Riddle Me NOT Batfans

The Dark Knight Rises

SWEAR TO ME!!!!!

In case you Bat-fans haven't heard already, there's some interesting news that hit the airwaves this week concerning the third installment of the beloved Bat franchise helmed by Chris Nolan. The bat-tacular director announced the title of his third Batman film, will be aptly called "The Dark Knight Rises." I'll get into my thoughts on the new title in a second, but the biggest news, and most surprising to many speculators out there, is that Nolan himself handed a little golden ticket by saying that the Riddler will NOT be the villain of the new film. Hmm, do I hear an uproar of green suited fanboys ready to overthrow Nolan for cerebral control of Gotham? I hope not...here's why.

If Nolan has taught us anything with his Bat-films, is to never expect the obvious. Over the course of the first two Bat-films, Nolan has redefined the comic book film genre each and every time. With Batman Begins, he taught us that even the most obscure villains can be taken seriously, and with the Dark Knight, well, Nolan showed us that an iconic villain can be made even more menacing than before, but that's due to the excellent casting choice of Heath Ledger. So how will Nolan up the ante from the Joker's reign of chaos? In all honesty, the Riddler wouldn't have been the answer. I've always been hesitant about the idea of Edward Nygma tearing Gotham apart with his narcissistic ways because Nygma was never a physical match for Batman, or cerebral one at that. On top of that, the only way I could see Riddler working in Nolan's universe is if he held Gotham ransom where only Batman could save the city by deciphering an all-too complex puzzle. We already saw something like this in the Dark Knight with the ferry-bomb scene, and it would be too similar in format. Plus Jim Carrey may have left a bad taste in all our mouths after that spectacularly awful performance in Batman Forever. I may have loved it as a kid, but I also loved Power Rangers...you do the math of my incompetence.

So here's where the crazy speculation begins of which villain will appear in the next Bat film. In order to calm the tidal wave of theories, I figured in honor of the world's greatest detectives, I'd do some detective work of my own in zeroing in on just who will go toe-to-toe with the Dark Knight. So here are the clues we have so far....

Clue #1 The Title of the Film

"The Dark Knight Rises" -- A title like this should evoke the greatest emotions out of comic book fans. When we last saw our Dark Knight in shining military flex-armor, he was branded a criminal in Gotham. Now the entire Gotham police force is after Batman, and the whole city probably hates his guts. With a title like the Dark Knight Rises, Batman must be beat down to a pulp and rise out of the ashes as the savior of Gotham, meaning it is not going to be a walk in the park. He must be thrown into the proverbial societal blender, mixing it up with the dregs of society, and becoming his own one man army against Gotham's underworld.

Clue #2 Casting Tom Hardy

The Forger from Inception was hand picked by Nolan to play an unspecified villain role in the upcoming film. If anyone saw Hardy's earlier performances that weren't Inception, such as Layer Cake, and even Star Trek: Nemesis, you'll clearly see a talented Brit with a knack for playing dark characters. Hardy has many qualities to his advantage as a villain: He is young, not a chick (sorry Poison Ivy & Harley Quinn), not fat (sorry Penguin), and not a skinny wimp (sorry Ventriloquist). I could be wrong and he does end up playing one of the characters above (I hope he's not a cross dressing Ivy) but because of this we can probably narrow down the list of possible villainous candidates.

Clue #3 Nolan's Believable World of Batman

Sounds like a good theme park name. Seriously though, the world of Gotham City that Nolan has created is something to treasure. Gotham City is a crime-ridden, dark, gritty world that looks like Chicago. I kid, I kid, it IS Chicago. The world of Gotham isn't what we were used to seeing in Burton-Schumacher land. No more are our villains characatures that would make even their animated series counterparts weep in dismay. No, these are villains that could be considered believable by today's degenerate standards. They are methodical, twisted, and anarchists by nature. So with that being said, you can rule out a couple villains just by this clue alone. While Riddler could've been translated successfully, Nolan hammered the final nail in the coffin with his latest announcement. (Which I called by the way...Don't believe me...check out my earlier blogs ya doubters)

Clue #4 Other Sources

Batman in the Bayou?

