Star Wars The Force Awakens Trailer Insanity

Am I really writing a post about a movie trailer???  Yes, it seems I am, and sadly, it seems I'm not the only one.  I write when I have something to say and I'm tired of repeating myself.  And I most definitely have something to say about this.

For over a month now, people have been eagerly anticipating the release of this trailer.  And after all the hype and repeatedly being rickrolled, and forced (no pun intended) to watch some nice (and some not so nice) fan trailers, here is the moment you've all been waiting for:


Looks kind of cool, right?  Of course it looks cool!  It's a Star Wars trailer!  Nothing about that should ever suck!

Now, let's put things in perspective.

Good or bad, people love Star Wars.  It has embedded itself so deeply into our culture and we all feel it is an invaluable part of our lives.  We want it to be fun, and expect great things, but often we are disappointed.  We all have this collective vision of what Star Wars should be.  And on some rare occasions, we get our wish.

But seriously, movie trailers are designed to be freakin' awesome!!  Have you ever watched a trailer that sucked?  I doubt any director is going to create a teaser with the worst parts of their movie to showcase.  And how often have you eagerly anticipated a movie based on an amazing trailer, and the movie was the biggest waste of time and money ever made?  So this teaser truly is a teaser.  It shows you one minute of footage from a movie that will most likely have 120 minutes total running time.  It's like hearing one note from a song and making the blind assumption that it will be the worlds greatest song ever.  It doesn't say much of anything really.

And now, let's explore the dark side...  J.J. Abrams.

A while back, I wrote this whole rant (here) on how I dislike Christopher Nolan's style of directing and can't understand his success.  I should write a similar rant on Abrams.  Maybe I sort of did here when I complained about him ruling two equally important nerd universes.

Abrams has admitted himself, he uses too much lens flare.  It's his signature style.  He's also proven he loves his shaky cam during fight sequences, preventing us from actually seeing any of the action.  And he's shown he prefers dark drab lifeless colors in his movies, (as he took every chance he could to get the Star Trek cast out of their traditional red, blue, and yellow uniforms), filming dull dark colorless scenes.  Will he suddenly change his methods for the Star Wars franchise?  I can't imagine he will, but maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.

It's also important to note, there is a huge difference between a director and a screenplay.  Alfred Hitchcock said "To make a great film you need three things - the script, the script and the script".  It's the directors job to film the story, and as long as the director has half a brain, and isn't trying to be too artsy, they usually can't screw that up.  But for a movie to be memorable, I look for something more.  A film should be like a moving painting for my eyes.  I'm not expecting EVERY shot to be a work of art, but I look for something visually entertaining.  

And in the interest of credit where credit is due... Abrams proved from Star Trek that he knows how to film ships in space.  He made that cool, and by showing X-Wing fighters, and of course, the Millennium Falcon here, he definitely proved he can still do that (so far).

So for me, this trailer only showed the movie is still being made and will be released next December 2015 (which I already knew).  If it's a good script, and Abrams lets me see the action, without any lens flare and shows me a decent color palette, it could be a good movie.  I can't be as 'pee my pants excited' as many people are, because Abrams is still the director, because I don't think he's that good.  But I will admit to being apprehensively curious.  I sincerely hope I can enjoy it, otherwise The Force Awakens might as well go back to bed (I doubt I'll be the first or last person to use this phrase).

Deeesher

Why I Hate Christopher Nolan

Everyone loves Christopher Nolan. He has directing credits, and writing credits for some of the most popular movies in the last ten years. Geeks and nerds around the world are building shrines in his name. I want to point this out, because I don't believe anything I say here will cause him to weep in a corner on a big pile of money. He is also from London, so at best, he might give me a hearty “Cheers, mate”, if he took time to read my rant.

  

I should also explain, he's not a horrible director. I will give credit where credit is due of course, but we need to take a moment and examine his popularity. Today, I plan to finally expose how this man has somehow brainwashed the world into accepting him as a hero. Once again, our core nerd values are at stake, and yet, he continues to gain accolades, where none are due!

Blasphemy you say??? Don't believe me? Let's take a moment to dissect the movies that people have been shoving down my throat telling me how good they are.

Memento (2000)

Here's a trailer:

If you're curious, he has no super powers, so the intro with the gun flying into his hand, is what the kids call trick photography. Guy Pearce plays Leonard, a guy who suffers from a very real mental illness (called anterograde amnesia, for future psychiatric students reading). While trying to keep track of people he met, and things that happen, he's constantly writing notes, and taking pictures. But since we live in America, people love to play cruel jokes on someone like this, so he's never sure what to believe.

