30 Mayıs 2012 Çarşamba
Fuck that hamburger with peppers and cheese and make it your bitch
So much like the "Egg Mcfuck" Dunkin Donuts has been touting with marquis-sized posters for the past month or so, I've been haunted by the giant advertisements for the JALAPENO AND CHEDDER STUFFED STEAKHOUSE BURGER for a while now and I've been putting off spending the six bucks (though it might as well be 4 bucks because their fries are fuckin unbearable) to cover it for all my loyal koolaide drinking followers. Well I guess if I had a cult they'd all be eating double downs and drinking Shamrock Shakes.
On the first bite, the peppers come on kind of strong. Like going for third base in the middle of a movie theater or something. I'll admit that was a strange analogy but the first thing I tasted was pepper. It wasn't necessarily a bad thing, but I'm pleased to admit that this one gets better the more you devour like a mountain lion. I didn't want the damn thing to end, which is about as big a compliment as I can award any fast food burger. Now I'm starting to think if I wanted to be a real cretin, I could combine two of these bastards and make a bowel-murdering double stacker of pepper.
The cheese element is pretty minimal, but they make up for it with greens and reds (by that I mean vegetables) and a slathering of some kind of house spread. Burger king has become fond of that. You'll notice the bun is serrated. I'm not sure how I feel about this. Are they implying this is more than a typical burger bun? Is there some kind of hidden reference here?
So, suprisingly, I really liked this one. More than the Whiplash Whopper, but then again, I didn't get to feel like Mickey Rourke when I ate it so there is something of a trade off. Not my favorite fast food item of all time (a list I've been thinking of making for a while now...like my own artery blocking oscars) but this one is really solid. The peppers seem to diminish after the first minute or so and you slip into just being sort of high off the flavor.
Wait...am I seriously reviewing this? Am I actually giving CULINARY review? My god someone stop me. When I say I do "food reviews" I mean it in a rhetorical sense.
Stay tuned for the FUCKING THOR SLURPEE POST.
I'M KINDA EXCITED TO SEE THOR
Be there a flavor of god nector flavored with the scent of the maiden Natalie Portman or Thor Sweat, my attempts to find it have been met with failure. I have filled my goblet and drank well of COCA COLA and CHERRY FLAVORED slurpees emblazoned with the thor crests of advertising.
The first thing mere mortals may notice about the goblets is they are adorned with the lenticular motion patterns of hammer-tossing. Atop the perch of the ...lid...rests a mighty statue of a god or foe or Asgard for children drinking the slurpee to devlope idol worship upon. They will cling to these miniature talismans of the mighty Marvel franchise for the rest of their pathetic lives, spiting their foolish parents who try to make them believe the heroic avenger's golden locks are but myth.
So far in my travels thou has exchanged around a grand total of around ten dollars of human currency for thor related slurpee trinket, now posessing resuable plastic cups and straws with the manly visage of Thor, Loki and the evil fire breathing destroyer. Tis a grand bargain and cause for celebration surely!
What could improve perhaps these glorious tokens of asgard? Why of course the jolly liquid known as VODKA. Nave, coward and god alike shall walk the streets swinging hammers with reckless abandon under it's spell with Thor slurpees posessing more spikes than the armor of thee destroyer!
Having enjoyed them to maximum godly potential now, I still require one more cup and miniature ho figurine to have them all. The marking spell of Odin is absolute. So I will soon pound my fist upon the countertop of 7-11 yelling for ANOTHA!
THE DEATH OF OSAMA. THE EGGMCFUCK. THE THORCUPS. GREAT TRIUMPHS FOR AMERICA!
Then it was time to celebrate active hater of my blog, Tyler Lopachin’s 21st birthday. We went to a couple bars, and by the time we walked into a second one, some rowdy Boston peasants were telling us that they got Osama…it was just uphill from there. I ended up spending the night hanging out with a friend at emerson watching the developments on the television and rejoicing in the death of a terrorist. We blew up the Death Star. We destroyed the T-1000. We won the Nascar 500. It was a collective victory. Pretty soon people were busting out the Charlie Sheen chants. I decided the time was right in the morning. It was time for the Egg Mcfuck at Dunkin.
I don’t really remember how good it was because I was coming down from “euphoria” but I remember really appreciating the tiny specks of pepper. The bread tasted like sex. I guess. I don’t know. I’ve eaten a lot more bread than I’ve had sex, so I might have to draw a more normal comparison somewhere.
Did I mention that I finally got the giant fucking Thor cups? I think I went to around ten 7-11's trying to find them. Did I succeed? Yeah I did. We drank out of them after haggling with some dumbass 7-11 employees who thought we were trying to con them out of slurpees the night of THOR at midnight. Which was pretty entertaining actually. I’d give it a solid B.
