Tag: Batman

[31 Days of Horror: Resurrection] Day 1 – The Phantom of the Opera (1962)

Director: Terence Fisher
Cast: Herbert Lom, Heather Sears, Thorley Walters, Michael Gough
Screenplay: Anthony Hinds
84 mins. Not Rated.

31 Days of Horror is back for the ninth round of terror! Thank you all for continuing on with me for nine years, and we begin this year’s group of films with a Hammer classic that doesn’t feature vampires, evil doctors, or werewolves: The Phantom of the Opera!

The year is 1900, and the London Opera House is set to unveil the new opera from Lord Ambrose D’Arcy (Michael Gough, Batman & Robin, Top Secret!). Before the first production of the opera is even completed, a stagehand is found dead, and the theater erupts into panic. Postponements and struggles behind the scenes at the Opera House continue, and an evil presence is noted by one of the chorus girls, Christine Charles (Heather Sears, The Story of Esther Costello, Room at the Top), who claims to hear a sinister voice speaking to her within the walls. As she grows closer to the show’s producer, Harry, to uncover the mystery, they unknowingly wander into the path of the mysterious and dangerous Phantom (Herbert Lom, The Pink Panther Strikes Again, The Dead Zone), who lives in the cellar underneath the Opera House.

Directed by Hammer mainstay Terence Fisher (Horror of Dracula, Four Sided Triangle), The Phantom of the Opera contains the necessary skeletal framework of the 1910 Gaston Leroux novel, but within that framework the narrative diverts in some strikingly interesting ways. It was originally conceived as a remake of the 1943 Universal horror film, which became popular due to sequences referenced in the 1957 Lon Chaney biopic, The Man of a Thousand Faces. From there, Universal allowed Hammer Films to take a crack of the story due to the success of Horror of Dracula. The 1943 Phantom wasn’t all that much like Leroux’s book either, but Fisher’s film continues with the emphasis on the Phantom’s tragic figure while also drastically altering the identity of the Phantom himself.

Fisher’s Phantom is one of the more excellently Gothic visual representations I’ve seen in an adaptation (of which there are many). I’ve always loved the production design of Hammer Horror films, the colorful pop of the environments and the deliciously dramatic portrayals of the characters, and this is no exception. The decision to dress up the environment but dress down the Phantom himself is also unique, giving Lom’s character a shabby mask (constructed from cloth, tape, paint, and string on the fly) and settling him into the dingy cellar labyrinth of the Opera House.

The titular character stands out because of a terrific performance from Lom, one that is less flashy that would be expected, and decisions made before Lom was even cast. While Christopher Lee almost circled the role, there’s a rumor that this iteration of the Phantom was constructed for Cary Grant of all people. The rumor states that Grant wanted to do a horror picture, and the Phantom’s more violent tendencies were relegated to a lackey so that Grant could retain his popular persona. This rumor has been called into the question before, with some saying that his role would’ve been the romantic lead rather than the Phantom, so we’ll never know, but it would have made for an interesting portrayal. As it stands, Lom is allowed to focus purely on crafting tension with his voice and the physical presence he exudes within the cellars. When we are finally treated to the flashback (which diverts from the source material but ultimately dribbles into predictability) giving us this Phantom’s origins, we get the flash and drama that Lom can unload paired with Fisher’s over-reliance on “Dutch angles” and classic Hammer intensity.

The other standout of the film, for me, was Michael Gough’s Lord Ambrose. I spent so many years of my life only knowing Gough from the supporting role of Alfred Pennyworth in 4 Batman films, but as I’ve introduced myself to Hammer, I’ve seen more and more surprising work from the actor in films like this. The way that Lord Ambrose evolves from a pompous but respectable composer into an absolute bastard bit-by-bit, brick-by-brick, throughout the narrative is masterful character work, and Gough never gives us too much info at once. Whereas the Phantom’s narrative fails to surprise, Gough’s portrayal and the screenwriting from Anthony Hinds (Night Creatures, The Curse of the Werewolf) make his the most compelling character of the film.

The remaining supporting cast members never seem to rise to the level that Gough and Lom are playing, but their mutual presences over the film make up for it, and Hinds’s screenplay, while serving Gough rather nicely, seems to hit the beats with a little more relaxed and unenthusiastic intention, serving up a narrative that loses focus occasionally throughout the film, while never completely shatters the entertainment of the film.