I added this clue because I overheard through the reliable friend of a friend scenario that some of the production on The Dark Knight Rises is scheduled to film in New Orleans. At his point everything must be taken with a grain of salt, but it does peak my interest. Why? Well, one of the more notorious villains in the Bat-Universe who has some deep comic book connections with the bayou city is none other than Killer Croc aka Waylon Jones. I know, I know, the inclusion of Killer Croc is hard to imagine within the confines of Nolan's realistic Bat-universe, but still, you gotta admit it would be an unexpected, yet welcome curve ball if that's who our villain turns out to be.

Hypothesis of Possible Villains

So with the clues that we have, we can start to pinpoint closer to who our villain could be, and here are my guesses beginning with the most likely:

Hush

If it were up to me, Hush would be the perfect villain for this movie. 'The Dark Knight Rises' will be a film about the struggle Batman will go through in order to win back the people of Gotham. In order to portray this film in the grandest of fashions, Nolan will need to introduce a villain that knows every move Batman will make, and that's where Hush comes in. Hush, aka Thomas Elliot, was a childhood friend of Bruce Wayne who grew up under similar circumstances with wealthy parents. However in Elliot's case, he hated his parents, and was jealous of Bruce. Nolan and crew could play with this relationship in a number of ways on screen, which could allow for furthur character development for Bruce Wayne. Elliot is also a master strategist, and according to the comics, he's known to have been an equal to Batman in both physical and mental prowess, and is a superb marksman. One of Hush's story arcs even had him manipulating some of Gotham's most vile criminals for his own purpose of ridding Batman, including Riddler, Joker, and even Killer Croc (wink wink). Plus Tom Hardy has the same charming looks as Christian Bale, and can easily be identified by audiences as the anti-Bruce Wayne.

Black Mask

Black Mask could be a major possibility within the context of Nolan's universe. Roman Sionis was another rich kid but his story is sadder than Hush. He was hated by his parents and he was bad from the get-go. A failed businessman, Sionis later turns to a life of crime, becoming a mob leader of the "False Face Society," where every member must wear a mask of their choosing, and he subsequently becomes the Black Mask after an incident with Batman, where his face was melted onto his Black mask...duh. I can see Black Mask in a Nolan film, especially with Hardy's casting, however the only problem I see with this is the whole mob connection. It's been done already in the first two films with Falcone and Joker, and I don't really see a chance for Nolan to add onto the emotional development of Wayne.

Ra's Al Ghul/Talia Al Ghul

If Liam Neeson makes a surprise appearance, I will officially s**t myself. If anyone analyzed the ending of 'Batman Begins' the way I did, you'll notice how Ra's peacefully closed his eyes before the train derailed, as if to say, "this will be merely a flesh wound!" Ra's al Ghul is immortal in the comics due to the mystical powers of the Lazarus pits. If Nolan wanted to up the ante of this film he could bring Neeson back, and maybe introduce Ra's daughter, Talia al Ghul as the new love interest because remember, Rachel went boom-boom in The Dark Knight. It would be nice, but that leaves the casting of Tom Hardy a mystery, unless he of course plays someone else we don't expect.

Killer Croc

As cool as Croc is in Batman lore, I am only including him based on clue # 4. It would be really difficult to include a character like this, mostly because it would either require an unbelievable amount of prosthetics or CGI to create, and I know Nolan won't be too keen on that. Plus, it doesn't really fit well in the believable realm of Nolan but hey, you never know.

=============

So those are my 2 cents on the possible direction of the new Batman film. I am thrilled that production is finally taking off with this film after a two and half year wait since the release of The Dark Knight. As great as Joker was, he should be left out entirely in the new film due to the tragic passing of Heath Ledger, and if anything, only be mentioned in an off manner. Maybe something like "Holy Shit, Joker escaped Arkham. We'll never find him." Maybe not exactly word for word how I put it, but you get the idea. Whatever the case may be, we're still a year and a half away until the Summer 2012 release date of The Dark Knight Rises, and anything could happen between now and then. Still, all the elements are starting to come together, and I know Nolan will make this a worthy third entry into a mainstream series. I wish I could say the same thing for Spider Man 3. I was seriously going into cardiac arrest when I saw Peter Parker dancing down the sidewalk. Hopefully Alfred won't bust out with a konga line.