I’d give this post a solid C. It’s far too normal.
It's human nature to fear the unusual: A critical look at Batman Returns
Batman 89’, which I might have been too harsh analyzing is still universally respected by critics and comic fans, many of whom are too bitter and jaded to admit that it may very well be a more true-to-form Batman and Joker story than The Dark Knight. Its sequel Returns however, falls prey to several complaints that are almost always the same by anyone criticizing it; which I’ve heard so many times that I’d venture to call them stereotypical critiques. While Batman 89 is decidedly dated at times and often very aged and misguided feeling in parts, I feel like Batman Returns builds and expands on the themes while incasing the story within the austere whimsical world of Tim Burton. I’d go so far as to say that Batman Returns is the most stylistically affected, though not afflicted, film Burton has ever done. This was a director at his peak; and it’s a shame to see how studios lost faith in these macabre visions for a while after this film’s release.
Perhaps one of the biggest faults Returns has, isn’t even to blame on the film itself so much as the untimely and nonsensical summer release. This is a Christmas film through and through, though it explores the darker and less jolly aspects of the holiday. Prevalent arctic themes, tree lightings and even a bittersweet wishing of Merry Christmas on the last line of the film add to the perversion of the holiday across a comic book landscape.
But wait…one of the main complaints about the movie is that it’s not a very good comic book film and it’s bogged down by being too unrealistic. Ask yourself for a moment if ANY film with a man dressing up like a bat, a woman dressing up like a cat and a man called “the penguin” can ever be interpreted as true-to-life and that argument goes out the window. Perhaps you’re looking for the hyper realism served up in The Dark Knight. You might notice that every moment the most whimsical and unrealistic character, The Joker, who seems to bend the laws of space and time with his all-too-convenient plans is not on screen. Compare that to the romantic arc in Batman Returns. Batman and Catwoman are enemies but Selina Kyle and Bruce Wayne are potentially lovers. Upon realizing each other’s identity for the first time, the immediate question posed is “do we start fighting?” This is a great way to delve into the psychological aspect of Batman. He’s often conflicted in his best moments by circumstances that make him want to give up his crusade; times when he’ll rise to the occasion and prove himself to be the true hero that he is. If you're questioning the scene where he kills a thug with dynamite you might as well question the scene where he levels Axis chemicals with explosives in 89', and also take into account that Bob Kane's Batman smoked a pipe and carried a gun. You have to wonder if Bruce meant what he said when he took off his cowl at the end of Returns and asked Selina to come away with him, or if he already knew she would never attempt to lead a “normal” life. Compare this to when Bruce wants to give up being Batman as a result of Rachel being DEAD in The Dark Knight. It makes for an excellent Batman arc…which contradicts how a lot of people say this isn’t a “Batman film.”
Isn’t the whole point of Batman the idea that he’s like an urban legend that strikes fear into the heart of his enemies? Batman isn’t going to flaunt around in every scene. That takes away a crucial element of mystery. Besides, he had his origin story in Batman 89. While the films don’t blend seamlessly given the shrunken scope of Gotham in Returns, you already know this Batman and what he’s capable of. Keaton delivers the same anger-fueled insanity in the role as he does in 89. If you don’t think there’s enough Batman in Returns, ask yourself what more was needed. As opposed to one villain in the first film, now there’s two that are extremely well developed, more so than any others in superhero films with multiple antagonists and there’s more action in this film than just about any of the other Batman films save for 89; all thanks to Batman and his comic book inspired arsenal of gadgets.
People have said that Returns is too dark for a comic book movie, but look at Watchmen on the other end of the spectrum…since when did comic books need to be lighter fare for kids? In addition to bringing comic book movies into the spotlight, 89 also legitimatized them as films for adults and kids alike. Returns knows exactly what it wants to be. It’s not totally stuck in fantasy, but it’s not grounded in realism either. It’s carved out a nice niche for itself in between the campiness of the silver age Batman comics and their outrageous plots and the darkness of its predecessor of a film. Part of the appeal of comic books at the time of their introduction as a graphic medium was the ability to convey the impossible without limitations opening up new kinds of storytelling. Now this is becoming more and more possible thanks to CGI, but it’s great to see a film that was able to set its own standards and create a unique world in the span of roughly 2 hours. It’s just the right blend of black comedy and horror tragedy while still safely under the mantle of Batman.
