cunning, powerful “magnificent bastard” with a poorly explained death fetish (that most writers have wisely left only cursorily explored), this series portrays Thanos as a despicable psychotic bully who tortures and murders his family of origin, wives, children, and random strangers in a twisted and muddled attempt to win the sexual affections of what may or may not be a paranoid hallucination of the avatar of “Death.”

This attempt to psychoanalyze Thanos succeeds so well that it actually weakens the character. One is left with a mixture of disgust and pity for the character rather than the begrudging respect he has earned in past iterations. One is left rooting for this character to be somehow put out of his (and our) misery for good rather than somehow surviving to vex our favorite heroes another day. Before this series I had a begrudging like for Thanos; now I can barely stand to look at his depiction.

This is not how Thanos should be written, and it is very poor preparation for the upcoming movies featuring him as the lead villain. I just shake my head is disgust and bafflement at the decisions Marvel Editorial is making in regard to cosmic. It really was better when the “architects” were ignoring cosmic and relegating cosmic to the fringe of the Marvel Universe. At least that allowed great writers (e.g. Starlin, Giffen, DnA) to do great and innovative things with the cosmic characters. This attempt to mainstream cosmic and increase sales by appealing to the lowest common denominator of comic book reader (e.g. Avengers buyers) has only resulted in abject mediocrity in storylines (e.g., Loeb’s NINO; Aaron’s Thanos; Bendis’ GotG) and mischaracterization of beloved cosmic characters (e.g., Bendis’ GotG; Aaron’s Thanos) rendered by writers who would be best left writing stories about Earthbound superheroes running around Long Island.

The art and colors are certainly respectable, but they’re not so impressive that they can save this mini-series. I will be very glad when this series is over and mercifully forgotten. It’s just trying too hard to be a cosmic version of Dexter. I know there’s a small group of Thanos fans. My sympathies to you as this series must be difficult for you to tolerate.

Comic Book News Marvel

Review: Nova #6 (Wells)

The Loeb-otomization of the Nova concepts and legacy continues.

This snooze-fest of an issue finds NINO returning from his cameo in AvX. You know – the one where he says he has to ask his mom’s permission to join the Avengers. He asks and she says no. Finally, someone makes a reasonable adult decision about a 14-year-old participating in kill-or-be-killed combat. Or so it seems. Then there’s some boring conversation between NINO and his mom. Then NINO sees his would be girlfriend who thinks he might be NINO. Then NINO has a confrontation with the school bully and doesn’t use his powers even though he wants to use them. Then there’s more boring conversation with the school Principal. Then there’s some pseudo teen rebellion nonsense in response to the Principal. Then there’s more boring conversation with mom where she relents. Then NINO flies off to Long Island to look for trouble. With all the talking heads, clichés, and lack of action – you’d swear Bendis wrote this one. But he didn’t.

Zeb Wells wrote this one, and he made good on his promise to keep up the Loeb-otomization by continuing to write the lead character as an annoying idiot.

I recently read an article where Rich Rider’s Nova was said to be Marvel’s most “identifiable cosmic hero.” I know some would argue Silver Surfer or Captain Marvel, and others Thor, but I would argue that Silver Surfer, Captain Mar-Vell, and Thor are not human. I think it’s more accurate to say Rich Rider’s Nova was Marvel’s most identifiable Human cosmic character, and in his latest iteration he embodied what the fans wanted from such a character – strength, competence, confidence – a “Cosmic Captain America” as it were as leader of the Nova Corps. Instead, Loeb, Brevoort, and Wacker – in a total misread and misunderstanding of cosmic and cosmic fandom – replaced the “Cosmic Captain America” with NINO and a series of silly, cutesy, smarmily sentimental, predictable comic book clichés aimed squarely at the prepubescent crowd. One half-way expects Scooby-Doo and Scrappy-Doo to show up and help NINO solve a mystery.

It’s telling that what garnered the most interest from readers was the Black-Ops Nova Corps. That sort of storyline is the basis for a great deal of popular SF. Cosmic fans grew up with Star Trek and Star Wars. They’re interested in military science-fiction. Of course, the architects got rid of the Black-Ops Novas faster than they did Rich Rider. Hey architects: try listening to the fans for a change. The tanking sales on NINO should be telling you something – and it’s not that it would make a great little Disney movie for the kiddies. Mr. Perlmutter – does Disney really want to send the message that child soldiers are a good idea (especially when the UN is in the process of condemning child combatants as internationally immoral)?

On the up side, Medina’s art is impressive as are Curiel’s colors. The art and colors are the most interesting thing about the book as usual. And Medina’s rendering of NINO makes him look slightly less ridiculous wearing the uniform of a soldier.

What can be said about the letters page that can’t be said of any annoying used car sales pitch on any late night TV commercial? Editor (and I use the term loosely) Stephen Wacker even has the audacity to claim he’s a Rich Rider fan. He certainly has a funny way of showing it when he’s not blowing smoke on the NINO letters page. I remember innumerable instances where he’s posted derogatory comments about Rich Rider and Rich Rider fans at a certain website (that shall remain nameless – wink -) that caters to fawning, undeserved praise of NINO and quashes any dissent.

So save your money on this one guys. It’s really not worth adding to anybody’s collection. You saw this same story with Peter Parker and Flash Thompson back in the day. No need to read it again. If you want that – go back and read Peter Parker and Flash Thompson. Those were better told stories.

At the end of the issue, NINO asks, “Who needs a hero?” The answer is, “We do. And it’s not you, NINO!”

