Batman: Earth One Review

Among the pantheon of superheroes, Batman's origin is certainly one of the most compelling and identifiable. Scarred by the trauma of witnessing his parents gunned down by a mugger during a harmless family outing young billionaire Bruce Wayne literally puts his life on hold and vowing justice against the evil that robbed him of the two most precious people in his life thenceforth committs every fiber of his being to achieving the peak of mental and physical perfection. Eventually developing the alter ego of the Batman, Bruce assumes the facade of a vacuous and narcassistic playboy during the day while at night, strikes fear into the hearts of Gotham's criminal underbelly while inspiring hope in its good people as the city's Dark Knight.
There have been quite a few interpretations of Batman's origins both in comics and cinema. The most noteworthy probably being Frank Miller and David Mazzuchelli's grim and gritty Batman: Year One series, pretty much considered as cannon to any current reader of the comics, and Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins, which is just as much a thought provoking psychological exploration into Bruce's drive and motivation for putting on the cape and cowl and choosing to be a hero as it is a rousing action/adventure story.
And now, just in time for The Dark Knight Rises no less, we have Batman: Earth One, the long awaited graphic novel by writer Geoff John's and artist Gary Frank in which The Caped Crusaders origins are re-imagined for a new generation of reader's. I had been looking forward to this for a long time and, John's definately takes some liberties with the mythology, probably to the disdain of more than a few hardcore purists, I found myself liking the book quite a lot.
Undeniably one of Earth One's most compelling aspects lies in its very human and fallible presentation of its central character. Contrary to his current depiction in comics and, to some extent, on film, this Batman is not yet the brilliant crime fighting strategist, not yet the cunning martial arts master, and not yet the stealthy sleuth who can creep beneath his enemies noses completely undetected. No, the Batman we are presented with in Earth One is a reclusive and angry young man not as interested in protecting the innocent and inspiring people for good as he is the single minded goal of uncovering the conspiracy behind his parents murders and dispensing violent revenge against the people ultimately responsible. He does not have the convenient amenities of a batcave or batmobile and his gadgets, or "gadget" I should say, does not always function properly in the heat of the moment. He is brash, arrogant, and his forays into to constumed vigilantism do not usually end with the bad guys lying in an unconscious heap on the floor. While I found this version of the character to come off as cold and not quite as sympathetic as the Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins who gained a sense of closure for his parents murders yet chose to become a hero anyway, I  thought he was nonetheless a very compelling character as we see him grow from a snobby and entitled little rich kid to a penitent and almost tormented adult for the role he unwittingly played in the tragedy that claimed his parents lives. On a purely ascetic level, it is interesting to note that this is really the first depiction of Batman in comics were you can see his eyes, as they are not whited out and hidden like they have always been in the monthly books. The result is pretty striking as rendered by Gary Frank's exceptional, life-like artwork, causing the reader that extra degree of identification with the character's vulnerability and humanity.
Some gymnastics are made with the supportive characters of Batman's mythology especially Alfred who, in a true departure from the fastidious, dry humored and stiff upper lipped domestic housekeeper we all know and love, is a gruff and gnarled veteran of the Royal Marines who forged a close friendship with Bruce's father, Thomas Wayne, after saving him in combat. Contrary to his virtuous "against the grain"  depiction in Batman: Year One, police sargeant Jim Gordon, Batman's loyal alley and confidant, in this book, is rather a disenfranchised and world weary drone in a hoplessly corrupt system he gave up trying to save after his wife died under "mysterious circumstances."  Perhaps the most radical character re-imagining is that of Detective Harvey Bullock who, in a far cry from the slobbish, outspoken, in your face cynic he was shown to be in the comics and to a greater extent, in the 90's Batman animated series, is a handsome, squeaky clean, agonizingly cheery and all around naive ex reality t.v. star from the west coast looking to re-invigorate his career by making a name for himself in Gotham City though his confidence is eroded later on when he witnesses first hand the horrors the city breeds. Earth One also feature's one of the most creepy and immoral versions of The Penguin I've ever seen on page and a truly terrifying serial killer who looks like he came right out of the pages of a Thomas Harris Hannibal Lecter novel.
One of the things I enjoyed most was how each of the featured characters experiences their own unique arc throughout the course of the story which, by the end renders them all the more recognizable to their counterparts in the DC Universe proper, particularly Batman who, (spoilers!) after saving Gordon's daughter from certain death at the hands of one of the story's villains, begins to comprehend the bigger picture of the symbol he could represent to Gotham and starts to transcend his former role as a mere vigilante lost in the scramble for his own gratification to a hero committed to an ideal greater than himself.
Overall, I really enjoyed Batman: Earth One and would definately recommend it to fans of the comic book medium. It is a fresh and engaging look at Batman, not as just a super hero, but truly and inescapably one of us as well.