The iconography of a Batman film is present throughout Returns, often times less in-your-face than it is in the newer films or in 89’. For example: pimping the bat logo. There’s an unforgettably moronic shot in Batman 89 where the Batwing flies past the moon and creates the bat logo. Not only does this defy physics, but it’s superfluous. Even less realistically, the Begins Bat signal is comprised of a prisoner wearing cut rags tied to a searchlight. How about a nice way to tie in the iconic logo and the bat signal without shoving it down our throat like the simple shot of Wayne reading in Returns when the logo shines through the window and he stands up and looks at it. It’s simple. It’s effective. It’s purely badass. Some would say that the shape of the bat signal is too precise…I have to argue, does that matter AT ALL? Like I mentioned before, realism flies out the window period in comic book films, so the logistics of the shape of bat signal are much less relevant than the source of the logo being from a tormented Arkham escapee or an idiotic shot of the batwing blocking the moon. Also part of the Batman iconography in addition to the obvious batsuit, is the Batmobile. While the design of the Batmobile is introduced in 89, the scenes with it are a bit unceremonious and don’t really show off the sleek awesomeness of the vehicle to its full potential. There’s something very “constructed” and fake about it as it cruises through the streets tipping fruit stands. In Returns, it’s a viable threat when it’s under the penguins control, driving recklessly through streets and smashing cars at top speed. Then in one of the single greatest and most innovative comic book movie moments I can think of, the Batmobile splits off the sides into the “Batmissile” to squeeze through a narrow gap between two buildings. It’s this same kind of enthusiasm you see in the “Batpod” scene of The Dark Knight that really makes the truck chase scene stand out. It’s Batman being one step ahead, and ready for anything.
Which brings me to refute another fault of the film, is that The Penguin isn’t a credible threat to Batman. Physically, he never was, and never should be, even in comics. The appearance of the character, deformed physically and mentally in Burton’s vision immediately creates a more formidable presence than anything prior in the comics or other adaptations. The audience fears the Penguin. He admonishes the viewer for treating him differently. First invoking feelings of fear, then pity, and then feelings of hate, the same cycle of emotions that Shreck and the other denizens of Gotham feel towards Penguin in the film. Batman, ever-vigilant is never scared of The Penguin because he knows what he has to do to stop him. Despite his confidence, The Penguin still manages to nearly kill Batman several times in the film, including the Batmobile bomb, an umbrella gun at the end and with the penguin commandos.
One of my friends in particular, a fellow Batman enthusiast faults the film the most for the inclusion of the “penguin commandos” aka live penguin army that lives in the sewer and eventually waddles into the streets of gotham with rocket launchers strapped to their backs while responding to a frequency signal. I think given the absurd nature of the rest of the film, this fits in pretty well. With every failed attempt, the Penguin continues to get angrier and angrier at Batman until he goes to an extreme which he’s clearly had in reserve for a long time coming. This is every bit as dangerous, if not more so than the Joker spraying the city with laughing gas from parade balloons or say…fear toxin in the water supply. If anything I would say that this is slightly more believable than those. If you’re asking how penguin could have possibly acquired the resources, then you also have to ask yourself how The Joker is able to employ Police Officers in The Dark Knight and plant a bomb inside of an inmate while unarmed inside of a holding cell. There’s certain things you just have to accept because like it or not…Batman is still based on a comic book, and like I said earlier, comic books serve to tell stories in a visually appealing way which you couldn’t find elsewhere. As Returns plays out like a big screen comic complete with it’s own artistic style, taking the penguin commando army in stride should be easy to get past after the first five minutes of seeing a baby eat a cat and get tossed into a sewer. At worst you can laugh at these “lighter” deaths and at best you can build a hatred of The Penguin’s pathetic character. The pathos are all there. I would say that there’s less suspension of disbelief involved in frequency controlled penguins than Doc Ock controlling tentacles with his “brain chip” in Spiderman 2…or even the concept of a Spider bite giving someone super powers. I don’t see how it could be difficult to accept, especially in a universe as absurd as Batman’s.
So I’ve written a lot now trying to defend Returns from various possible criticisms (Why do people always bring tomatoes to speeches?) but what sets it apart from the rest? I can safely say that personally, as a lifelong Batman fan, Returns may be the most enjoyable Batman film to me. While for nostalgic reasons, The Dark Knight is still the most fun I ever had with a film given all the hype surrounding the release, Returns is worth a watch if you can overlook the lack of Nolan.
It’s the perfect mix of comic Batman characters with elements of movies ranging from comedy to horror. The suit is there. The tech is certainly there (remote controlled batarang anyone?). The action sequences are tight and well edited. On top of that, it also has my personal favorite musical score of all time for a film. Dark brooding, moody circus music perfectly fits the character of the Penguin and the slinky, screeching effects suit Catwoman’s character very well. Elfman also expands on the already great Batman theme from 89 and mixes the best cues when Batman is on screen with heightened versions of the Penguin suite when the characters are intercut on screen (such as the pursuit of the penguin through the sewers in the third act).