Comic Book News

COVER SHOOT: Top Five Comic Book Covers for 7/17/13

Cover Shoot

By: Chris “DOC” Bushley

This weekly feature will take a look at the most visually compelling covers on the market today. Whether they be variant editions or standard ones, these are the top 5 covers that stand out amongst the bevy of books that are released each week. They say, “A picture is worth a thousand words,” these covers are worth more than that! No matter the storylines found behind them, these covers draw you to at least check them out, which can be worth exponentially more than just words to the companies that publish them! Enjoy!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9411:]]

1. Fables #131 (Vertigo/DC): Joao Ruas continually creates some of the best artistic pieces seen in comics today. This piece in particular, grabs the reader with a myriad of techniques that tantalize the eye. From the bold use of color on the “Round Table,” to the simplistic sketches that decorate the background, this one has it all. But, it is the gaunt and burdened faces of King Arthur and his men that truly grab the reader and make them want to learn more.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9412:]]

2. Superior Carnage #1 (Marvel): Artist extrordinaire, Clayton Crain, makes a stunning rendition of Marvel’s most ravenous psycho — Carnage! No one has made Carnage look more maniacal than Crain! Utilizing the background as dead space makes the crimson spilling forth that much more eerie and the layers upon layers he used to accentuate the sinew and movement of the symbiote, — perfect!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9413:]]

3. Batman ’66 #1 — SDCC Variant Edition — (DC): Okay, this one is going to be hard to find but that doesn’t make it any less cool! Done by Mattel, this cover pays homage to the camp and innocence of the “60’s television show while making it a unique collectable that fans will be clamoring for! You may not be able to find it at your local shop, or be able to get it cheap, but it’s worth a try to have such a “swingin” book in your collection!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9414:]]

4. Harbinger Wars #4 — Variant Edition — (Valiant): Juan Doe has been doing his stylized “propaganda” covers for awhile now, but this one will surely stand out above everything else this week. Stark, bold, black and white lines help to off set the violent oranges and reds of the background formulating in a dizzying array of complex shapes and figures. The figurehead of Toyo Harada prominently displayed above all else gives the cover a central, powerful image that commands notice. This one is outstanding!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9415:]]

5. Thor: God of Thunder #10 (Marvel): Esad Ribic is one of the most soft spoken and underrated artists in comics today. For a man that is so quiet, his covers explode off of the racks! This complex image of Thor battling the God Butcher is exquisite in scope and execution. The painted image conveys so much raw emotion and power that you can practically hear the rage bellowing from Thor’s lips. With stark color contrasts and a dynamic visage, this cover hammers the competition!

Movie News Reviews

Movie Review: Pacific Rim (2013)

Let’s Go Voltron Force!

A Film Review of Pacific Rim

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9261:]]

Well, not exactly, but Guillermo del Toro’s giant f’ing robots vs. giant f’ing monsters-scifi action-extravaganza has certainly set the table for a series of non-Transformers films to be promptly adapted, mass produced and shuttled to your local cinemas ASAP. Yes, yes, Michael Bay’s Transformers were very visually dynamic films and certainly showed off the proficiency of today’s technology not to mention the talented digital artists behind those computers, but the stories within Bay’s films didn’t exactly have the same impact as the look of the bots. I respect the fact that Pacific Rim is a film that attempts to be more serious than displaying Shia LaBeouf screaming at his mother to “put away the booties!” That’s not to suggest that this film is entirely gloom and doom as Charlie Day’s contributions see fit to break up the tension regularly. But it does suggest that having more respect for your own subject matter can work with impressive CG to galvanize better filmmaking in general and more satisfying end products in particular. Film adaptations of Voltron, Robotech and MechWarrior are sure to come, and the stories within those fictions are much more dramatic than giant f’ing robot films have delivered so far, so let’s hope whoever helms those projects expands on del Toro’s playbook.

The teasers for this film brought a high level of anticipation, but I’m not going to lie; I had serious reservations due to the fact that it was a brand new Hollywood IP and del Toro’s history with Hellboy, Blade II (sperm removal?) and Pan’s Labyrinth didn’t suggest he had the pedigree to deliver a story on as massive a scale as Pacific Rim. There’s a difference between being a talented creature designer and being able to aptly envision things as large as skyscrapers smashing each other and their environment into oblivion. Thankfully, del Toro was not intimidated by the scale as well as the vast number of visual effects artists contributing to the overall spectacle. His leadership delivers a sci-fi-action film that is visually impressive, contains satisfactory human elements of drama while maintaining good pacing throughout to deliver a very entertaining, CG-heavy movie. Pacific Rim is easily one of this summer’s better popcorn flicks, but it is by no means perfect.

Part of the problem is that this story requires a heck of a lot of setup and this is reflected in the inordinately long introduction that precedes the title flash on the screen. Co-writers del Toro and Travis Beacham have an interesting story on their hands, but this film is intent on highlighting the end of a drawn out, global conflict over the course of many years. This is a difficult task to accomplish for any script because it demands the audience to accept a lot of bullet points on faith alone without any form of emotional investment in characters or situations. As a result, what seemed like explaining the important detail of the Pacific Rim disturbance in the first place actually gets glazed over because ultimately, this movie is concerned with getting right into the action as soon as possible. Details like describing the use of giant robots as defense and their functionality gets the same kind of treatment. In fact, just about every instance of uniqueness that the story presents receives the same kind of brief lip service which gives the audience yet another “end of the world” scenario that seems formulaic, predictable and all too familiar. This is one of the reasons why this film counters with so many scenes featuring the giant robots at work because quite frankly, when they do what they do, the audience is suddenly less concerned with plot, dialogue and character. When compared to del Toro’s Pan’s Labyrinth, Pacific Rim has the intelligence of an episode of Sesame Street (no offense Big Bird), but dumb can still be fun. It has just enough human drama as depicted via the pilot teams for the “Jaegers” (what the giant f’ing robots are called). The special relationships they share with each other keeps the story disciplined. Character development is as much of a wash as the story’s details, but simply seeing these individuals work together is a real treat and, as it turns out, a vital infusion of the human element in a film where almost everything on every single frame is digital fabrication.