It's a Bird! It's a Plane! It's Super Snyder!!!

Zack Snyder Taking the Helm for Man of Steel

Zack Snyder ready to tackle the greatest comic book icon of all time

A glorious bit of news seeped out into the media this week, and it's good enough to make comic book fans feel really Super about themselves. According to an Deadline magazine, Zack Sndyer (300, Watchmen) has been given the daunting task to direct the upcoming Superman Reboot "Man of Steel." Hold up your glasses boys and girls, because this is a good thing. For years, Superman has not quite gotten the motion picture treatment he's deserved for this generation. The last great Supe movie came with Superman II, and suffice to say the man faster than a speeding bullet hasn't really been up to speed by today's superhero film standards. Recent comic book film successes like Iron Man and The Dark Knight have proven to moviegoers that it IS possible to make any superhero relevant in today's society, and right now I think it's time the most iconic superhero in comic book history gets his 15 minutes of fame.

Why should you be excited? Given the track record of Superman's big screen appearances, it's tough to imagine a good Superman film these days. Fortunately, the puzzle to creating a good Superman film is beginning to come together, and the pivotal first piece came when Christopher Nolan announced he was going to produce the film. If you can't appreciate what Nolan did for the Batman franchise, then close this blog, because you're probably 50 years old and hate children. Before Nolan became the powerhouse director that he is, Batman was in dire times with all the Nipple Suits and Joel Schumacher raping. Thankfully, Nolan took the source material very seriously, and decided to go in a direction where comic book fans would be taken seriously. Enter "Batman Begins," which presented us with a beautifully gritty, violent, and realistic take on the Caped Crusader, and well, the rest is history. The key...Nolan recognized what made Batman such an appealing character to comic fans, and if I were to put my money on it, he knows what makes Superman so appealing, and that's where Zack Snyder fits right in.

Snyder's signature action, in action...One can only hope Superman gets the same treatment

If you haven't seen any of Snyder's work, you might as well not have watched The Wizard of Oz. Dawn of the Dead, 300, Watchmen, and the upcoming film Sucker Punch, are havens for nerds. Each of these films contain an obscene amount of action, but it's not mindless explosive action a-la Expendables. The action sequences are stylistic, using a combination of High Speed Cameras, CGI, prosthetics, and of course, lots and lots of violence. And this my friends, is what Superman has been missing all these years. Looking back at Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns," I think we can all agree it wasn't necessarily a bad film. The problem however, was that it wasn't a great film. A superhero like Superman, who can fly, use heat ray, frost breath, and has super strength, needs to have an explosive presence on camera. Throughout all of Superman Returns, we never really saw The Man of Steel do much of that. He never got into a fist fight, and the climax of the film was that he lifted a Kryptonite continent into space. I felt like a kid who just watched a lousy fireworks show, because I left the movie asking myself "That's It?" Superman is all about the fights, and if the film is going to connect with audiences today, I need to see Superman down in the trenches, bleeding, battered, with his suit ripped and shred to pieces, and he's still ready to take more. On top of that, as iconic a villain as he may be, Lex Luthor no longer cuts it. I am a firm believer that a hero is only as good as his villain, and for this next film they need to bring a person that can go toe-to-toe in a fight with Superman, and if the rumors are true, that man's name could be General Zod

You can never really trust the internet once big news like this comes out, but one of the bigger rumors going around the web is that General Zod will be the villain of the film. Zod, who was so notoriously played by Terrance Stamp in Superman II, was a worthy adversary to Superman (considering both men came from Krypton and had the same powers here on Earth). Of course, the internet trolls are clamoring for baddies like Brainiac or even Metallo, but I think General Zod would be a good start. You can tackle some of the Krypton Origin story, and bring a nasty villain to the table. Ultimately, that decision will rest on writer David Goyer, who is handling script duties on The Man of Steel. Goyer is probably best known for his work on Batman Begins, but his credits also include the Blade Trilogy and Dark City, so the man has his comic book roots in check. That, multiplied with his  Nolan and Snyder team-up, and we should have a recipe for Super success.