Speaking of the pursuit scene…out of all the secondary bat vehicles introduced in the third act of the Batman films (Batplane, Batwing, Bat sub, Batpod, Bat…sled…) the Batskiboat which narrowly dodges wayward missiles from Penguin Commandos is by far the coolest and most practical. There’s this great overwhelming presence of the absurd in Batman Returns, but the subject matter is so dark (I’ve heard people compare the film to an inkwell) that it’s hard to laugh at it. I think it’s a great mix for a Batman movie. It’s sad, often poignant at times, but also tends to feel like a sitcom akin to the 1966 Batman show crossed with the Addam’s Family. It’s a perfect cross between darkness and camp…beauty and the beast if you will.
One of the greatest scenes in the film is the death of the Penguin. After he has supposedly fallen to his watery grave through glass, he emerges dripping blood and bile from the water behind Batman, in one final attempt to kill him. He reaches for an umbrella, and accidentally "picks a cute one" before collapsing needing a "cold drink of ice water." Hated by everyone his entire life, in his death, the penguins emerge from the corners of his sewer lair and drag him into the water to sink to the bottom. It's touching, bizarre even to Batman, who watches the procession unfold. The music is powerful, sad and extremely fitting. It's incredible to see an incredibly humanizing and tragic end to a character that is so easy for most people to hate throughout the film.
Rather than just elude to the accepted truths of the Batman mythos like the super-urban high tech current films, grim to the core, I think Batman Returns is a good superhero film that’s certainly worth watching again if you feel like it’s “stupid” or not a “batman film.” I wish I could have spent more time praising the nuances in Devito’s performance or the greatness of Catwoman’s role in this film as the only truly well written female character in the Batman series’, but the pitiful legacy Returns has acquired among comic fans made this more of a crusade to set the record right. Though I would hardly call myself a Returns apologist…as there’s nothing to be sorry for. This is an excellent film.
"Come what may...Merry Christmas Mr. Wayne..."
"Merry Christmas Alfred. Goodwill toward men. And women."
My review of Super 8: marketing a film as retro doesn't mean it needs to be more of the same
The film opens with the protagonist, a young boy named Joe losing his mother and then flashes forward a few months to a group of enthusiastic young film makers attempting to film a zombie movie with a Super 8 camera. For “production value” they film a train as it’s passing by and it happens to explode multiple times. Before you know it the military is involved and it’s up to Joe’s father, the local sheriff, as played by Kyle Chandler (who seemingly holds the position of every other elected official in the town and conducts one-man press conferences) to save the world. Of course since the loss of his wife there has been some distance between him and his son and this alien disaster is just the kind of therapy their father-son relationship needed to bring them together in a one-dimensional and forced emotional arc.
It’s not the only shallow and uninteresting relationship in the movie though. Joe also quickly falls in love with a girl named Alice (Elle Fanning) applying monster make up on the film shoot and is willing to risk his life in the subsequent days to find her when she goes the way of the local dogs and appliances-missing. Scenes of Joe showing Alice footage of his mother and their bizarre under-age bonding experiences are where the film really tends to drag, though the action scenes are equally underwhelming and should serve to prove that the more explosions, thrashing tentacles and spastic unintelligible motion sequences you have in a movie doesn’t add to its stark and tasteful ambiguity, it only leaves the viewer slightly bored.
While it’s true, the use of child protagonists harkens back to older Speilberg films, you have to wonder how they became like a kid version of the A-team. One is a master of pyrotechnics, another a make up artist, one a brilliant actress and the other with an eye for storytelling. This premise unto itself, might have actually been more interesting than the wanton destruction and government conspiracies. Instead I’m left wondering why the film was marketed as if it were framed through a Super 8 camera and the logo of the film focused so much on that, as that plot line quickly devolves after the first 20 minutes until it’s no longer existent or relevant by the end of the film. While protagonists like Elliot in E.T. were able to stand alone in the 80’s and create a dramatic arc without forced drama, it was somehow necessary for Joe to be grieving the loss of his mother and making a film and falling in love prematurely to create a fully dynamic backdrop for alien invasion. And that aspect is nothing we haven’t seen before.