The Phantom of the Opera was paired with Night Creatures (also called Captain Clegg) upon release, as many Hammer films would, but it failed to garner the level of box office Hammer was hoping for, leading to a cooling between Hammer and Fisher, who would have a larger break between films than usual, but I don’t think Fisher’s was the faults.

Terence Fisher’s take on The Phantom of the Opera is perhaps the most interesting viewpoint of the adaptations I’ve seen, and I was entertained throughout, even as some of the narrative choices stumble and, outside of Lom and Gough, many of the cast are treading water. It’s a mixed final product with some absolutely gorgeous cinematography and production design, lifting the film up and ensuring it’s lasting unforgettable legacy.

3/5
-Kyle A. Goethe

0

[31 Days of Horror Part VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan] Day 29 – Twilight (2008)

Director: Catherine Hardwicke
Cast: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Billy Burke, Peter Facinelli
Screenplay: Melissa Rosenberg
122 mins. Rated PG-13 for some violence and a scene of sensuality.

It seems almost too easy to make fun of Twilight as a franchise, and I’m not here to bash. It’s been a good many years since I’ve seen any of these films, and I felt like a revisit. I’ll start by saying something nice about the source material (I’ve read the first 100 pages of the first book, so I’ve earned this). These books by Stephanie Meyer got younger people reading again, and I’ll never fault that (even if the source material is dreck). Okay, I tried my best. Now, let’s get to the vamp-lovin…

Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart, Snow White and the Huntsman, Spencer) has just moved to Forks, Washington to stay with her dad, and she’s just trying to fit in. When she’s forced to be lab partners with the strange and reserved Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson, Remember Me, The Devil All the Time), she finds that she is unable to stop thinking about him. Soon, she learns a great secret: Edward and his family are vampires, full of long-life and glittery skin. Now, Bella is forced down a dangerous path, for loving Edward comes with a host of other problems, both living and undead.

As I said above, it’s easy to bash this movie and its sequels, and to be fair, Twilight is not a good movie, but it isn’t the worst thing put to cinema, so let’s talk about what works. First of all, I’m going to be the guy that defends glittery skin. I actually don’t mind this take on vampirism, especially the glittery skin thing that so many people hate. Fun fact: vampires aren’t real, and people have played hard and fast with the rules for decades, so this is not the strangest take on the undead bloodsuckers, so just calm your shit on that one.

Also, there are solid performances in the movie. Not from the two leads, not at all. Both Stewart and Pattinson are really unlikable in this movie. Stewart has these fits throughout the movie where she can’t stop blinking, mumbling and faux smiling, and it’s almost unnerving, and Pattinson’s take on Edward is creepy and dickish, but there are solid performances from members of the supporting cast. I really like Billy Burke (Drive Angry, Batman: The Long Halloween – Part 2) as Bella’s father, Charlie. I believed that he was a bit of a dolt at parenting, that he was trying to do the Friend thing more than the Dad thing, and he couldn’t wrap his head around the parenting of a teenager because he hasn’t had to.

I also really liked Peter Facinelli (The Vanished, 13 Minutes) as Carlisle Cullen, the adopted father of Edward. Facinelli brings a restraint to his characterization of Carlisle that the “teen” Cullens completely fail at. Comparing Facinelli’s take on the vampire to Pattinson’s Edward, Carlisle comes off as a friendly but quiet man, whereas Pattinson is trying so hard not to be noticeable that he’s awkwardly even more noticeable. The same can be said of Elizabeth Reaser as Esme, Carlisle’s wife. Reaser isn’t really in the movie all that much, but she’s great. She has that quality of a mother who is a little over-friendly to her son’s new girlfriend.

The problem with a lot of the performances in the film is that the screenplay, by Melissa Rosenberg (Step Up, TV’s Jessica Jones), is quite messy. The reason for this is she based her screenplay on Stephanie Meyer’s book. I’ve read enough of Meyer’s book to know that the screenplay is actually pretty close to the book, and the book is bad, so the screenplay is bad. That, combined with director Catherine Hardwicke (Thirteen, Miss Bala) making some bad calls, like her insistence that the film should have narration, and some of her collaboration with cinematographer Elliot Davis on the color palette, some things that would prove to be just as problematic as the series would unfold.

Twilight has some elements that work, and the finished film is not a total loss, but unfortunately, this is a movie that hinges on the romance, and the romance is bad. Both Stewart and Pattinson do not correctly understand their characters, and they both rely on some poor scriptwriting based on even poorer subject matter. I stand by that fans of the source material will probably like this movie, but it’s bad, just not as bad as most haters would lead you to believe.