As for all that action, it really is something special to see. The cinematography by Guillermo Navarro gives the audience all kinds of dynamic angles while juxtaposing them with excellent close-ups to get us as close to the action as possible. In many respects, the action is framed like some of the best boxing films of the past, and yes, once the punching begins, those familiar with Real Steel will begin to notice some parallels. All of the fighting is essentially savage fisticuffs between robots and monsters, but naturally there are moments where “special attacks” are used to finish off opponents. Oh yes, plenty of lasers, missiles, giant swords and buzz saws abound which don’t exactly channel the awesome power of the Blazing Sword, but it comes awfully close. What helps the viewer really appreciate this mammoth combat is the fact that movement within the frame is relatively slow when compared to other contemporary action films. Remember, the combatants are still the size of buildings and they simply do not demonstrate the agility of Bruce Lee. The action sacrifices fluidity for shear, wrecking-ball brutality, but make no mistake, this is a plus for Pacific Rim. The only thing I would have amended to the overall philosophy behind capturing all of this digital mayhem is to cut to more super wide shots to really give the audience a more appropriate sense of scale to these titans having at each other. Sure we see plenty of buildings and cities getting turned to rubble, but seeing large things get stepped on like a 3 year old steps on his or her Matchbox cars gives the viewer a whole new perspective on destructive force.

Pacific Rim boasts a cast filled with mostly newcomers who produce satisfactory performances in their respective roles, but the best belongs to the one recognizable veteran: Idris Elba as Marshall Stacker Pentecost. The Marshall is the man in command who’s in charge of the Jaeger Program and exudes everything you need in a prototypical leader. Dignity, respect, presence and dominance are all balanced by Elba’s temperance which makes him the kind of leader soldiers go the extra mile for as opposed to cowering in fear or scheme in spite of. The true main character, Raleigh, played by Charlie Hunnam, produces the typical white man, pretty boy save the world with something to prove performance, which is fine, but what was truly lacking was the flaccid romance he shared with onscreen love interest Mako, played by Rinko Kikuchi. Yet again, the romantic angle of any action film gets chopped off at the knees because there just isn’t enough screen time, but man, actors got to have chemistry to even have a chance to show chemistry. I didn’t even realize that Charlie Day (It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, Horrible Bosses) was in this film, but his golden nuggets of screen time shared with fellow bumbling scientist played by Burn Gorman (The Dark Knight Rises) were welcome moments of reprieve without shifting the tone of the film to ridiculous.

Pacific Rim may have had a budget on the same level of the AAA comic book adaptation ($180 million), but it certainly isn’t being marketed as such. I wouldn’t be surprised if this film underperforms in North America for this specific reason, but also because word of mouth will not spread like wildfire in its favor. This film delivers a very specific kind of sci-fi action, and if you aren’t into giant f’ing robots, you lose 80% of this film. I also wouldn’t go so far as to qualify this film as a must see, but during a summer that has been filled with good, but not great blockbusters, Pacific Rim is worthy of consideration. Sci-fi seems a tad underrepresented in 2013, and though del Toro’s love letter to Mecha-centric fiction is a little light on brains, it certainly delivers some serious brawn. If you’re bored with name brand adaptations, check out the Rim, just be sure to activate interlocks, have your dynotherms connected and get your infracells up so you can get your megathrusters to GO!

Comic Book News

COVER SHOOT: Top 5 Comic Book Covers For July 10th, 2013

Cover Shoot

By: Chris “DOC” Bushley

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9198:]]

1. X-O Manowar #15 – Variant Edition – (Valiant): Kekai Kotaki gives a gloriously rendered cover that explodes off the racks and exudes pure energy! From background to foreground, every inch of this cover is exquisite! His sense of action and power is heightened by the choice of an angled perspective making the cover seem fluid throughout. Highly detailed and electric, nothing shows as much force as this cover this week!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9199:]]

2. Batgirl #22 (DC): Beautiful and haunting, this cover by Alex Garner tells a complete tale in a single image. You can feel the anguish and pain pouring out from every brush stroke, compelling the curious buyer to grab it off the racks and learn more. The use of shadow and the vibrant contrast between Batgirl and the Bat symbol, relate to the idea that the person behind the mask matters less than the overall iconic status portrayed by the symbol itself. Garner has created something pure and engaging and quite symbolic in his own right.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9200:]]

3. Ultimate Comics Ultimates #27 (Marvel): Michael Komarck creates a stunning digital image that is sure to get heads turning in shops all week. From the read-out screens hovering in the background to the creepy “mad scientist” image in the foreground, everything screams classic “Sci-fi” in this cover! The use of a greenish hue behind the central figure gives an overtly eerie feel to the cover, one heightened by the image of an incapacitated Tony Stark. Awesome!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9201:]]

4. Quantum and Woody #1 – Variant Edition – (Valiant): To begin, this is a beautiful painting of a goat by Tom Fowler! The juxtaposition between the royal blue background and the stark white of the goat makes the image stand out amongst all other comics. But, it’s not the image so much as the sheer brilliance in technology that lands it a spot on COVER SHOOT this week! This cover is also enhanced with a QR code that is found over the goat’s mouth. When using your Smartphone or Android device to activate the code you will hear the goat “speak” to you! Now, Valiant has done this before with Harbinger #1, but how cool is it to have a goat baying to you and utter “Quantum and Woody?” Cool enough for me!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9202:]]

5. The Lone Ranger #16 (Dynamite): This cover is simplistic yet, perfect! Francesco Francavilla does an astonishing job of breaking down a cover to the core of what it should be — eye-catching! The magnificent contrast between the overwhelming blue and the brilliance of the “glowing” moon is breathtaking, creating a total image that transcends everything else between the covers. It exudes a relentlessness, a determination that will defy all odds, and overall, it tells the tale of a lost soul seeking vengeance with only one beautiful image.