Super 8 borrows techniques and plot devices from tons of other films; from the accidental death of the mother as the result of the carelessness of a side character ala Signs to the government involvement of District 9, Super 8 felt like a movie that I’d seen before which added nothing new to the table. Some critics have said that if it was made in the 80’s it may have been a classic. I think it’s a little unfair to say that, because just about every movie that comes out now with advanced visual effects would have been as well. It feels slightly lazy to fall back on the draw of the film being a period piece with nods to older bodies of work to attempt to validate it. The movie magic surrounding Star Wars, E.T., Close Encounter of the Third Kind, and more is because those films really did something special that added to the ever changing medium of film and brought a new spectacle to the table. As much as I love homage’s to older movies and film connections, Super 8 just feels cut-and-dry and lifeless with no true emotional drive at the core and no genuine need to see how it ends, because you’ve seen it so many times before and you’re certain that all the characters will be fine. For a director that boasts such bold new visions, I can’t help but feel like this film is remarkably predictable and safe.
Toward the beginning of the film before disaster/invasion movie tropes became rampant and monotonous, the screenwriter of the group of kids is explaining how he read books on screenwriting and how you need to write in a love interest. When asked why he can’t supply a real reason other than “That’s how it works.” Thus Elle Fanning’s character is introduced into the zombie film. Ironically she exists in Super 8 for the same reason. For a movie apparently so aware of clichés it never made one attempt to avoid them or deviate from that little how-to guide to screen writing.
26 Mayıs 2012 Cumartesi
Victorian Undead II: Sherlock Holmes vs Dracula – review
Art: Davide Fabbri & Horacio Domingues
First published: 2011
Contains spoilers
The Blurb: The game is afoot!
In turn-of-the-century England, a lone ship arrives from the Black Sea beached and crewless, save her captain, dead and tethered to the wheel. With nine men missing and a very curious cargo aboard, only one man is fit to unravel the mystery—London’s brilliant consulting detective, Sherlock Holmes!
With the assistance of the faithful Doctor Watson, Holmes uncovers a plot against Her Majesty Queen Victoria to overthrow her kingdom through a plague-like corruption of her bloodline. And the evidence suggests that at the epicentre of this gruesome conspiracy is none other than the ancient and abhorrent Count Dracula!
Borrowing from both Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and Bram Stoker, writer Ian Edginton faithfully weaves together an artful tale of intellect and horror in this epic face-off between two literary icons.
Also featuring a special adventure wherein Holmes and Watson tackle the strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde!
The review: As you can see this is the second trade paperback in the Victorian Undead series, a series from DC. The first was Sherlock Holmes vs Zombies and I must admit I have not read that volume. The story in volume 2 offers enough narrative to explain that in that volume Moriarty released a zombie plague upon London and it was halted through the burning of much of the city. In this volume, one year on, the city is being rebuilt but that rebuilding allows the author and artist to redesign London and add in such ideas as Babbage Machines, revising the technology of the Victorian age.
The first part of the volume is the Jekyll and Hyde story (and twists it to include the idea that Jekyll has become a revenant but his science holds him together, just, and that the Hyde personality appears when the revenant side breaks through). You’ll see that the blurb mentions both Doyle and Stoker as sources for the main story and this is true, but one must also suggest some influence via the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, in setting and merger of literary figures, and Kim Newman’s Anno Dracula, given the threat by Dracula to Victoria and the throne.
In this the comic is explicit that Dracula is Vlad Ţepeş, though less explicit when contemplating how he might have become a vampire. We have Lucy vampirised, Mina dead (she was turned and committed suicide by bathing in sunlight – a strange suicide given that it is later confirmed that “The vampire can exist in daylight but he is weakened, his power greatly diminished.”). Arthur is a traitor, siding with Dracula (and was one of Mycroft’s agents originally). The graphic also features Quincey Morris, Jack Seward, Jonathon Harker and Abraham Van Helsing. They are portrayed as God’s madmen, quite literally, the horror they have witnessed pushing them towards madness. I did think the portrayal of Van Helsing did the original character little service, making him out to be a cantankerous old fool.
Interestingly the boxes of earth shipped with Dracula held a strain of Bubonic Plague that was extremely virulent but short lived once active. Dracula planned to thin the heard with this and this fits in with the idea of the plague carrier explored in Nosferatu who slept in coffins filled with earth “from the fields of the Black Death”, and also resonated with the plague theme within The Satanic Rites of Dracula.
The art was technically good but felt a little too blocky to me and, whilst I understand London was being rebuilt, its portrayal of the Capital could have done with being darker and grimier. I enjoyed the story, however, and (despite the sunlight conundrum outlined above) felt it held together well.
Holmes and Dracula have met before, notably in Radio shows and in Fred Saberhagen’s writing. The fact that they are two enduring characters from Victorian literature suggests to me that they should continue to pit wits against each other. 7 out of 10.
Death Valley – season 1 – review
Release date: 2011
Contains spoilers
This was a comedy show that has aired in the States and received a DVD release over there and it is a comedy. Of course, as I often repeat, Comedy is very subjective and this one really hit home for me. In essence it is like the documentary ride-along Cops, with a massive dose of “Police Squad!” and zombies, werewolves and vampires.