2/5
-Kyle A. Goethe

0

[Stephen King Day] Maximum Overdrive (1986)

Director: Stephen King

Cast: Emilio Estevez, Pat Hingle, Laura Harrington, Christopher Murney

Screenplay: Stephen King

98 mins. Rated R.

 

The trailer for Maximum Overdrive, perhaps the single greatest trailer in cinema history, features Stephen King, the writer/director of the film and writer of the short story Trucks, which the film is based on, claims that if you want Stephen King done right, sometimes you have to do it yourself. He also claims that he’s going to Scare the Hell out of you! Neither of these claims ever comes true in Maximum Overdrive, but is the film without merit? I don’t think so. Let’s break down the horror novelist’s lone directing credit today, and we’ll find out just what the hell happened.

The date is June 19, 1987, and the Earth has passed in the tail of a comet that creates a supernatural force, bringing all machines on Earth to life. The machines begin a hostile and homicidal takeover, and a group of survivors hold up in the Dixie Boy truck stop gas station, hoping to fend off the mechanical menace.

Let’s start off with King’s second claim. There’s nothing in Maximum Overdrive even remotely terrifying outside of its central concept. It just doesn’t offer chills. Perhaps it’s because we don’t care about our core group of characters, perhaps it’s because we aren’t presented with enough tension once the initial plot comes into play and the survivors are trapped at the Dixie Boy. It isn’t exactly clear where the film falls apart because it is only tenuously held together to begin with. King’s a hell of a novelist, but directing just doesn’t seem his forte. He can direct on the page, but not all that well with a camera. That’s not entirely on him, as he was quoted as saying that he was “coked out of my mind” for the entirety of the filmmaking process, and it shows (perhaps nowhere more obviously than that trailer). If there’s ever been a solid case for quitting drugs, show someone the great modern horror writer and his film only directing film, Maximum Overdrive.

None of the performances are particularly dazzling. I like the Emilio Estevez (The Way, D3: The Mighty Ducks), specifically in Repo Man, but he capture the audience well. Pat Hingle (Batman, Hang ‘Em High) is flatly asshole-like in his work as Hendershot, a secondary antagonist to the survivor group, and everyone else in the film falls into the stock character work, with most of the secondary cast disappearing from memory with hours of seeing the film.

AC/DC provided the music for the film, and their song choices kind of worked with the high-octane motor vehicle villains that circulate around the Dixie Boy looking to pick off our blood-pumping heroes. I’m not big on their ratchety score outside of the song choices though. Again, AC/DC are not writers of musical scores, and while some musicians can do both, perhaps they were not ready at that time to move into the realm of films.

So the film is bad, there’s no denying that (King himself called it his worst adaptation back in 2013, and those 2 Golden Raspberry noms didn’t give it much credibility), but is it a so-bad-it’s-good kind of film? In some ways, it really is. It has such a simple plot that you don’t have to follow it with detailed notes, the inconsistencies (why do some of the working vehicles never come to life when others do?) are almost endearing, and the murder and mayhem are enjoyably silly and entertaining (King’s cameo as a man at an ATM is particularly dumb and fun). Sure, I showed it at a movie night a few years back, and it earned the enjoyment factor raised.

Maximum Overdrive is not a good movie, but like all auto wrecks, there’s some salvaging to do with this one. There are parts that work well enough to get it moving, and you can get some mileage out of it in the right circumstances, as long as you know what movie you are watching. The statements in the trailer may not be truthful, but it does sell exactly what this movie is, if you can handle it. It’s not good, and I won’t claim that it is, but you can still have a hoot with it.

 

2/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

3

[Early Review] Joker (2019)

Director: Todd Phillips

Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Robert De Niro, Zazie Beetz

Screenplay: Todd Phillips, Scott Silver

121 mins. Rated R for strong bloody violence, disturbing behavior, language and brief sexual images.

 

Well, it’s finally here, the prequel to the Batman series that isn’t connected to any Batman films. Wait, the Joker origin story that isn’t The Killing Joke. Wait, so what is it? It’s something else, I’ll tell you. This film is really something else…

It’s really getting crazy out there, and Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix, Her, Don’t Worry, He Won’t Get Far on Foot) sees it. He’s down on his luck, living paycheck to paycheck with his mother, and he’s constantly picked on by others. He has a goal in life, to bring joy and happiness to the world, and he sees his idol, late night talk show host Murray Franklin (Robert De Niro, Raging Bull, The Wizard of Lies), as an escape. He wants to be a comedian like Murray, but all he has is negative thoughts. When Arthur is pushed into a corner, he finds a new way to put a smile on, one that will transform him into an icon all his own.