As for the casting, no one knows just yet. And for the life of me, I can't think of a proper casting choice at the moment. I hope Nolan and crew don't bank their film on a Triple A Hollywood star, because once that happens, the film's substance gets thrown out the window and everyone is interested in the star attached to it. Given Nolan's track record with casting Christian Bale as Batman, and Heath Ledger as Joker, he has a good eye for these things, however, the casting also shouldn't be a complete unknown. Brandon Routh donned the red cape in 2006 with varying success, ultimately lacking any kind of emotional depth with his performance. Plus, I always envision Superman as a guy in his early 30's, and Routh's look just didn't cut it for me. Instead, the casting should rely on an emerging Hollywood talent, preferably small screen, with enough credibility to tackle a big project like this. Think about it, we already know whomever gets selected to play Kal-el will see his film career launch, so I see no point in picking a well known actor.

Whatever the case may be, I proudly ride the "In Nolan We Trust" bandwagon and hope for the best. Superman: Man of Steel is expected to come out sometime in 2012, and until then, the sky is NOT the limit for the possibilities with this film. Nolan and company will have to think beyond the big blue sky, and maybe hang a hard left around the Sun if they're going to give the Son of Krypton his due justice on the silver screen.

Hollywood Turns to Board Games for Ideas

Liam Neeson Boards 'Battleship' Movie

I know this kid must be thinking "Why is Dad wearing a gay white sweater-vest?"

Hollywood finds yet another way to completely baffle me. Today the wonderful folks on Tinseltown have apparently signed Mr. Ra's Al Ghoul himself, Liam Neeson, to star in the upcoming film adaptation of the popular boardgame "Battleship." No jokes are necessary here...the first sentence is funny enough. Hollywood has gone to the far reaches of unoriginality to create a serious movie based on a board game, and I never imagined I would see something like this happen. I don't know why this is necessary considering the hundreds of other creative properties they could adapt and ruin, but then again, Hollywood continues to force feed audiences the films we don't need.

Neeson better learn to mind his surroundings, Battleship will bomb

Before I begin ranting as to why this is evidently a dumb idea, let me first bash the casting and plot of the film. According to Entertainment Weekly.com, the film is an action-adventure about the planet battling a colossal force. So now that we have THAT all cleared up, here's my battleship themed guess as to what that force may be...B-7 that it's global warming....HIT!!!  Regardless of what this "colossal force" will be, whether it be a nuclear threat, global warming, terrorists, etc. the film's apparent direction in its casting is ridiculous. Liam Neeson is set to play Admiral Shane, with Taylor Kitsch (Gambit from X-Men Origins: Wolverine) playing a naval officer who is also the Admiral's future son-in-law, and Rihanna also starring in the film. Yes, I said Rihanna. Her role....drum-roll please....a fellow high-ranking crew mate and weapons specialist. And that deserves a big WTF.

Hungry Hungry Hippos coming to a theater near you

The film is being directed by Peter Berg, who has a good track record when it comes to action films, however the casting is atrocious in this film. Neeson clearly has the chops to play a leading figure in the film, but adding young names like Kitsch and Rihanna, both of whom are nowhere near the acting credibility of Neeson, is a big fumble. This is Hollywood's attempt at making the film appeal to a broader audience instead of focusing on making an adaptation like this work, which would be a "Hunt for Red October" kind of atmosphere, and even that's a stretch. I'm just left pondering how Rihanna can convincingly play a high-ranking crew mate and weapons specialist, when her real-life counterpart can't even dodge a few punches from Chris Brown. Adding insult to injury, the film is aiming big with a tentative summer 2012 release date, and I'm calling sink on this ship.

A board-game adaptation done right...Clue.

Believe it or not, this isn't the first time Hollywood has reached into the world of board games for film adaptations. Back in 1985, a little gem of a film called "Clue" was based on the popular board game of the same name and is often considered a cult classic. So why am I bashing Battleship and not Clue? Because Clue was a farce and never took itself seriously. The film was intentionally silly and played with the absurdness found in mystery and thriller novels. Not to mention the film was hysterically cast with Tim Curry leading the bunch as Wadsworth the Butler. The point is Hollywood needs to stop taking adaptations so serious and get to the root of what made the original creative medium so good in the first place. If that's not the case, then I'm still going to wait for a Horror "Torture-Porn" adaptation of Hungry, Hungry, Hippos; I mean, the board-game left so many questions unanswered.