Comic Book News

COVER SHOOT: The Top 5 Comic Book Covers For July 3rd

Cover Shoot

By: Chris “DOC” Bushley

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9093:]]

1. Trinity of Sin: The Phantom Stranger #10 (DC): A constant addition to COVER SHOOT, Jae Lee, creates eerily alarming covers that draw the eye to a central image by diluting the background and using stark, contrasting colors. Through his meticulous line work and expertise at using shading to accentuate the image, Lee has created some of the most awe-inspiring covers to date. His skill makes the images he creates transcend past the realm of “comic art” and into the plane of just Art!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9095:]]

2. Next Testament #2 — Variant Edition (BOOM! Studios): Haemi Jang creates a stunning modern art cover than will overshadow any book on the rack! Using a myriad of colors, Jang fascinates the eye, all the while drawing it into the center of the book where he sums up author, Clive Barker’s, horrific tale with two famous quotes. It is a great juxtaposition between the color and prose that does exactly what it needs do to stun the buyer into grabbing a copy for a closer look.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9096:]]

3. The Superior Foes of Spider-Man #1 — Variant Edition (Marvel): My daughter and I just love Scottie Young’s “Baby” variant editions he has been doing for the past few years. They may seem simplistic, but his line art is some of the best “cartoon” style renderings on the market today. These covers have become so popular that other companies are now doing their own “kid’ version covers, but none breed the sheer hilarity and enjoyment that Young’s do! Try to find them at your local shop — if you can!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9097:]]

4. Shadowman #8 — Variant Edition (Valiant): David Mack, creator of Kabuki, gives fans an amazing “collage” style painted cover that exudes so much emotion — it’s scary. This is a stunning cover, filled with layer after layer of exquisite detail and hue. It conveys the overall tone of the book perfectly, dark and morose and laced with a heaping helping of fear! Everything David Mack creates is just astounding and instantly gallery worthy!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9098:]]

5. The Shadow #15 (Dynamite): Alex Ross is the pinnacle of “life like” comic art and this cover shows off his skill perfectly. From the use of angle to show velocity and depth, to the perfectly painted facial features, Ross gives fans the raw emotion and fun of great comic covers with the skill of “high end” art. Everything is done perfectly to convey action with absolutely no action at all, making it as stunning as it is skillful.

Comic Book News Marvel

Review: Guardians of the Galaxy #4 (Bendis)

So Drax is a drunken buffoon, Gamora is an easily beaten incompetent in need of rescue, S

Comic Book News Marvel

Review: Nova #5 (Loeb)

No surprises here. The tragic descent of the Nova concepts and legacy into silly, child-oriented cutesiness continues.

Comic Book News

COVER SHOOT: The Top 5 Comic Book Covers For June 26th

Cover Shoot

By: Chris “DOC” Bushley

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9000:]]

1. B.P.R.D.: Vampire #4 (of 5) (Dark Horse): Fabio Moon creates a cover that is simplistic but overpoweringly eerie in the same breath! Buried in complete darkness, the figure, spider, vampire claws, whatever it may be , is coming for you! It is so surreal, it is actually tough to want to touch this book — and that’s what makes it such an amazing cover!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9001:]]

2. Daredevil #27 (Marvel): Artist, Jock, is known for his ability to enhance the aspects of modern art, melding them with classic comic styling to create visually stunning images. This cover encompasses the recent tales of both Foggy Nelson and Bullseye in such an iconic fashion, centering them in the middle of Daredevil’s world of chaos. It is both bold and memorable!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9002:]]

3. The Unwritten #50 (Vertigo/DC): Now, this is a true work of art! Yuko Shimizu creates a classic Japanese style cover reminiscent of ancient parables. Complex and exquisite, the border detail alone makes this cover better than anything else on the shelves this week, there is no way it could possibly be missed!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9003:]]

4. Batman/Superman #1 -Variant Edition- (DC): Jae Lee made a breathtaking cover, but Kenneth Rocafort’s variant cover is what piqued my interest more. Dark and foreboding is what we expect from from a Batman rendition but not so much from a Superman one. The faceless alien with burning eyes is completely unsettling and the confidence that the Dark Knight exudes in the forefront, is only heightened do to the fact he has such a powerful ally directly behind him! What makes this cover even more interesting is the fact DC challenged Rocafort, a Superman artist, to portray Batman more predominately for this cover, taking him out of his comfort zone. If this is the type of cover we get when Rocafort isn’t at ease, imagine what he does when he is!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:9004:]]

5. Justice League of America #5 (DC): David Finch brings us a cover that, although the style has been done before, is striking and beautiful. The juxtaposition between the vibrant colors of the flag and the ominous, stark black of the background makes this image stand out on the racks. The image is so well drawn that you can feel the sorrow in our heroes hearts just from the simple images of their hands alone. Plus, any image of a coffin prominently displayed on a comic cover equals instant curiosity from any fan. Perfect!

Comic Book News

Review: Batman/Superman #1

There are moments in our lives that resound more than others. A special event, a tragedy or a first meeting with someone that will change our lives. These milestones define us, make us better or worse than we once were.