This is Joaquin Phoenix’s film. There are no costars. The other performances are practically extended cameos. Phoenix makes this version of the Joker all his own. His performance is filled with intensity (his eyes are filled with anger) and depression. Phoenix researched multiple psychological disorders in order to give an unidentifiable character, one that could not be diagnosed. The dialogue and physicality is disturbing and unnerving to no end.

This is a film that is intense, unhappy, and joyless. Director Todd Phillips (War Dogs, The Hangover Part III), who co-wrote the screenplay, infused the film with moments that made me and the rest of the audience nervously laugh, and I felt bad for laughing after. There’s a weird feeling the film gave to me, where I felt like I was watching something I shouldn’t, or perhaps watching something I felt bad watching. There’s an emotionally disturbing quality to the film but I would say that those looking for violence won’t see as much as critics have proclaimed. What violence is in the film is very powerful and more character-focused than shock-driven. It’s more emotionally and mentally violent.

The biggest flaw I would have with the film is the final scene, but I’m not sure how I would end the film other than how it ends. I would also argue that the film contains fewer surprises than I expected. It’s fairly straight-forward. It’s not a true-to-nature flaw, I would say, but the controversy and the critical reception might be overselling the shocking nature of the film. It was pretty much how I expected the story to go.

Joker is a masterful film with a career-best performance from Joaquin Phoenix. This is a man in his playground, a thrillingly-disturbing character study that’s unlike any comic book adaptation I’ve ever seen. The film makes use of its unreliable narrator better than almost any other film ever has. Temper your expectations for any shocking revelations because this is a standalone film that is one of the more crazy movie experiences I’ve had in recent memory. See this movie, but only if you think you can handle it.

 

4.5/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

2

[Batman Day] Batman Returns (1992)

Director: Tim Burton

Cast: Michael Keaton, Danny DeVito, Michelle Pfeiffer, Christopher Walken, Michael Gough, Pat Hingle, Michael Murphy

Screenplay: Daniel Waters

126 mins. Rated PG-13.

  • Academy Award Nominee: Best Effects, Visual Effects
  • Academy Award Nominee: Best Makeup

 

On this day in which we celebrate the caped crusader, let’s take a look at the strangest, and dare I say, greatest, live-action Batman film, Batman Returns.

It’s Christmastime in Gotham City, and the rich businessman Max Shreck (Christopher Walken, Catch Me If You Can, Irreplaceable You) is showing his holiday spirit by secretly trying to get a power chemical plant built in the city. When he gets kidnapped by the sinister Oswald Cobblepot (Danny DeVito, Matilda, TV’s It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia), a man more known by his moniker, the Penguin, Max sees a way for each of them to get what they want as he attempts to get Cobblepot into public office as Gotham’s mayor. It’s during this time that Bruce Wayne (Michael Keaton, Birdman, Dumbo) begins looking into Cobblepot’s background and see him as a threat to the city.

There’s a surface-level love for Batman Returns that springs out of the fact that it was my first experience with Batman of any level. I hadn’t read any of the comics when I saw the film, I hadn’t watched the cartoon, I hadn’t seen any of the other films. It was my first and most memorable experience of the caped crusader.

Michael Keaton has always been the actor I’ve most associated with the Batman and Bruce Wayne role, and I think he’s the actor that’s always embodied the conflict of the two roles and the sacrifice that he feels is necessary for him to give to Gotham for its protection. He’s better in this sequel than the previous film because here he’s even more conflicted about his role. He’s put through trials that test his commitment to Batman, most notably through his interactions with Selina Kyle and Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer, Hairspray, Avengers: Endgame).

Director Tim Burton (Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, Beetlejuice) put a lot of himself into this film, more than its predecessor, and it’s especially apparent with the villains. Danny DeVito’s Penguin and Michelle Pfeiffer’s Catwoman both have some altered history with their origins, and there are liberties taken with a lot of what makes them villains, and part of that is likely from Burton’s very obvious disinterest in comic books. While that can be a death knell for a film, I really like his take here, and I think he is able to juggle multiple villain arcs alongside his hero in a way most superhero films cannot.