But Mr. Nolan wasn't content to just tell a story. He had to tell a confusing story! I can only assume he watched too much Pulp Fiction, or episodes of Lost, where the story jumps around through time. Memento tells the story mostly in reverse, backing up roughly 10 minutes at a time. Since I'm not one of those “smart” people, a very straightforward story, suddenly became a big mess.

Whatever happened to linear story telling??? Maybe I can sort of understand why he did this, because it does build a bit of a mystery. But when you put things in order, it's a pretty good movie, so why screw with it?? And if you're curious to see it in the proper sequence, youtube has versions of the entire movie, re-edited in the proper sequence for your listening and dancing pleasure.

RottenTomatoes gave Memento a 92%. Maybe I'm just a clueless idiot?

Personally, I thought it was done right the first time in 1994, when it starred Dana Carvey and was called Clean Slate. Here's another trailer:

Although, the real credit should go to Saturday Night Live, and Tom Hanks for creating Mr. Short-Term Memory in 1988:

This brings us to the movie that made Nolan “legendary” (note the quotes):

Batman Begins (2005)

Here's an important life lesson: You don't have to work too hard to impress anyone, if everyone else screwed it up. Case in point, 1997's Batman and Robin *cringe*. I sincerely hope you know how bad Joel Schumacher's version of Batman was (starring George Clooney). If however, you enjoyed it, please stop reading now and seek professional help.

So in 2005, nerds everywhere rejoiced! Someone took the character of Batman seriously, and made a believable movie about this epic franchise! There were a lot of things to like about this movie. Christian Bale made a very good Bruce Wayne (although questionable Batman with his painfully gravely voice). Gary Oldman made a great Jim Gordon. You also had Michael Caine, Liam Neeson, Cillian Murphy, and Morgan Freeman. Very impressive! Well, on a personal note, Katie Holmes just did the job and never overly impressed me.

And with a surprisingly decent script by David Goyer and Christopher Nolan, this was a very good Batman movie. But, I can hear you shouting, “But Deeesher, why didn't you looooove this movie???” I said I enjoyed it. But looooove is a very strong word. The main reason, is because I couldn't find any “moments” in this movie.

When I watch a movie, I look for something artistic and memorable. Think back on movies you love, and there are always scenes and dialogue that stick out very clearly in your mind. Whether it's Kirk screaming “KHAAAAAAAAAAN!!”, or Charlton Heston pounding his fist on the sand in front of the busted up Statue of Liberty, or Superman catching a helicopter in 1978, or King Leonidas shouting “This.. is.. Sparta!” before kicking the dude into the bottomless pit. These moments have power, and impact. A movie isn't required to have these moments to be enjoyable (or successful), but it really does help in this particular genre.

How often did Batman Begins slap you in the face and make you realize you were watching something epic? Was there a “Snakes... why'd it have to be snakes...” moment? Was there even a “Luke, I am your father” moment? How about a “There is no spoon” moment? I got none of that. To me, this is the difference between like, and loooove. Batman Begins was just a wash of mud. An enjoyable wash, but still just mud. And isn't the job of a director, to make something memorable for moviegoers? Maybe you will tell me that was the fault of the scriptwriter (just as a reminder, Nolan co-wrote the screenplay). Or maybe it was the fault of the actors.

But one thing I can blame Nolan for, is the look. Movies are meant to tell a story, and possibly also be be artistic. The more epic your movie, the more artistic I will expect it to be. If your name is Rob Schneider, I'm not expecting to see anything cinematically beautiful on the screen. If you name your movie Sharknado, I can lower my expectations exponentially. However, if you are spending millions of dollars to create something, that you expect to make billions of dollars for, I will anticipate something to really wow me.

Technicolor was invented in 1916. Why isn't he using it??? Movies have colors like, red, green, blue, yellow. I'm pretty sure there are a few other colors, but overall, when used properly, they tend to give a movie a bit of life. All I see from Nolan, is brown, black, and white. Memento added some light blue and occasional black and white scenes, but that's it. Is Nolan colorblind? Have I finally exposed his deepest secret perhaps?

And now you shout to me, “But Deeesher, this is Batman, The Dark Knight! Of course it's supposed to be dark and gritty in Gotham!”. Now I must remind you of a movie from 1994, called The Crow, starring Brandon Lee. This was also based on a comic book. But not just any comic book... a black and white comic book! The Crow somehow managed to use color, but still created the same feel as the comic book. I always said, it was one of the best black and white color movies ever made. But whatever happened to director Alex Proyas? Well, please just remember how good The Crow was.