Greg Pak and artists, Jae Lee and Ben Oliver, use these same circumstances to bring together DC’s biggest icons for the “first” time. Their defining moments, shared tragedies along with prolific upbringings, are used to build upon their mythos and create something that is truly noteworthy. Pak portrays their rivalry/friendship in a perfect manner. Bruce Wayne, before the cape and cowl, has an instant dislike towards the future savior of Metropolis. Their brief encounter leads to immediate judgment from both parties, branding each other as the drunkard, playboy and the other, a sanctimonious blowhard. It’s nothing fans haven’t seen before, but the pristine writing form Pak and the beautiful art of Lee, bring it to a level never done quite as well as this. It will become a moment that fans won’t soon forget.

As for the first encounter of the Batman and Superman, I won’t reveal the circumstances behind it but, it is explosive to say the least! Utterly jaw-dropping visuals assault you as you take in the sheer brutality and power of these two individuals. The internal thoughts of our heroes, as they take each others measure, is pitch perfect. Pak makes them come across as arrogant and bold, passing judgment upon their foe again and underestimating each other in the process. The naive nature of the fledgling heroes is what Pak is trying to portray and he does it with panache.

Overall, the story is the perfect portrayal of Bruce and Clark, Batman and Superman, in the early days of their careers as future pillars of the DC Universe. The underlying tale of why these two are strewn together is both intriguing and thought provoking, but it is the rhetoric, both internal and external, between these two that will make this book unforgettable!

Movie News Reviews

Movie Review: World War Z (2013)

The Zombie Apocalypse: Roland Emmerich Style

A Film Review of World War Z

By: Lawrence Napoli

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8987:]]

Zombies, zombies, zombies. George A. Romero made them cool in 1968, and they’ve been a mainstay in American cinema ever since. But why are we constantly drawn to these brain-eating, walking corpses? Surely, we can’t all be so morbid with some latent desire to be frightened, threatened and otherwise mortified just “cause.” The key element to the zombie mythos is the theme of survival which effectively represents humanity’s ironic ability to do so despite our real-world history of constantly trying to annihilate each other. It’s all about hope ladies and gentlemen; specifically hope against impossible odds, and that’s something that appeals to everyone, period. Do you know what other genre of fiction revolves around this theme exclusively? Disaster films do this almost as well as zombie stories, but their weakness is exposed as a diluted intimacy as the narrative may be experienced by a smaller group of protagonists, but is always reflected via impersonal global destruction.

Perhaps this unlikely genre pairing is the true reason why World War Z had a myriad of production woes, setbacks, rewrites and creative conflict paving its own road to completion. Disaster and zombie movies have always had extremely different scales to how they told their stories and their combination posed a significant challenge. Sure, lots of zombie apocalypse films make reference to the rest of the world succumbing to the plague, but the audience never really sees the destruction that’s wrought everywhere else because (for the most part) Z-films just don’t have the budget to digitally create such images. Brad Pitt must have maxed out his celebrity favors to help accumulate the near $200 million dollar budget for World War Z, which only shows off its high production value only in certain instances. There are plenty of scenes that pull wide on city wide destruction, but there are as many (if not more) scenes that are minimal, enclosed and prototypical of lower end, undead affairs. Instead of synthesizing a consistent visual style to allow the audience to appreciate both types of settings, director Marc Forster is content to bite off both Roland Emmerich and George Romero in every other scene and jumping back and forth between them is a little jarring.

Nothing represents this sensation better than the fact that the zombies themselves behave so differently in the two settings I just outlined. They are an amped-up, ant-like and hive-minded swarm of monstrous destruction during the big budget sequences while they sputter to standard staggering and lunging whilst indoors. Funnier still is the fact that the bi-polar nature of the zombies is reflected in the screen story of World War Z thanks to the combined efforts of Matthew Michael Carnahan, Drew Goddard, Damon Lindelof and J. Michael Straczynski. Every scene in this film fluctuates between hot action sequences and cold (uninteresting) dialogue/exposition. A stronger dedication to characterization could have compensated by making the audience care more about UN investigator Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) and therefore care more about scenes that weren’t visually dynamic. But that’s the big problem with this story. While desperately trying to deliver something fresh from a genre that has been a tad overexposed in recent history, the audience gets nil on Gerry’s back story and only the fact that he loves his family to sympathize with. What the heck even is a “UN investigator?” At first, I presumed it was some sort of investigative journalist, but Gerry’s skill set is more reminiscent of a mercenary. And why are a mercenary and his family worthy of the special attention and treatment they receive to be involved with a concentrated effort to save the planet in the first place? Bear in mind, these are the issues that surround the main character, so don’t even think you’ll get anything else from any other character in the cast.

Plot details may be either non-existent or glazed over, but the action, explosions, gunplay and visual effects are front and center. It is in the area of the visual spectacle where World War Z flexes its strongest muscle. Just about every wide angle is a money-shot of destructive anarchy, but the composition of these shots is almost entirely CG. Vehicles, explosions and (of course) the zombies are as fake as Megan Fox’s “talent,” but the fact that the audience never gets too close during these moments allows the filmmakers to mask the “fakeness.” The frame is filled to the brim with so much activity that it is impossible to lose interest, but the proficiency of the CG action is a double edged sword. When juxtaposed with the close-up action driven by standard ballistics and practical effects, the wide angle CG severely outclasses the rest in terms of impact and satisfaction. Traditionally, the opposite has been true even among the most CG-heavy Hollywood films. It’s true that there’s an awful lot of running the audience must endure, but hey, it’s still a zombie movie posing as a disaster film (or is it the other way around?), so there must be running. Still, the action throughout World War Z amounts to some of the best popcorn from a Z-film since Zach Snyder’s remake of Dawn of the Dead.