Ross

     

The Amazing Spiderman Review

Maybe it was the jazz dancing or the Jared Leto eye liner that did him in, either way by the end of Spiderman 3 it was painfully apparent that the character had lost a good portion of his "amazing-ness." A fresh start was needed. Enter "The Amazing Spiderman," a witty, edgy and innovative re-telling of the character's origin and ultimate decision to become the hero, Spiderman.
What's that? Why are we getting another origin story when we've already covered all that in the 2002 Spideman film you may protest. Well, unlike it's predecessor, which was in such a mad rush to get Tobey Maguire in the suit that they barely scratched the surface of who Peter Parker was, "Amazing" really provides an in depth look at the character, from his earliest childhood memories of his parents leaving him under mysterious circumstances, to the strong sense morality instilled in him by his aunt and uncle as featured in the scene were he stands up for a kid being harassed by the token highschool alpha jock/meathead and takes a pounding for his troubles. In short, the movie makes you care about Peter Parker before he puts on the costume. Much of the credit for this goes to Andrew Garfield for turning in such a genuine and memorable performance. Tall, lanky, and awkward, Garfield's Peter Parker just comes across as more in line with webhead's original comic book incarnation than the diminutive maguire, and although he is fundamentally a good kid, I liked how the movie is not afraid to portray Peter Parker as just that, a kid, who can be reckless, selfish, arrogant, and even a downright snarky little a$$hole a times. When his uncle is shot and killed after trying to stop a robber, Peter does not immediatly shape up and commit himself to the lonely and selfless road of the road of the hero as he did in the previous franchise but instead becomes an angry and unpredictable vigilante acting out of a self-centered desire for revenge against his uncle's killer. It is not until later, when he uses his powers to save a young boy from falling to his death in a flaming car that Peter begins to realize his responsibility to use his abilities for good and his motives take a more altruistic bent. It is these added dimensions of moral ambiguety and wrestling with the ego that make Peter's journey as compelling as it is gratifying.
All the performance were pretty top notch. Martain Sheen is Uncle Ben to a t. evoking both wisdom and a rascally sense of good humour. The intimate and dramatic scenes between he and Garfield really shined and, although it is really small part, one of my absolute favorite bits of the movie happens near the beginning when the two are talking and Peter just tells him, "Your a pretty great dad." Sally Field, is likewise perfectly cast as Aunt May who, as in the comics, acts as Peter's moral anchor throughout the film, believably conveying the fear and heartache a parent feels when a child starts to meander down a dangerous path yet all the same never giving up on them no matter what. Emma Stone was was very well cast as Peter's classmate and love interest Gwen Stacy and ended up bringing a lot more to the table rather than just being the requisite "damsel in distress." Unlike the agonizingly forced chemistry between Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst in the Raimi films these two were a lot of fun to watch on screen together and root for as a couple. Rys Ifans was solid as Doctor Curt Conners who winds up turning himself into a giant, scaly lizard man after trying to regenerate a limb through gene splicing. There was kind of a been there done that feeling of repitition however as Peter is forced to defeate his surrogate scientific father figure, a part represented by Norman Osborn/The Green Goblin in the first film and Otto Octavius/Dr. Octopus in 2004's Spiderman 2.
Even though I have been harping on them, I still really love the Raimi/Maguire films (the first two anyway) they have a sense of wonder and fantasy about them that is infectious and makes you want to put on a red unitard and start scaling walls, but, at the end of the day, I think Amazing Spiderman's honest depiction of the complex, confusing and often times messy nature of life along with a very strong character focus on Peter Parker is what makes it soar, or should I say "swing" higher than what has come before.