But let's move on shall we...

The Prestige (2006)

A movie filled with superheroes! Okay, maybe not. Two magicians from London in the 1890's hate each other. Starring Hugh Jackman (formerly known as Wolverine), Christian Bale (formerly known as Batman), Scarlett Johansson (formerly known as Black Widow), and David Bowie (formerly known as Ziggy Stardust... look it up kids!).

For the most part, I enjoyed this movie. Although, I did figure out 'the twist' half way through. But it was still a good story, maybe cause I like magic, and Tesla. I will even go so far, to give Nolan a pass for the browns, blacks and white look of this film, because remember, nobody invented color until 1916.

However, once again, Nolan seems to enjoy this non-linear storytelling. Maybe I could accept it, if there was a very obvious change in the look of the scene, showing you it's six months earlier, or one year later etc. Maybe you could even put text at the bottom of the screen, saying “Six months earlier”. But with my tiny brain, I had to really pay attention to the scene to figure out when in the story it takes place, causing me a bit more confusion than I am accustomed to.

The Dark Knight (2008)

Heath Ledger, Heath Ledger, Heath Ledger. I can't say enough about his performance. Remember those 'moments' I talked about earlier? Here they are! His performance as Joker really helps you ignore some of the flaws in this movie. And sadly, there are still plenty of flaws.

Again, keeping consistent, we have the drab browns, blacks, whites and greys. The exception being the Joker. The only bit of life in this entire dull looking franchise. Otherwise, once again, I felt this was more like CSI: Gotham City, than a theatrical movie.

The story was decent, but I will always say Harvey Dent's story, (played by Aaron Eckhart) needed to end after Joker visited him in the hospital. Instead, suddenly we have two villains to contend with at the end of the movie. Two-Face should have been saved for the third movie in the trilogy.

Inception (2010)

Well this was interesting. Dreams, within dreams, within dreams etc. It was unique (if you ignore Dreamscape starring Dennis Quaid and Max Von Sydow from 1984). I can say I mostly enjoyed this. Although, Nolan's use of browns, blacks, and greys are getting very old very quickly. There was some pretty things visually, which was a nice change of pace for Nolan.

Dark Knight Rises (2012)

*sigh* So much potential. So much crap. I did give this movie a fairly decent review, if you shut off your brain and stop thinking. If you don't examine the story too closely, it was fun-ish. Tom Hardy as Bane made it mostly enjoyable as another memorable bad guy (although still drastically different from the comic book... why???). Anne Hathaway as Selina (aka Catwoman) also made it enjoyable for other reasons.

This movie could have been helped with a better story, and of course a bit of color. It could also have used some decent fight choreography, and maybe a bit of lighting, less quick edits and pull your camera back so we can see what's going on, but... maybe I'm silly.

Man of Steel (2013)

The more I think about this movie, the more it makes me angry. But I'm not sure who to be angry at. Everything inside me, is eager to blame Nolan, because I've always loved director Zack Snyder. But how much influence did Nolan as producer have over the project? Nolan co-wrote the story with David Goyer, but who's decision was it to take away the core values of what makes Superman a hero?

And again you shout to me, “But Deeesher, Superman really needed a 2013 reboot, and he's learning to become a hero!” And I say to you, stop yelling at me. And I very strongly agree, Superman needed a 2013 reboot... but this wasn't it. It is possible to keep the important small town philosophy of Clark Kent, and still have him be the hero we know for today.

Man of Steel had a lot of potential, and after they spent millions of dollars making it, they really fell short in my mind. There were a couple of nice scenes, but they were heavily overshadowed by bad writing. I have a couple of great ideas on how to make the Clark/Superman/Lois love triangle work... but nobody asked me!

And again the look... between the fast quick camera edits, the extremely annoying shaky cam making it difficult to see, to the washed out uniforms and drab backgrounds, I just feel cold and empty inside.

So there ya go. Nolan's not a bad director, but maybe he's more suited for television than taking our nerdly birthrights away from us. This rant has been slowly building over the last few years, but the final breaking point was after hearing the announcement of Man of Steel 2, with special guest star, Batman. The roar of nerd-cheer was heard around the world... as I cringed in terror. Are nerds and geeks so blinded by this epic event, that none of them take a moment to really study what they are giving us??

Of course I will keep an open mind, but given what I've seen so far, I am extremely apprehensive.