I'm sorry, but Speed Racer was an adaptation done right

Besides Clue, my idea of a perfect adaptation is Speed Racer. I know a lot of people laugh when I say that, but if you ever watched the old anime series, you'll see it was light-hearted with flashy animation, wacky dialogue, and great racing sequences. But because neither the show nor the film appealed to a mainstream audience, movie-goers shunned it and it became a box office disaster. (Not to mention it was also competing with "Iron-Man" at the time.) I've said it before in my blog about comic-book adaptations, but if Hollywood is going to continue pulling out all these weird adaptations then they need to be a little more faithful to the source. If you're source appeals to a specific audience, then don't inflate the budget of your film and make it the way it's supposed to be (Speed Racer, Clue, Kick-Ass) But if you're going to go all gung-ho and change the tone and style of your source material (GI Joe, Transformers 2, Last Airbender) and continue to appeal to the "tweenie" movie-goers who have attention spans the size of a walnut, then may God help us all.

Paul W.S. Anderson = The Destroyer

Resident Evil Movies Continue to Fail Upwards

Excuse me Milla? May I borrow your shotgun for a moment?

God it never ends. I'm not sure what to be more peeved about; the fact that Hollywood is milking 3D until it's supple teet is bone dry, or the fact that yet another film based on one my most beloved video game franchises continues to insult me like an elementary school bully stealing my milk money. "Resident Evil: Afterlife 3D" is the fourth installment of the treacherous Resident Evil movie franchise, and now it seems the film is picking up steam in it's marketing campaign as Screen Gems (the film's production studio) is releasing clips of the film in anticipation of its September 10th release. The footage your about to see may be too graphic for your nerdism.




Resident Evil: Afterlife Exclusive Clip

Trailer Park Movies | MySpace Video

The Executioner Majini from Resident Evil 5

Are you ok? Did your skull turn to liquid goo after watching those two clips? Mine did. Once again the unholiest of Hollywood's residents Paul W.S. Anderson has tainted the film adaptation with his wildly irrelevant interpretation of the Resident Evil games. For anyone who may have played the games, you'll know that the series is known for its relentless build up of tension, and it's pitch perfect delivery on thrills and scares. Over time, the games have matured, and have slowly delved into a more action oriented nature, but that's another issue for another blog entry. The point is, the Resident Evil gaming franchise was all about isolation and survival horror, not John Woo style Kung Fu cinematics. Every Resident Evil film to date has clearly missed the mark in capturing what made the games so damn fun to play.

I got these knee pads for $5 at Sports Authority

Clearly from looking at the cinematography and direction of the latest film, it's borrowing heavily from the fifth game in the franchise. The film features the mutated zombies, the executioner Majini with the large axe, and the inclusion of both Chris Redfield, and a T-Virus filled Albert Wesker. But what Hollywood didn't realize is that Resident Evil 5 was the weakest of the series. Why? Because the game veered too far off from its roots of isolation, fear, and tension. The game added a co-op partner named Sheva, who took away the isolation from the game...and was just plain annoying as a character. Sure the game was a commercial success, but the story didn't satisfy long-time Resident Evil fans, and the gameplay was radically different from its predecessors. I just wish franchises would learn to evolve from their successful formula rather than try something completely different. Of all the games in the series, the one with the perfect blend of tension, horror, isolation, and action was none other than Resident Evil 4. It was a story about one man versus a harrowing and ruthless army of mutated creatures, and that was the epitome of what I consider a Resident Evil game. The movie on the other hand looks like it's trading survival horror for action-adventure, which doesn't make sense. It's like a Jewish kid going to a Catholic school. You have to ask why?

Albert Wesker...Gangsta

I will now use this paragraph to vent about specific grudges I hold with the film franchise:

#1 Characters from the game are not the main characters in the film.
#2 Milla Jovovich has supernatural abilities, is one of a thousand clones, and knows too much slow-mo kung-fu.
#3 The films have progressively become their own universe rather than the universe created by the game's narrative.
#4 Nemesis does Karate.
#5 Mike Epps was cast as an unnecessary comic relief.
#6 Main character Carlos Oliveira from the third Resident Evil game is killed off in the third movie.
#7 Paul W.S. Anderson created these films...Remember people, this is the guy who created "Event Horizon" which just ended up being a film about a blood orgy on a spaceship.