Ross

Superman vs. The Elite Review

In Superman vs. The Elite, the latest from DC Entertainment's direct to dvd animated line, themes of  pheomenal power and even more phenomenal restraint are at the forefront as the man of steel's reverence for the sanctity of life is challenged  when an edgy new team of super powered individuals calling themselves "The Elite" burst onto the scene. Led by the charasmatic and calculating Manchester Black, The Elite instantly garner public apporoval by demonstrating their willingingness to get their hands dirty and make the hard choices that Superman avoids. Namely, in dispensing lethal force on the world's criminal element. As people everywhere seems taken with the rockstar-esque Black and his motley crew of  hard hitting anti-heroe's and their promise to clean up, Superman recognizes the immense danger The Elite pose through their casual and reckless displays of "might makes right" and  braces for the inevitable showdown while all the while contemplating if the world truly has moved on to a place he cannot follow as his old fashioned, mid-western values seem to have lost their relevance and become somewhat of a parody in an increasingly fearful and calloused modern world.
I enjoyed this movie a lot. Not only does it deliver the goods in terms of action and thrills, but it also manages to be a moving and thought exploration into what truly makes Superman a hero and why his high moral standards and no killing policy when dealing with the world's most vicious monsters, though not an easy road to tread by any means, is at the end of the day superior to the instant gratification of eye for an eye championed by The Elite.
That is not to say that the thought never crosses Superman's mind, and during his brutal standoff with the volatile team, one actually experiences a twinge of panic for Superman as the paragon of truth, justice, and the American way comes closer than ever to crossing that line.
Simply put, this is one of the best from DC Entertainment's animated line thus far and, for readers of Superman in comics, a refreshing alternative to the characters attempted more edgy and sci-fi ish "New 52" revampment that, aside from Morisson's current run on "Action Comics" has left a decidedly sour taste in the mouths of many longtime DC loyalists. Now more than ever we need to be reminded why the ideals embodied by heroes like Superman are still a pivotal part of our culture and this movie does the job near perfectly.

Ross

Prometheus Review

In "Prometheus," colossus of cinema Ridley Scott's intense and ambitious quasi-prequal to his 1979 "Alien," questions of science, theology, and the all around riddle of human existence are placed under close examination as the crew of the space ship Prometheus, like the Greek god whose namesake it shares, are punished for trying to bring a symbolic "fire" to the human race in the form of the true origins for life on earth.
The movie takes place in the distant future close to the next turn of the century were what are now only theoretical scientific concepts such as cryogenic hibernation, interactive holograms, and artifical intellegence are an everyday reality. A pair of young explorers who study the markings on ancient ruins from lost civilizaitons think they have discovered a common theme of the deification of celestial, god-like beings that they are somehow able to trace to a faraway planet that orbits the rings of Saturn. A planet, that like our own, has its own sun and is capable of sustaining life. The couple theorize that this advanced race race engineered life on earth before returning to their own world. When their research captures the attention of a corporate titan with very deep pockets and a hidden agenda to boot, the two along with a team of other proffessionals are sent on a scientific expidition to this mysterious planet to uncover find this race of "engineers" who at their apex, gave birth to the human species itself. Though what awaits them when they arrive is something far more sinister...
This is a movie that tries to be a lot of things and succeeds more or less. In parts, it is a dazzling sci-fi space epic. In others, it is a sqeam inducing thrill ride complete with creepy crawlers and the trademark gothic horror of Scott's classic "Alien." In others, it is a serious study of the age old question, "why are we here?" "What is our purpose?" "Where did we come from?" In this way, the movie's ambition seems to be its greatest enemy as some of these themes tend to undermine one another especially as the action picks up and the stuff starts hitting the fan. Simply put, it is hard for a movie to be too philisophical without coming off as silly when the only thing the audience cares about is whose going to buy it next and how gross is it going to be?
Pretty good performances all around. The standouts probably being Michael Fassbender as David, an Android who turns out to be far less artificial than he lets on and Noomi Rapace as Explorer/Scientist Elizabeth Shaw, who probably undergoes one of the most truly terrifying birth sequences ever in a film.
In some ways, I feel like Prometheus, is trying to sell itself as more of an "experience" than an actual story. This is not an entirely bad thing. Especially in stunning 3D the the sheer scope and aura of film is both wondrous and terrifying to behold. Despite its flimly philisophical conjectures and somewhat shcizophrenic sense of identity, Prometheus is definately a horror/space spectacle that delivers the metaphorical "fire" and manages to return a great deal of dignity to Scott's floundering Alien franchise