This film will forever be known for its association with Brad Pitt due mostly to the fact that actors of his caliber simply do not make zombie movies. It will never be known as one of Pitt’s best performances, roles or otherwise contributions as an actor. I understand that the nature of this movie is in a rush to get to the conflict, massive set pieces and intimidating destruction, but it never stopped one of the best hybrid-disaster films in ID4 from giving us characters the audience gave a damn about. In all honesty, I could have used a lot less Joe Black from Pitt in World War Z and a hell of a lot more Tyler Durden. The world may be crumbling all around you and your family is out of harm’s way, so your character plays it cool and collected for the remainder of the movie? Where’s the anger? Where’s the aggression? Is Brad Pitt’s Gerry Lane a secret saint that disallows himself to go feral in the least to fight the good fight? Pitt’s performance equates to too much of a nice-guy-dad to be entrusted with saving the world from walking cadavers. Tom Hanks (the perpetual celebrity nice guy) gave us a bad ass performance in Saving Private Ryan, but he also had the luxury of an R-rating to give the audience a more realistic and horrific take on a soldier in various war zones.

, but it never entwines the audience with enough intrigue to become fully immersed in the fictional danger of this world. Good disaster and zombie films deliver a tiered escalation of loss and destruction, but this film paints the world as having ended at the onset of hostilities. Without delivering that sense of loss, there’s no chance for a character, let alone the audience, to appreciate the road to saving it. I loved the zombies whenever they behaved like a tornado of gnashing teeth, and I loved the action whenever I was exposed to an epic scale. Unfortunately, other aspects of a good Z-film like devotion to character and character relations are noticeably absent in WWZ so it’s difficult for the audience to make a personal connection to the loss of civilization when no main character loses anyone close to them during the overall conflict. World War Z is the polar opposite of AMC’s The Walking Dead, but it’s still an entertaining (albeit safe and formulaic) depiction of zombies on film. The fiery hype that preceded this film should have been doused the instant we all learned this film was rated PG-13. Recent history has shown that not all movies fall prey to that shameless, money-grabbing rating, but I simply don’t think anything less than an R can deliver a solid zombie apocalypse.

Comic Book News

Review: Guardians of the Galaxy #3 (Bendis)

If I were to free associate, the first words that come to mind in describing this issue are: boring, un-imaginative, hackneyed, wordy, un-balanced in terms of verbiage vs. action, and un-exciting in the single action sequence. I could go on but it’s just too sad to see the decline from the imaginative, exciting, fast-paced, and fresh Volume II to the terribly generic and ponderous Volume III. Yep – the architects got their hands on it and turned it into just another sub-average Avengers-like book, and it painfully obviously shows.

There’s a lot of exposition about the Guardians in the first three quarters of this book, but the Guardians themselves only appear in the last few pages of the book for a real yawner of a battle sequence followed by Star-Lord, once again, acting out his daddy issues. Basically, Star-Lord commits treason, and it’s hard to see how he could ever realistically reconcile with Spartax in general and his father in particular. Now there’s a writing black hole that even Gaiman is going to have a hard time fixing as it basically makes the Guardians pirates now and forevermore. What a dumb decision. Royal outlaw you can come back from – royal traitor – well – not so much. Does Bendis actually put any thought into this hack writing?

Poor Rocket is reduced to a catch-phrase shouting caricature of himself in Bendis’ desperate attempt to reduce him to a marketable icon which can be plastered on tee shirts sporting an image of the gun-toting raccoon and the phrase, “Blam! Murdered you!” How sad. Bendis has so painted himself into a corner with this approach to the character that basically all Rocket says in this issue is the catch phrase and variations of it. The great thing about Volume II was that – despite his appearance (which would naturally lend itself to reduction to silly cutesy-ness in the hands of the wrong writers) – DnA never reduced him to such a caricature. Instead – they did the un-expected and played him as a smart-assy but competent “force to be reckoned with” and Star-Lord’s second in command. Bendis and Loeb seem to be hell bent on turning Rocket into a silly, hot-headed, “shoot everything in sight,” pseudo-bad-ass who callously brags about “murdering” other soldiers.

I ask again – do Bendis and Loeb actually put any thought into this hack writing?

Groot gets to shine, but Gamora and Drax are under-utilized as usual. Of course, Tony Stark gets a whole lot of panel time. What a surprise. And once again he’s totally out of place in this book. His attempts to bribe the Spartax soldiers come across as more annoying and stupid than funny. I hope Gaiman does the sensible thing and drops him from this book like the rotten potato he is. That would be a good start toward cleaning up Bendis’ train wreck.

I’m getting really tired of this Council of Kings thing that Bendis focuses on way too much in each book. They come across as a bunch of arrogant and terribly un-interesting jerks, and I just want them to go far away as they make totally boring villains. The art has declined somewhat in this issue. Looks like McNiven drew much less than in past issues. Bad mistake on Marvel’s part. A lot people were only buying this book for the art. Expect sales to fall. Ponsor’s colors remain at their usual best and help to partially make up for the decline in the art.

In summary, Bendis has reduced this book to the level of any sub-average generic Avengers book you can pick up off any shelf at any comic book store. If you substituted anyone from any Avengers roster for the Guardians, the book would read exactly the same. “Cosmic” is just a background setting in Bendis’ parochial Earth-centric approach to the characters and concepts. No awe and wonder. Plenty of generic talking and generic action. With a few minor tweaks, the story could just as easily take place at the center of Marvel’s universe – Long Island. The architects think that this approach will make the characters more “relatable” to the typical Marvel reader. Yeah – Norse Gods, billionaire playboys, WWII era super-soldiers, big green rage monsters, super-spies, a man with spider powers, mutants with indestructible metal skeletons/claws, and wisecracking assassins – they’re all 100% relatable to the typical comic book reader. But these “cosmic” characters – they’re just too “far out” for the typical comic book reader to fathom.