There’s another accomplishment to Batman Returns that most reviewers and fans tend to overlook regarding its villains. Returns features a third villain, remarkably made from scratch, in Max Shreck. Yes, he’s just as much a villain in the film as Penguin or Catwoman, perhaps a little less zany, but a villain all the same, made by a terrifically unhinged performance from Christopher Walken. Without Walken, the film may not have worked at all. In fact, I would say that I remembered Shreck more than the other two as a child. He was frightening because he was very real, and the role he plays in both the Penguin’s master plan and Catwoman’s origin makes for an effective creepy character.

After the success of his first Batman film, Tim Burton was able to really explore his version of Gotham City and its inhabitants with his special visual blend of gothic and supernatural influences. This is a very arty Batman film, and that’s mostly due to Burton being at the top of his game here. He’s playing with his cinematography, he’s exploring the sound and music of Gotham, and he’s relishing in a classical costume design within the confines of this world.

Batman Returns is perhaps the most unique of all the Batman films in that it is really experimenting with its tone, look, feel, and world. It’s hard to find a flaw, but if there’s one, it’s that the film does take a little pushing at the beginning to get it moving, and in the modern superhero landscape, some of its zanier elements might seem laughable, but revisiting this film in honor of Batman Day has reminded me of how rich an experience Batman Returns is. I highly recommend a rewatch if it’s been awhile.

 

5/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For my review of Tim Burton’s Batman, click here.

For my review of Tim Burton’s Beetlejuice, click here.

For my review of Tim Burton’s Sleepy Hollow, click here.

For my review of Tim Burton’s Corpse Bride, click here.

For my review of Tim Burton’s Dark Shadows, click here.

For my review of Tim Burton’s Dumbo, click here.

0

The New Batman is Here, and He is Sparkly

Okay, okay, okay…

So we finally have an announcement as to who is taking up the mantle for the next entry in the Batman series, currently titled The Batman. The film, to be written and directed by Matt Reeves, is scheduled to begin production later this year for a September 2021 release.

The new Batman is Robert Pattinson.

The internet took it pretty well actually. No wait, I didn’t say that right. Let me correct…The internet lost its collective shit because the internet hates everything, and as I said about Game of Thrones recently, no one hates Batman casting picks as much as Batman fans do.

Early reports claimed that Reeves was searching for a younger Batman, and upon reading everything I’ve read about the film, I still believe it will be tangentially related to the larger DCEU, set some time before Batman looked like Ben Affleck. There will likely not be any reference to the larger DCEU, but that would be a smarter thing than forcing it in or confusing the general movie-going audience by adding another separate Batman franchise next to the standalone Joker movie and the DCEU proper. It’s just messy.

As far as Battinson (see what I did there?) goes, I’m rather excited. No, he wasn’t a very good sparkly vampire, but his work in the Twilight franchise was a decade ago, and he was working from a not-great screenplay and source material. Compare the Twilight books to the larger Batman comic books. If you agree that Batman’s source material is better, then you have to assume that a better screenplay and director at the helm can only help.

If you’ve seen Battinson in films like The Rover or Good Time, then you’ve seen a range that will separate him from his Twilight days quite effectively. Hell, he wasn’t half-bad in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

To put it simply, and to paraphrase Spongebob Squarepants’s thoughts on Krabby Patties, the only people who don’t like Battinson have never tried him.

I think I’ve made my point.

 

UPDATE: Just as this was set to be published, as with all news stories from DC, it appears there is more to this than previously thought. It would seem that Nicholas Hoult, known for his work as Beast in the X-Men films and also playing J.R.R. Tolkien in the new biopic, is also in the mix for Bruce Wayne/Batman. Now, I don’t have any funny nicknames for Hoult as with Battinson, so that’s one strike.

On the other hand, though, Hoult has proven himself time after time to be an excellent actor with a wide range similar to that of a Michael Keaton. Keaton was a controversial choice back in the 80s to play the Caped Crusader, but with turns from Beetlejuice to things like Mr. Mom, he proved he had the right mixture of professional acting and insanity, something I would argue Hoult also has. Don’t believe me? Check Mad Max: Fury Road to see that level of Let’s-Get-Nuts that a Keaton would have. There are indeed similarities.

So what it boils down to is that both of these choices would be inspired, and in Matt Reeves I trust, so whatever he decides, I’m down for the ride.

So what do you think? Who should play Bruce Wayne/Batman? Let me know/Drop a comment below!