Essentially, a year before the series, the three types of monsters started appearing in the San Fernando Valley and, in answer, the LAPD set up the UTF or Undead Task Force. During the length of the series the UTF have a camera crew on ride along documenting their exploits (the wall to this is broken often by having situations where the crew wouldn’t be, but given the OTT nature of the comedy that works in itself).
a werewolf |
a fresh zombie |
lamp stake |
turning party |
extreme zombie slaying |
Stubeck and Billy |
Bryan Callen as Dashell |
Caity Lotz as Kirsten |
The imdb page is here.
Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens – Masters of Cinema edition – review
Release date: 1922 (film)
: 2007 (DVD edition)
Contains spoilers
Nosferatu is, of course, the earliest surviving vampire film. As it is in the public domain it can be downloaded gratis from the internet and bought in multi-dvd sets, singularly and in such editions as the Industrial Gothic Mix, which was the first version I reviewed on the blog, and the ill-advised and ultimately avoidable 3D version, retitled Orlock the Vampire.
As such you need a pretty darn good reason to go out and re-buy the film, especially if it is a fairly pricey set. Welcome to the Masters of Cinema edition. This is the UK release of the Kino restoration of the film and let us talk base film for a moment.
vampire's carriage |
broken coffin lid |
shadow of the vampire |
Knock receives correspondence |
All this makes this a definitive version of Nosferatu. The score is for the DVD set itself, 10 out of 10.
The imdb page is here.
Gone Fishing
I won’t be checking comments, so any left will only be published on my return, but I will be checking email sent to the taliesinloki account listed in the ‘contact me' section to the right.
When I get back we will have delights such as the first Baltimore graphic novel, an honourable mention for Monster Brawl and a look at Thomas Emson’ Krimson, amongst other goodies. So here’s wishing you all the best, and hoping you have some toothsome fun, until I return.
Honourable Mention: Monster Brawl
The film itself dates to 2011 and was directed by Jesse T. Cook. The voice of Lance Henriksen (Near Dark & Vampires out for Blood) is used from time to time and the German DVD comes with art cards of each monster. The monsters are split into two conferences and two weight categories. The first two matches were middle weight and saw, in the creature conference, the Cyclops (Jason David Brown) against witch bitch (Holly Letkeman) and, in the undead conference, the mummy (Rj Skinner) against Lady Vampire (Kelly Couture).
Jimmy Hart as himself |
a goblet of blood |
in the ring |
Lady Vampire |
The imdb page is here.
23 Mayıs 2012 Çarşamba
It's human nature to fear the unusual: A critical look at Batman Returns
Batman 89’, which I might have been too harsh analyzing is still universally respected by critics and comic fans, many of whom are too bitter and jaded to admit that it may very well be a more true-to-form Batman and Joker story than The Dark Knight. Its sequel Returns however, falls prey to several complaints that are almost always the same by anyone criticizing it; which I’ve heard so many times that I’d venture to call them stereotypical critiques. While Batman 89 is decidedly dated at times and often very aged and misguided feeling in parts, I feel like Batman Returns builds and expands on the themes while incasing the story within the austere whimsical world of Tim Burton. I’d go so far as to say that Batman Returns is the most stylistically affected, though not afflicted, film Burton has ever done. This was a director at his peak; and it’s a shame to see how studios lost faith in these macabre visions for a while after this film’s release.
Perhaps one of the biggest faults Returns has, isn’t even to blame on the film itself so much as the untimely and nonsensical summer release. This is a Christmas film through and through, though it explores the darker and less jolly aspects of the holiday. Prevalent arctic themes, tree lightings and even a bittersweet wishing of Merry Christmas on the last line of the film add to the perversion of the holiday across a comic book landscape.
But wait…one of the main complaints about the movie is that it’s not a very good comic book film and it’s bogged down by being too unrealistic. Ask yourself for a moment if ANY film with a man dressing up like a bat, a woman dressing up like a cat and a man called “the penguin” can ever be interpreted as true-to-life and that argument goes out the window. Perhaps you’re looking for the hyper realism served up in The Dark Knight. You might notice that every moment the most whimsical and unrealistic character, The Joker, who seems to bend the laws of space and time with his all-too-convenient plans is not on screen. Compare that to the romantic arc in Batman Returns. Batman and Catwoman are enemies but Selina Kyle and Bruce Wayne are potentially lovers. Upon realizing each other’s identity for the first time, the immediate question posed is “do we start fighting?” This is a great way to delve into the psychological aspect of Batman. He’s often conflicted in his best moments by circumstances that make him want to give up his crusade; times when he’ll rise to the occasion and prove himself to be the true hero that he is. If you're questioning the scene where he kills a thug with dynamite you might as well question the scene where he levels Axis chemicals with explosives in 89', and also take into account that Bob Kane's Batman smoked a pipe and carried a gun. You have to wonder if Bruce meant what he said when he took off his cowl at the end of Returns and asked Selina to come away with him, or if he already knew she would never attempt to lead a “normal” life. Compare this to when Bruce wants to give up being Batman as a result of Rachel being DEAD in The Dark Knight. It makes for an excellent Batman arc…which contradicts how a lot of people say this isn’t a “Batman film.”