Get a clue architects – before you run cosmic irreparably into the ground.

Comic Book News

COVER SHOOT: The Top 5 Comic Book Covers For June 19th

Cover Shoot

By: Chris “DOC” Bushley

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8801:]]

1. Batwoman #21 (DC): Although the black and white version of this cover is stunning, the simple swath of crimson bleeding across makes this one that much more compelling. J.H. Williams III has always pushed the envelope with his use of dead space but the use of the diagonal layout helps make it more pronounced and tricks the eye into believing Batwoman is falling faster than she should be for Killer Croc!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8802:]]

2. Miniature Jesus #3 (Image): Ted McKeever makes a truly artistic cover, devoid of color but rattling the senses with everything else. The pristine line work and stellar background makes the image project off the page, but it is the composition of the beasts tearing through that conveys the emotion of the entire book and tells the tale of Chomsky in a single, terrible image.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8803:]]

3. It Girl & the Atomics #11 (Image): Michael Allred is a pop icon that brings fresh and exciting ideas into everything he touches. This gloriously colorful, retro style cover by Michael and Laura Allred, cannot help but draw attention to itself on the rack. The simple layout with stunning background will literally “pop” no matter what book resides next to it!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8804:]]

4. Age of Ultron #10 -Variant Edition- (Marvel): Okay, so this is the “big” finale to Marvel’s less than mediocre crossover, but I won’t be buying it for Angela’s first Marvel appearance. I will, however, be thoroughly impressed by this variant cover. Bleak and monstrous, it exudes the overall feeling of dread that the future holds, all the while drawing your eye to the single, luminous figure that stands beneath it all. It is a startlingly intricate picture that comes across as simplistic, yet stunning.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8806:]]

5. Supergirl #21 (DC): Mahmud Asrar makes an explosive cover that will surely make any books around it on the rack tremble in fear. With a stylishly designed background, this cover conveys only one message — Supergirl is pissed and someone’s going to pay! The foreground melds perfectly with the burning red background symbol, making the entire cover breed rage before you even look at Supergirl’s facial expression. Absolutely perfect!

Movie News Reviews

Movie Review: Man of Steel (2013)

I’m More Than a Man in a Silly Red Sheet

A Film Review of Man of Steel

By: Lawrence Napoli

The DC/Warner Bros. alliance begins its rise to challenge Marvel’s Avengers Initiative with Man of Steel, and it certainly was a heck of a way to start. This movie is big; like Michael Bay on steroids, crack and crystal meth, BIG! It also looked really expensive to make with the expected cornucopia of CG effects constantly lighting up the screen. All of the different POV perspectives on these shots as well as the aerial angles kept the audience amazed and engaged. It also paid homage to the quaint origin story made famous in the Christopher Reeve/Richard Donner films in a way that communicates the drama and exposition without letting it run on for too long. It also established Henry Cavill as the face of the Superman/Justice League franchise moving forward because the man has serious acting chops, is in peak physical condition and can be as impactful with his dialogue as he is with his fists.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8717:]]

Impactful. Bang!

I am no particular fan of Zack Snyder mostly due to his efforts in Sucker Punch and Watchmen, but it’s all good because even he couldn’t screw up a story penned by the likes of David S. Goyer (Da Vinci’s Demons) and Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight Trilogy). As fantastic as Superman’s abilities are and as epic a scale as this film presents, there remains a conscious effort in the script to keep the story grounded in reality. This was certainly one of the concerns when Man of Steel was first rumored to involve the man who created the definitive depiction of a realistic Batman onscreen. The concept of Batman isn’t as much of a stretch because with enough tech, training and resources, anyone can be Batman (which also happens to be that character’s appeal). NOT just anyone can be Superman, so how can an alien make a realistic connection with audiences that know full well that he is not human? You do it by highlighting character relationships, and in the case of Man of Steel, three keys unlock a character we can relate with. Superman’s relationship with his father, Jor-El, brings out his morality. His relationship with his human parents, the Kents, brings out his humility. And of course, his relationship with Lois brings out his determination and inspiration.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8718:]]

There’s enough Lois & Clark, but there could have been more.

Those story elements were meant to converge on the question of whether a being with such powers should ever present him or herself to humanity, and just about every practical reason to remain anonymous is addressed from several perspectives, not just those within Superman’s camp. Unfortunately, the story also had to include a significant action element in the form of a bunch of pissed off Kryptonians with an axe to grind with the House of El, so Superman doesn’t exactly have a say in the matter. It’s a real shame, too, because extending a preemptive olive branch could have expanded the few scenes Superman shares with various American, government officials which gives the audience some laughs and food for thought as a plain speaking super being lays it all out for an organization that personifies the concept of control. Fighting Kryptonians also cuts into Superman’s relationship with Lois a bit as I feel the romance that clearly gets established right away, was a bit rushed – but I guess all the ladies swoon for the man with the big “S” for “Swag.”

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8725:]]

Swag. That’s right.