Couldn't have said it better myself

There are probably many other gripes that I can't remember off the top of my head, but I'd like to keep myself from punching a hole through my laptop.

Anyway, like most of the country, I will watch this movie. Before you ask me why, here are a couple of things you should know. First, I want to be able to see just how badly this franchise will be butchered. Second, I really like that they are including both Chris Redfield and Albert Wesker in the film, but again, I want to see how Anderson will destroy this. And thirdly, I probably won't pay to see this film. Wink, Wink, thank you high seas of internet piracy. I just hope that movie-goers understand that just like books, games are much better than their movie counterpart.

Pinch Me...I Must Be Dead

The Zombie Genre Invades Your Living Room

The Walking Dead -- Appearing on AMC this fall

This could turn out to be one of my shorter posts, but I am so excited to finally have seen the trailer for the upcoming AMC series "The Walking Dead." In case you haven't heard, The Walking Dead is a new Television series coming out this fall on AMC based on a comic series created by writer Robert Kirkman and artist Tony Moore. I will admit I was not familiar with the series at all, but after watching the newest trailer for the TV adaption, I have the ultimate jitters.

Black and White zombies, a clear homage to George Romero

The Walking Dead follows the life of a small town sheriff who is injured on duty and goes into a coma. After waking up, he somehow avoided being eaten alive and comes to terms with the zombie apocalypse that has spawned around him. It seems almost like a cliche premise, but I'm hooked nonetheless.

First and foremost, add zombies to anything, and I'm sold. Zombies have evolved into a mainstream genre that there are even acclaimed works of literature such as "Pride and Prejudice" being re-written to include zombies. I am not kidding, this book actually exists. But this isn't just about my affection for zombies. Instead, this is about a TV series that looks to appease both zombie fanatics such as myself, and Television devouts alike. The Walking Dead is being written and directed by Frank Darabont, who is responsible for some cinema classics like "The Shawshank Redemption," "The Green Mile," and "The Mist." Sure any mediocre talented director could've tackled this adaptation with ease and cashed in quite easily, but the fact that Darabont is heading the production adds major credibility points for me.

The cast of the Walking Dead, just waiting to shine in the spotlight

Besides a good amount of action and gore, The Walking Dead looks to be like a series that is mainly devoted to character development. It is vital for any TV program to have that sense of character progression to connect with audiences. Good or bad, audiences need to be able to follow along with what a character is thinking and doing if they're going to commit to the series, or even next week's show. And Darabont is no slacker when it comes to this. Fans of Darabont know that he can bring it when it comes to creating thought provoking characters. Andy Dufresne (Shawshank Redemption) has to be on an all time greatest character list. Not only that, he's also got the experience in creating creature-filled action. If you've watched Darabon't last film "The Mist," you'll understand why it's a very highly underrated creature film. If The Walking Dead avoids being pigeonholed to previous zombie films, and is anything like "The Mist," then we're in for a deadly fun time.

The game changer of Zombies. Go watch it now!

Until then I leave you all with a link to the trailer for The Walking Dead. The series is set to premiere on AMC on Halloween Night around 10 pm, which hopefully allows for some more brutal action sequences than usual. Not only that, the casting on the series looks to be solid. Actors like Andrew Lincoln and Michael Rooker are bringing the much needed acting chops required for a production like this, but The Walking Dead looks to include the perfect mixture of up and coming Hollywood talent, allowing for it's supporting cast the chance to shine. Until then, I'll be shuffling through my daily routine in anticipation of this series. Heck, it's even inspired me to check out the comic series when I get a chance. It's too bad it's about 70-something issues and still going strong. Damn you zombie love. Enjoy.


http://www.amctv.com/originals/The-Walking-Dead/?bcpid=111717822001&bclid=88963904001&bctid=593569611001

This Class is Getting Crowded

X-Men: First Class Seeing too Much of a Good Thing?