Isn’t the whole point of Batman the idea that he’s like an urban legend that strikes fear into the heart of his enemies? Batman isn’t going to flaunt around in every scene. That takes away a crucial element of mystery. Besides, he had his origin story in Batman 89. While the films don’t blend seamlessly given the shrunken scope of Gotham in Returns, you already know this Batman and what he’s capable of. Keaton delivers the same anger-fueled insanity in the role as he does in 89. If you don’t think there’s enough Batman in Returns, ask yourself what more was needed. As opposed to one villain in the first film, now there’s two that are extremely well developed, more so than any others in superhero films with multiple antagonists and there’s more action in this film than just about any of the other Batman films save for 89; all thanks to Batman and his comic book inspired arsenal of gadgets.
People have said that Returns is too dark for a comic book movie, but look at Watchmen on the other end of the spectrum…since when did comic books need to be lighter fare for kids? In addition to bringing comic book movies into the spotlight, 89 also legitimatized them as films for adults and kids alike. Returns knows exactly what it wants to be. It’s not totally stuck in fantasy, but it’s not grounded in realism either. It’s carved out a nice niche for itself in between the campiness of the silver age Batman comics and their outrageous plots and the darkness of its predecessor of a film. Part of the appeal of comic books at the time of their introduction as a graphic medium was the ability to convey the impossible without limitations opening up new kinds of storytelling. Now this is becoming more and more possible thanks to CGI, but it’s great to see a film that was able to set its own standards and create a unique world in the span of roughly 2 hours. It’s just the right blend of black comedy and horror tragedy while still safely under the mantle of Batman.
The iconography of a Batman film is present throughout Returns, often times less in-your-face than it is in the newer films or in 89’. For example: pimping the bat logo. There’s an unforgettably moronic shot in Batman 89 where the Batwing flies past the moon and creates the bat logo. Not only does this defy physics, but it’s superfluous. Even less realistically, the Begins Bat signal is comprised of a prisoner wearing cut rags tied to a searchlight. How about a nice way to tie in the iconic logo and the bat signal without shoving it down our throat like the simple shot of Wayne reading in Returns when the logo shines through the window and he stands up and looks at it. It’s simple. It’s effective. It’s purely badass. Some would say that the shape of the bat signal is too precise…I have to argue, does that matter AT ALL? Like I mentioned before, realism flies out the window period in comic book films, so the logistics of the shape of bat signal are much less relevant than the source of the logo being from a tormented Arkham escapee or an idiotic shot of the batwing blocking the moon. Also part of the Batman iconography in addition to the obvious batsuit, is the Batmobile. While the design of the Batmobile is introduced in 89, the scenes with it are a bit unceremonious and don’t really show off the sleek awesomeness of the vehicle to its full potential. There’s something very “constructed” and fake about it as it cruises through the streets tipping fruit stands. In Returns, it’s a viable threat when it’s under the penguins control, driving recklessly through streets and smashing cars at top speed. Then in one of the single greatest and most innovative comic book movie moments I can think of, the Batmobile splits off the sides into the “Batmissile” to squeeze through a narrow gap between two buildings. It’s this same kind of enthusiasm you see in the “Batpod” scene of The Dark Knight that really makes the truck chase scene stand out. It’s Batman being one step ahead, and ready for anything.
Which brings me to refute another fault of the film, is that The Penguin isn’t a credible threat to Batman. Physically, he never was, and never should be, even in comics. The appearance of the character, deformed physically and mentally in Burton’s vision immediately creates a more formidable presence than anything prior in the comics or other adaptations. The audience fears the Penguin. He admonishes the viewer for treating him differently. First invoking feelings of fear, then pity, and then feelings of hate, the same cycle of emotions that Shreck and the other denizens of Gotham feel towards Penguin in the film. Batman, ever-vigilant is never scared of The Penguin because he knows what he has to do to stop him. Despite his confidence, The Penguin still manages to nearly kill Batman several times in the film, including the Batmobile bomb, an umbrella gun at the end and with the penguin commandos.