Clearly, the filmmakers wanted just about every basic element about this updated version of Superman to be firmly planted in the ground as quickly as possible before moving forward with any sequels or expanded fiction. Part of me appreciates this strategy for being extremely efficient by conveying Clark’s youth via flashbacks, while another part of me feels the drama from those missing moments take a back seat to explosions. It’s not an easy task to address an origin film in this way, but Goyer and Nolan make enough of the right decisions to error on the side of balance between the drama and action. Overall, the story is entertaining and intriguing without any significant lapses in continuity while managing to deliver a whole lot more of Kal-El’s Kryptonian heritage and the events that preceded his home planet’s demise.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8719:]]

Don’t worry son. The origin tale will be quick and painless.

Do you know what $225 million tells me? It tells me that a movie with that kind of budget had better deliver some phenomenal visual eye candy via effects and CG, or else I’m demanding my money back. Thankfully, Man of Steel delivers the best onscreen effects and action sequences to date in the summer of 2013, and they all begin with the depiction of Superman’s powers. Not all of his iconic abilities are on display (as he’s clearly still learning to “test his limits”), but the ones he does show like flight, super strength, invulnerability and heat vision are very impressive. As excellent as they all look, the use of sound, from muffled grunts to the vibrations on the ground and in the air, enhances the guttural effort Kal-El exerts to do the amazing things he does. Kryptonian combat has a significant presence in the very beginning and end of Man of Steel which delivers fairly standard issue laser blasts, space ships and otherworldly technology at work. These all looked fine, but presented nothing you haven’t seen before in the likes of Avatar, T2 or (here’s an obscure reference) The 6^th Day. I could say the very same thing for the destruction of Metropolis at some point, which features some pretty scary buildings collapsing all over the place that were inspired from movies like Green Lantern and just about every other disaster film (ahem, pun intended right there).

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8723:]]

Uh, you guys know I’m on YOUR side, right?

I wasn’t as sold on the entire cast’s performance as our EIC outlined in his Man of Steel reflection. Actors like Diane Lane as Ma Kent and Laurence Fishburne as Perry White are there strictly for star power as their moments to shine are limited, and they don’t do too much with them when they are front and center. I was particularly unimpressed with Lane as she seems to overact the crotchety old lady persona a bit to sell her advanced age which the make-up department didn’t exactly hit a home run on either. Kevin Costner is almost in the same boat for this criticism, but his contributions were worth it thanks to the poignant moment that explains his character’s tragic passing. The best supporting character, by far, was Jor-El played by Russell Crowe who officially begins his comeback from Les Misérables right now. I respect that he got into a bit better shape for this film, but his impeccable line delivery, presence and ability to gaze through the camera’s eye resonates with the audience.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8720:]]

I don’t wanna hear nothing about no Javert!

I never liked most of Superman’s rogue’s gallery nor the fact that we were going to revisit General Zod in this reboot once again. The first moment Michael Shannon spoke a single line of dialogue was an instant wash for his performance in my book because I could never get past the awkwardness of his voice. I don’t know if he was purposely trying to grate his rear molars as he spoke, but he seemed like an over-angry, over-powered, spoiled little jerk who couldn’t lead fish to water. The real villain that stole the show for me was Antje Traue as Faora-Ul who is fairly attractive in as plain as Hollywood gets, and her diminutive stature wouldn’t seem to pose much of a threat to Superman, right? Wrong! Not only does she kick some serious ass, but she delivers the perfect villain’s voice, stare down, threat and general demeanor. Why these crazy Kryptonians aren’t following her is completely beyond me.

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8721:]]

Explain it to everyone how I’m a superior villain to Zod.

Of course, a Superman origin story ultimately boils down to him and Lois, and although I like the casting of Henry Cavill and Amy Adams in these roles, I haven’t quite bought into their onscreen chemistry which I am completely aware that they didn’t exactly have many opportunities to fully explore here. Cavill is (unfortunately) another perfectly cast, British born actor for this role thanks mostly to his exquisite physical condition and piercing blue eyes. He approaches his character with respect and dignity, so it matters not if he delivers dramatic lines in a spandex body suit. His performance as Superman isn’t going for adorable charisma like Christopher Reeve. He’s going for a simple man that has great ambitions for the future with even greater powers to accomplish them with. Adams could take a page out of Cavill’s book and loose a little “adorableness” to revisit the assertiveness she displayed in The Fighter in order to deliver a slightly less girly, Lois Lane. I like my Lois the way I like my coffee: BOLD!

[[wysiwyg_imageupload:8722:]]

I was going for “bold,” but now I need dental implants.

I have no doubt that Man of Steel will probably be the best blockbuster, action adventure film you will see all summer long, so now’s the time to break out those loose dollars you were hiding in the cookie jar. This is a movie worth seeing on the big screen, but not necessarily on an IMAX screen as (once again) the 3D effect is nice, but it could be distracting to some and doesn’t deliver a game-changing experience. This movie sets up DC and Warner Bros. quite nicely to move their own franchise forward in a realistic-enough world that rivals The Avengers. The thing is, I don’t believe they could find a dedicated enough actor who has everything Cavill brings to the table and more (in the form of experience) to project the character of Batman on equal footing as the blue boy scout than Christian Bale himself. Seeing Man of Steel actually reaffirmed my belief in Justice League working as a film adaptation, but only with that particular Dark Knight. It’s just too bad that we didn’t get any post-credit teaser at the end of Man of Steel which my natural paranoia interprets as those who control the franchise not having a clear vision for their own future.

Cosmic Book News

Featured Articles

Batman Then, Now and Beyond

Adam West

George Clooney/Val Kilmer

Michael Keaton

Christian Bale

Kevin Conroy

Armie Hammer (The Lone Ranger, The Social Network)

Joe Manganiello (Magic Mike, True Blood)

Karl Urban (Dredd, Star Trek)

Michael C. Hall (Dexter, Gamer)

Jon Hamm (Mad Men, The Town)

Start typing and press enter to search