As many hardcore comic book fans may know, next summer's movie line-up will be a haven for lovers of the mutant kind. With the likes of Captain America, Thor, the Spider-Man reboot, and Green Lantern, one of these anticipated titles includes the reboot of the X-Men franchise "X-Men: First Class." Directed by "Layer Cake" and "Kick-Ass" helmer Matthew Vaughn, the film will chronicle the early beginnings of Professor Xavier's friendship with Magneto, and how both would ultimately turn against each other in their growing disagreement over how to handle the relationship between humans and mutants, ultimately spawning the X-Mansion and the Brotherhood of Mutants. Anyways, the film is set to release next June and lately there's been a flurry of casting choices that really has me concerned over just what kind of shape this movie is in.

Mcavoy as Professor 'Wheels' Xavier

Today it was announced that 'Mad Men' starlet January Jones is the newest addition to the film, which is adding to an already heavy line-up of Hollywood talent. Headlining the film are James Macavoy as a young Professor Xavier, and Michael Fassbender as a young Magneto (both of which are excellent choices in my opinion). Among the rest of the big line-up of talent are Kevin Bacon as an unknown villain, Oliver Platt as a mysterious character called "Man in Black," Rose Byrne as a possible Moira McTaggert, and the list goes on and on. But just like Lebron joining the Heat with D-Wade and Chris Bosh, this film has me concerned over who will be the star in this movie. Just how many characters will audiences have to keep track of, and will each of them have their due screen time?

The dude from 300 as Magneto...nice

Another concern of mine is not just the big name casting, but the fact that the film hasn't even begun filming yet, and we're about 9 months away from its release. I'm not sure how the movie industry works, but I imagine 9 months to shoot, edit, re-shoot, and polish your film has to take a bit of time. On top of that, news broke a couple of weeks ago of director Matthew Vaughn claiming he had to scrap at least 12 pages of the film's script because an action sequence in 'First Class' involved a zero-gravity fight scene which Vaughn claims was too similar to a  scene in Christopher Nolan's "Inception" (which is truly an amazing film by the way). So some of the big questions I have is whether this film will be delayed, or will it be too rushed in its production?

Nolan makes the guy from 500 Days of Summer badass

Whatever the case may be, I have a great deal of trust in director Matthew Vaughn. He's dealt with problems like this in films before, (look into the drama to get Kick-Ass funded) and he's come out swinging for the fences and kicking the audience's ass with his awesomeness(no pun intended...who am I kidding? hells yea it is!). I'm all for adding as much amazing talent to your film as possible, but sometimes too much of a good thing can be bad and it's just hard for audiences to really connect to a character that gets 5 minutes of screen time. I mean, just look at the Ocean's Eleven franchise. Until then, as Stan Lee would say, stick around true believers!

Why Hollywood needs more movies like Scott Pilgrim and Kick-Ass

Here's looking at you Hollywood

 
So as we all know Hollywood is a melting pot of filled with beautiful, talented, and creative individuals. It's also filled with some of the most narcissistic, egotistical, and self-depreciating pricks of all time. However Hollywood is something we've all grown up with, and it's something that we will never stop appreciating or following for the rest of our lives. Still, there are many moments where I have to remove my hat and take a big bow of thanks. Enter "Scott Pilgrim vs. the World" and "Kick-Ass."

Seriously one of the best video games of all time

I got the opportunity to watch Scott Pilgrim this weekend and let me tell you, as an extravagant fan of video gaming, films, and comics, this movie is the perfect homage to fans of the "nerd" culture. Just from the opening title sequence of the film, I knew this was going to be something extremely different from the norm of standard filmmaking. Director Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz fame) was able to grasp the nature of the graphic novels and translate it with success. Everything from the sound effects (Legend of Zelda music) to the narrative structure of the battles is a throwback to the glory days of the good ol' NES. Perfect example, everytime Scott defeats one of the bosses they turn to coins....Brilliant.

Anyone wanna check out my blue junk?

Anyway, as I was watching Scott Pilgrim, I couldn't help but compare it to another comic-book adaptation "Kick-Ass." This was another film I thoroughly enjoyed which was another service to fans...specifically to comic book mafiosos. It was a film that never completely strayed from its roots, and challenged the norm of typical filmmaking. I mean, our supposed "hero" character gets his ass kicked to a literal, and quite gritty, bloody pulp, a 12-year-old girl is a believable potty-mouth assassin. Kick-Ass challenged the norm of comic-book movies by giving us a realistic, sometimes uncomfortable take on the genre. The only other movie that came close to this was "Watchmen," which was also a great fan service film.