Avengers Review

It had been building since 2008 when a brief post credit sequence at the end of "Iron Man" planted the seeds for a full blown cinematic superhero extravaganza like none before that now, four years later, has finally come to fruition. "The Avengers" marks the first time Marvel characters, some (Iron Man) already carrying their own lucrative franchises, are featured together on screen taking on a common enemy that too powerful for any one of them to defeat on their own. So, the pivotal question, is The Avengers actually a good, worthwile film or just two and a half hours of loud dumb fun (e.g. transformers) that provides the quintisential of summer escapism fix (IN 3D!) while lining the pockets of Marvel studios execs eager to cash in on their biggest money making properties.
After attending a midnight showing of The Avengers. In glorious 2D showing I might add, I can say that the first film featuring "The Earth's Mightiest Heroes" definately lives up to all it's hype and then some. From the grandest set pieces to the most minute of details one can instantly tell that a lot of love care, and above all, effort was put into this movie by a studio whose intimate understanding of its characters and earnest desire to convey the ideals and values they represent really seems to take precedence over treating its characters as souless moneymaking tools which, in my opinion, is the problem with 20th Century Fox and its current mishandling of the X-Men franchise but that is the topic of another rant.
The movie is basically a thrill ride, and as with every ride, there are a few lulls and quiet moments here and there, though before you know it your senses are immersed in a another barrage of mind blowing action that, more than any other film I dare say, really feels like a comic book come to life. Seeing Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and the monstrous Hulk himself on screen fighting side by side was a truly amazing and awesome thing to behold and I am not even a big fan of those characters!
Most all of the main cast are back and slip effortlessly into their respective roles. Robert Downey Jr. once again oozes his trademark charm and charisma as Tony Stark, the world's foremost superhero celebrity. Chris Evans returns as Steve Rodgers, a war hero displaced in time now given a second chance to wield the shield as the star spangled hero Captain America in the modern world. Chris Hemsworth is back as Thor, the hammer wielding god of thunder with a personal stake in the trouble that has befallen earth. Replacing Ed Norton is Mark Ruffalow as Bruce Banner, a brilliant scientist who, when pushed to his limits, transforms into a rampaging beheamoth known as The Hulk. I was a little dissapointed when I learned that the part was being re-cast but now having seen the movie I think that Ruffalow gave a good performance as Banner and I really liked his deliberatly deadpan delivery along with the slightly unhinged quality he brought to the role. If I had to give an award for best performance in the movie though I would probably give it to Chris Hiddleson who reprised his role from last summer's "Thor" as the Loki. Much more of a true villain than the last time we saw him onscreen, Loki's actions even more aggresively reflect his overwhealming psycholical need to compensate for the shameful circumstances surrounding his origins and  the feeling of inferiority he feels towards his stepbrother Thor. I loved how Thor never gave up hope that Loki would see the error of his ways and come around to the good side even after all he suffered at his brothers hands. And the way that Loki would tease possible redemption only to do a total about face and trounce his prey like a jackal that smells blood is a true credit to the actor in successfully portraying such a wonderfully despicable villain.
Unlike the hilarious post credit sequence, in which the completely exhausted group of heroes partake in a much needed fast food indulgance after their epic, world saving endeavors, I had a big smile on my face when I walked out of The Avengers. It truly epitomizes the term "summer blockbuster" and I hope its success gaurantees the long term health of a studio that is truly passionate about making good superhero movies.