And this just in: Remember how painful it was to hear about Nicholas Cage playing Ghost Rider? Ben Affleck has been signed to play the new Batman! At what point can I start shouting, “I told you so!!” It seems Christopher Nolan hates us, so it's okay for us to hate him back.

Oh Joss Whedon, you've never hurt me. Please keep me safe with your big strong Buffy/Angel/Firefly/Avengers arms! Make my dreams come true by writing and directing Wonder Woman pleeeeeease!!

Deeesher

Man of Steel Review

I like to think I know Superman fairly well. One of my very first comics was a Superman comic. And maybe one of my favorite superhero movies of all time is the 1978 Christopher Reeve version of Superman. Followed soon after by the nearly equally awesome Superman II. Followed by the frustratingly painful Superman III, and not forgotten soon enough, the gut wrenchingly horrible Superman IV. But I also at times enjoyed the George Reeves television Superman, (in all it's glorious silliness). And then came Superboy, and Lois and Clark, and the animated versions of Superman, and Smallville seasons 1 through 4 (ignoring the rest), and the meh rated Superman Returns... And the list goes on.

So here we are in 2013, and I learned one of my favorite directors, Zack Snyder, is making his version of Superman, called Man of Steel. What could possibly go wrong???

Well, here we have another origin story. Someone pointed out to me, that Superman (and other Superheros like Spider-man and Batman), need to be more like James Bond. They should give a brief overview of their origin in the first 5 minutes of the opening credits, then we can move on with our lives and focus on the real story. But whatever... we get another origin story. And then Superman fights General Zod.

Did I miss anything? Nope. 143 minutes running time, and that was pretty much everything. Sure, I could discuss the details, but what's the point? Most of those details are lame. Like how Lois Lane seems to have some serious unnatural pull in the military for a newspaper reporter (very similar to one of my complaints about Transformers! Does the military let just anyone give orders now???). Or like how Lois suddenly appears right near Superman, even though he and Zod have been quite literally fighting all over the city, including at one point going to space and landing back in the same city! And I'm still curious, when did the military suddenly decide to negotiate with terrorists before anyone fires a shot??? I guess terrorists can give orders to the military too now, especially if they are alien origin.

Maybe writer David S. Goyer is getting tired? He did write everything from Dollman vs. Demonic Toys in 1993, and more recently Batman Begins, Dark Knight, and Dark Knight Rises. Well, let's be honest, out of all of those movies, maybe I found the least problems with the Dollman vs. Demonic Toys script. Don't you dare tell me for one second how awesome the writing on the Batman trilogy was! We both know, the writing got progressively worse!

I really don't want to blame director Zack Snyder. We were BFF's! I even touched myself thinking about him sometimes! But this time, he really broke my heart.

Let me count the ways:

I have no problem with the planet Krypton being 're-imagined'. However, wouldn't it make more sense if it looked like people lived there? They were a fairly advanced civilization, with ships and lasers and video screens you could buy from Spencers! So why did they live in caves??? Shouldn't there be shops, or art, or maybe a restaurant, or some sort of entertainment center in their homes? Even a pool table would have been nice!

Do I blame Zack or producer Christopher Nolan (director of the recent Batman Trilogy), for the look of things? Having Superman and Zod fighting against gray buildings and gray dirty backgrounds, while they both have very dark colored suits on, makes no sense. I'm far from a fashion critic, but couldn't they at least have made Zod's uniform a bit more black and given Supermans uniform a bit more brighter contrast? I don't mind the battle armor they wore, and I could even sort of accept the new Superman uniform but... I'm confident enough in my manhood to say, it just wasn't fabulous for me *snap snap*

And did anyone else play Mass Effect? Is it just me, or do Zod's ships look a bit familiar?

And sadly, Zack did the worst thing he could have possibly done to me... he shook his camera. Not just once or twice, but all night long! It never stopped! One reason I loved Zack, was because in his past movies (300, Watchmen, Sucker Punch), I could see the action! This time, things were shaking, and too close and too quick edits. My love affair is over, when Zack suddenly became just another *cringe* J.J. Abrams, or Michael Bay. Frustratingly, there were many fights that were impossible to watch. And the fighting takes about half the movie.