So here's my gripe, many of these fan service films are underperforming at the box office, which is leaving many studios to turn a blind eye to adapting works of this nature. Scott Pilgrim came in 5th at the box office this weekend, scoring a meager $10 Mil. dollars on its opening weekend. Kick-Ass had a similar fate. The film scored something like $20 Mil. on it's opening weekend, which was well below what the studio wanted.Last year, Watchmen was able to rake in more cash, but it had a massive budget and also underperformed to studio expectations.

Hey...did anyone get Jean-Claude Van Damme's invitation?

My point in all of this is that I want studios to understand that just because a fan-service film underperforms at the box office doesn't mean audiences don't love it.  Many factors could play into why a film was unsuccessful. Things like competition, release date, marketing, casting, and even the economy play a major factor in a film's success. Sure Scott Pilgrim and Kick-Ass are going for a specific audience, but movie-goers need films like this to balance out the selection at the box office. What kind of world would we live in if we were forced to choose between "The Expendables" or "Eat, Pray, Love?" I think I'd rather grow pony-tails and have Miss Trunchbull from 'Matilda' hammer throw me across the patio.

Dude...I thought I was the Flash?

Hollywood needs to stop being a bunch of wusses and continue to make these fan service films. Many studios are sticking with the sure-fire bets like Captain America, Green Lantern, and X-Men First-Class, but I hope they continue to produce the "lesser known" works of art that need to go mainstream. Sure us 'hardcore' fans will drag our girlfriends to see these films with us, but movie-goers in general need a break from the routine bullshit that Hollywood churns out every year. Studio executives need to take a risk and slap movie-goers in the face with a comic-book/video-game adaptation that pulls our pants down and reminds us why our parents spanked us. Plus there are always DVD sales and rentals. HOLLYWOOD...LEND ME YOUR SPECIAL FEATURES!!!

New Batman Arkham Asylum Deets and my gripe with Co-op

So I know it's been a while since the news broke, but the good ol boys over at Rocksteady studios are finally letting the cat out of the "bat" when it comes to it's sequel to the 2009 hit game "Batman Arkham Asylum." If any of you have ever loved Batman, heck, even comic books in general, then you'll understand why this game is important to the nerd landscape.

Anyway, down to the juicy deets. Apparantly, the game is now stretching its wings out of Arkham Island and into Gotham City...but not entirely. It seems the overzealous Warden Sharp has decided to set up a makeshift prison inside Gotham, which may open up some possibilities in terms of how we can explore the area. Jumping from rooftop to rooftop anyone?

Besides the location, Rocksteady is promising to include additional villains in the game, which shouldn't be too hard given the fact that the Batman universe has arguably the finest villain line-up in comic book lore. Finally, I can batarang Mr. Freeze till his balls drop. However one interesting thing to point out is that on the latest issue of Game Informer, which is the source of all this bat-tastic news, is the spotlight on Catwoman, which is leaving many to speculate the inclusion of co-op in the game.

Here's my problem. What makes Batman great as a video game is the fact he operates mainly as a lone vigilante. Sure he joins up with Robin, Nightwing, and anyone else I don't care to think about, but we all love the concept of one man kicking everyone's ass. Adding Catwoman to the single player game is just a gimmick. Case in point, look at the biggest violator...Resident Evil 5. The RE series is all about tension and fear, and when you add another person into the equation it kills that sense of being alone and fending for yourself against hordes of zombies (which need to make a comeback by the way). Same goes for Batman. Developers need to get to the essence of what their story and protagonist are all about and determine what's the best route to take when including new gameplay types.

I'm not saying co-op is bad, but give me the experience as a standalone piece if it doesn't fit into the context of the story. The best way to do this is to do what the Splinter Cell series has done. That series gave us a satisfying single player campaign, and then added an entirely new mechanic that takes advantage of having another buddy...not to mention making a unique story to go along with it. 

Anyway, I'll be drooling for this game until its release date next fall. Until then, here's some more info on The Dark Knight's next digital adventure:  http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/111/1111550p1.html