One of my friends in particular, a fellow Batman enthusiast faults the film the most for the inclusion of the “penguin commandos” aka live penguin army that lives in the sewer and eventually waddles into the streets of gotham with rocket launchers strapped to their backs while responding to a frequency signal. I think given the absurd nature of the rest of the film, this fits in pretty well. With every failed attempt, the Penguin continues to get angrier and angrier at Batman until he goes to an extreme which he’s clearly had in reserve for a long time coming. This is every bit as dangerous, if not more so than the Joker spraying the city with laughing gas from parade balloons or say…fear toxin in the water supply. If anything I would say that this is slightly more believable than those. If you’re asking how penguin could have possibly acquired the resources, then you also have to ask yourself how The Joker is able to employ Police Officers in The Dark Knight and plant a bomb inside of an inmate while unarmed inside of a holding cell. There’s certain things you just have to accept because like it or not…Batman is still based on a comic book, and like I said earlier, comic books serve to tell stories in a visually appealing way which you couldn’t find elsewhere. As Returns plays out like a big screen comic complete with it’s own artistic style, taking the penguin commando army in stride should be easy to get past after the first five minutes of seeing a baby eat a cat and get tossed into a sewer. At worst you can laugh at these “lighter” deaths and at best you can build a hatred of The Penguin’s pathetic character. The pathos are all there. I would say that there’s less suspension of disbelief involved in frequency controlled penguins than Doc Ock controlling tentacles with his “brain chip” in Spiderman 2…or even the concept of a Spider bite giving someone super powers. I don’t see how it could be difficult to accept, especially in a universe as absurd as Batman’s.
So I’ve written a lot now trying to defend Returns from various possible criticisms (Why do people always bring tomatoes to speeches?) but what sets it apart from the rest? I can safely say that personally, as a lifelong Batman fan, Returns may be the most enjoyable Batman film to me. While for nostalgic reasons, The Dark Knight is still the most fun I ever had with a film given all the hype surrounding the release, Returns is worth a watch if you can overlook the lack of Nolan.
It’s the perfect mix of comic Batman characters with elements of movies ranging from comedy to horror. The suit is there. The tech is certainly there (remote controlled batarang anyone?). The action sequences are tight and well edited. On top of that, it also has my personal favorite musical score of all time for a film. Dark brooding, moody circus music perfectly fits the character of the Penguin and the slinky, screeching effects suit Catwoman’s character very well. Elfman also expands on the already great Batman theme from 89 and mixes the best cues when Batman is on screen with heightened versions of the Penguin suite when the characters are intercut on screen (such as the pursuit of the penguin through the sewers in the third act).
Speaking of the pursuit scene…out of all the secondary bat vehicles introduced in the third act of the Batman films (Batplane, Batwing, Bat sub, Batpod, Bat…sled…) the Batskiboat which narrowly dodges wayward missiles from Penguin Commandos is by far the coolest and most practical. There’s this great overwhelming presence of the absurd in Batman Returns, but the subject matter is so dark (I’ve heard people compare the film to an inkwell) that it’s hard to laugh at it. I think it’s a great mix for a Batman movie. It’s sad, often poignant at times, but also tends to feel like a sitcom akin to the 1966 Batman show crossed with the Addam’s Family. It’s a perfect cross between darkness and camp…beauty and the beast if you will.
One of the greatest scenes in the film is the death of the Penguin. After he has supposedly fallen to his watery grave through glass, he emerges dripping blood and bile from the water behind Batman, in one final attempt to kill him. He reaches for an umbrella, and accidentally "picks a cute one" before collapsing needing a "cold drink of ice water." Hated by everyone his entire life, in his death, the penguins emerge from the corners of his sewer lair and drag him into the water to sink to the bottom. It's touching, bizarre even to Batman, who watches the procession unfold. The music is powerful, sad and extremely fitting. It's incredible to see an incredibly humanizing and tragic end to a character that is so easy for most people to hate throughout the film.
Rather than just elude to the accepted truths of the Batman mythos like the super-urban high tech current films, grim to the core, I think Batman Returns is a good superhero film that’s certainly worth watching again if you feel like it’s “stupid” or not a “batman film.” I wish I could have spent more time praising the nuances in Devito’s performance or the greatness of Catwoman’s role in this film as the only truly well written female character in the Batman series’, but the pitiful legacy Returns has acquired among comic fans made this more of a crusade to set the record right. Though I would hardly call myself a Returns apologist…as there’s nothing to be sorry for. This is an excellent film.
"Come what may...Merry Christmas Mr. Wayne..."
"Merry Christmas Alfred. Goodwill toward men. And women."