But, before you think it's all bad, it's really not. One saving grace, was Henry Cavill. I easily accepted him as Superman. I could go on about his chiseled jaw, or his dreamy blue eyes, or his rock solid chest, or bulging biceps but... you get the idea. He had a very cool Greatest American Hero homage as he was learning to fly, (although I still don't understand the afterburner exhaust). And with every Superman, you get a Lois Lane. This time played by Amy Adams. She got a paycheck, and that's about it. She felt a bit too light and meek to be a real Lois Lane to me. And of course you also get a General Zod. Michael Shannon also got a paycheck for screaming. He was by no means Terence Stamp from the 1978-80 Superman! And at no point, are there any “Kneel before Zod!” moments *sigh*

My personal favorites, were Kevin Costner as Jonathon Kent (who had one of the best moments in this movie, but his overall influence on Clark's life was poorly written), and Antje Traue as bad girl Faora. She was underused but awesome every time. Russell Crowe also made a pretty good Jor-El (but also badly written for the most part).

I really wanted to like this movie, and there were a few good shots. But instead it just made me angry because it had so much potential that was just wasted. And unfortunately, most people will love it, because it's a Superman movie, and everyone loves Superman. And since they spent so much money on it, it must be good! For me, I'll still take my 1978-80 Superman as the best. I would rank Man of Steel better than Superman III and even better than later seasons of Smallville. But not as good as the first few seasons of Smallville, or the recent animated Superman stories. So that puts it slightly above Superman Returns.

Now let's talk about making Supergirl!
 

Up, up and away!

Deeesher

Dark Knight Rises

Didn't I just review a superhero movie??? Seems like every time I turn around, another one is released. Why can't we have one summer filled with heart-warming, touching stories about two people hopelessly in love but somehow never able to connect. Maybe one of them could be dying from an incurable disease. Either that, or another Rob Schneider movie.

HA! Sorry, I can't continue like that after tasting the bile in my mouth. The truth is, the last few years have been Nerd Mecca in theaters, and I wouldn't want it any other way. And this year, maybe the ultimate in Nerd-vana, is the final chapter in the Christopher Nolan version of Batman: The Dark Knight Rises.

I'm trying to figure out what to say about this movie, because I keep my reviews spoiler-free. But 90% of this movie is spoilers! So... it's got Batman/Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale), Bane (Tom Hardy), and Catwoman (Anne Hathaway). That's about all I can tell you.

Yes, I've enjoyed all three of Nolan's Batman movies, and maybe this is the best of them but...

Just so I'm clear, I don't hate director Christopher Nolan. I want to, but I can't. He's like that annoying kid in school that always tries to get attention by eating paste. It's fun, but is it unique? Nolan is very good at telling a story, and I like the way I can see most of the action (unlike other directors I hate *COUGH*j.j. abrams*COUGH*michael bay*COUGH*). However, he tries to make a movie set in the 'real world'. Some people like this. It's just not for me. I always feel like I'm watching an episode of CSI: Gotham City, or Law and Order CGD (Commissioner Gordon District).

At the risk of getting pelted by fan Batarangs, for me, none of Nolan's Batmen, were very epic. I personally never had a moment where I looked at his style and said, “Wow!”. Yes, they've had some very good stories, and amazing acting, (particularly Heath Ledger as Joker from 2008's The Dark Knight), but I had no interest in seeing this in IMAX, because he didn't do anything spectacular. I could save a few bucks and enjoy it equally on a smaller screen.

Speaking of acting... How about that Michael Caine as Alfred! He was seriously underused in the previous Batmans, and I'm very happy to see them take advantage of his talents here. I genuinely felt for Alfred, and I appreciated every moment he was on screen.

Also very noteworthy was Tom Hardy as Bane. If you ignore how he sounds like Darth Vader with a bad accent, and if you ignore that his storyline is much different than the original comic book, he really does a great job with the role. Even when he just stood there, he felt very imposing. He truly made this character come to life!

Everyone else did as expected by the caliber of their talents. Morgan Freeman is always good as Morgan Freeman (Lucius Fox), Gary Oldman was very Commissioner Gordon-y, and Christian Bale made a great Bruce Wayne, but still too gravely and stiff as Batman. And did I mention Anne Hathaway as Catwoman? I wouldn't mind watching a movie with her for three hours... in slow motion.

Yes, Dark Knight Rises is almost three hours long, but it does move along very nicely. It is fun and has some exciting moments with great acting, (and an extra wow to Hans Zimmer for an amazing musical score). But try to forget what you know about the comic books. Try to forget that Batman has many gadgets he never uses here. Try to forget how horrible Christian Bale sounds when talking as Batman. And try to forget everything you may know about the medical profession.

And did I mention Anne Hathaway as Catwoman?

There are some things you never want to forget...

Deeesher