Ross

      

"The Man of Steel" Official Banner

Not exactly hot off the presses news but I just felt like posting this new, "official" banner for "The Man of Steel" which hit the web a couple of weeks ago. From what I understand, the filmakers are taking a very neo/medieval approach to Superman's homeworld of Krypton, the style of which is very much conveyed here in the re-imagined S logo which manages to be evocative of the character's classic iconongraphy while at the same time hinting at something bold and new for a modern audience. I know it is a little silly to get too worked up over just a logo but damn, this looks cool!

Ross  

The Hunger Games Review

I love distopian stories. From Brave New World, to 1984, The Handmaid's Tail, The Giver, Anthem, Watchmen, The Dark Knight Returns, all portray a bleak and troubling vision of the depths to which humanity can descend when we trade reason for fear and freedom for safety. Suzanne Collin's  "The Hunger Games," the first in a trilogy of books is the latest offering in a long tradition of stories to take place in a future in which something is fundamentally wrong, and people are in desperate need of a dramatic example to rattle the cages shake them out of apathy and submissivness. Recently adapted into a major motion picture that, if I am not mistaken, has become the highest grossing film starring a female character ever, this harrowing tale of sacrifice, survival, and defiance in the face of insurmountable odds has certainly struck a chord with people everywhere.
Set sometime in the far future where a totalitarian regime has emerged from the ashes of what was once North America, now known "Panem" The Hunger Games tells the story of Katniss Everdeen, a young women who barely manages to scratch out a living for herself, mother, and younger sister in the poorest, coal mining  province of a rigidly stratified class system, the uppermost percentage of which reside in a glistening city state called The Capitol, a veriable Roman Empire of sorts representing the pinnacle of societal acheivment and decadence. In a heroic act of self sacrifice on behalf of her younger sister whose name is drawn at a town assembly refferred to as "the reaping," Katniss volunteers to compete in her place in a yearly event known as The Hunger Games. A high stakes, winner take all gladatorial competition featuring one young man and woman under the age of eighteen selected at random from each of the twelve districts. Serving the double function of a cruel punishment against the more impoverished districts who once tried and failed to throw off the yoke of Capitol opression in a past uprising and a celebrated pastime for Panem's wealthy uppercrust who wager big money to sponsor their favorite players, the nationally televised event provides something of an ultimate reality show for the immoral, elitist and hedonistic Capitol residents who train, encourage, and expect the young tributes to savagely dispose of one another so that only one victor may make it out alive.
Borrowing themes from Lord of The Flies and The Running Man, the story explores the moral implications of young people being forced to kill one another for other people's entertainment, specifically the residents of The Capital, who, in a critique on modern society and our obsession with youth, go to extreme and unnatural lengths to alter or modify their appearances in pursuit of some distorted ideal of perfection. Despite being dismissed as subhuman and inferior, it is Katniss and the people from the lesser districts who are closer to true humanity as exemplified in their closeness to the land and their faith and dependence in each other.
I thought the movie had really good performances all around. Jennifer Lawrence did a great job as Katniss and managed to strike the perfect balance between strength and vulnerability. Unlike the main female character in another wildly popular series which shall go unnamed Katniss does not define herself by whichever broody looking guy she happens to be with at the time but is tough, decisive, resourcful, and clever. Not to mention she happens to be a crack shot with a bow and arrow. Woody Harrelson makes a memorable supporting role as the boozy, irrascible mentor to the tributes of district 12 while the usually stunning Elizabeth Banks looks creepy and clown-like as the insidiously cheerful Effie Trinket.
I was only part way through the book when I finally broke down and spoiled it for myself by seeing the movie. I am glad I did. This is truly a unique film and not one to miss. Not that I mean this as an endorsment to give up on the book, I sure haven't.

Ross