 

-Kyle A. Goethe

0

The Suicide Squad Losing Will Smith?

The DCEU has been having a rough go of keeping their stars. Now with confirmation of Ben Affleck’s official exit as Batman and Henry Cavill in an on-again-off-again return status as the Man of Steel, Variety is reporting that Will Smith, who played Deadshot in Suicide Squad back in 2016, may not be returning as the infamous DC assassin and villain.

It should be noted that this has not been confirmed, so we will judge this as a rumor for now, but their sources say that the split was amicable.

It’s been discussed quite extensively that James Gunn, recently fired by Marvel/Disney only to be taken on for the new installment, is planning on shaking up the team and rebooting this portion of the DC Universe with the new film, so it was a bit up in the air who, if anyone, would be returning to the franchise this next time around.

If this is indeed true, I will be saddened but hopeful that we will see Smith return in some form in the future. Smith and Margot Robbie were the two best characters in Suicide Squad, so losing him is tough. That being said, in James Gunn I trust, at least as far as making kick-ass movies goes.

The DCEU is gaining steam following the success of Wonder Woman and Aquaman, and the future is looking brighter as long as they can keep some stars attached.

So what do you think? Are you sad to lose Will Smith or are you thinking Good Riddance? Let me know/Drop a comment below!

 

-Kyle A. Goethe

0

The Death of Superman (2018)

Director: Jake Castorena, Sam Liu

Cast: Jerry O’Connell, Rebecca Romijn, Rainn Wilson, Rosario Dawson, Nathan Fillion, Christopher Gorham, Matt Lanter, Shemar Moore, Jason O’Mara, Rocky Carroll, Patrick Fabian

Screenplay: Peter Tomasi

81 mins. Rated PG-13 for sequences of violence and action including some bloody images.

 

I remember seeing Superman: Doomsday when I was younger. The animated movie sounded incredibly exciting to me, even though I had not read The Death of Superman, the comic it was based on. It was, to me, probably the most famous Superman run that I could remember, and it was incredibly intriguing as an idea. The animated film version wasn’t very good. I remember finding it slugglishly boring, and that was that. Probably wouldn’t see another version of that story play out, especially with the reception of the most-recent live-action Superman film, Superman Returns. I just figured that was the end of it. To my surprise, DC’s animated films have decided to play this out again, and this new incarnation, The Death of Superman, is thankfully much better.

Clark Kent (Jerry O’Connell, Stand by Me, Boy Band) is struggling internally to tell the love of his life, Lois Lane (Rebecca Romijn, X-Men, TV’s The Librarians) his biggest secret: that he is really Superman. He can see that his secrecy about his past is straining things in their relationship, and if he plans to move forward with their courtship, he needs to figure out how to deal with his identity. He sees fellow Justice League members Batman (Jason O’Mara, The Siege of Jadotville, TV’s The Man in the High Castle) and The Flash (Christopher Gorham, The Other Side of Heaven, TV’s Insatiable) moving forward with their real lives and he wants the same thing. Meanwhile, a team of astronauts led by Hank Henshaw (Patrick Fabian, The Last Exorcism, TV’s Better Call Saul), on a mission aboard the Excalibur space shuttle, witness a boom tube opening and unleashing a meteorite toward Earth. When it crashes, a giant creature is released from the wreckage, and it has a trajectory for Metropolis.

I like the voice cast for The Death of Superman. I feel as though the star players involved really understand their characters and I like how they brought them to life. I also wouldn’t have been able to peg a lot of these performers without having looked at the cast to write this review. The only true standout is Rainn Wilson (The Meg, TV’s The Office), who is woefully miscast as Lex Luthor.

The action is much better in The Death of Superman because it takes the time early on to establish its characters and their motivations. Superman spends the whole of the film fighting with himself to open up and be a normal human. Even The Flash describing his normal life makes Clark pine for one of his own, and yet he is the only meta-human capable to taking down the creature, Doomsday. It’s his internal conflict that makes the external conflict so intriguing.

There’s still some pacing issues in the film, especially with the large-scale fight with Doomsday. It is broken up quite nicely but the narrative does tire out earlier than it should. It’s the same problem that Man of Steel had. Superman is such a powerful guy that the stakes don’t feel like they are there, even knowing how this one is going to end, and perhaps that’s part of it. This is very clearly The Death of Superman, and perhaps it would be a stronger outing to focus on the fact that this is the first part of a two-part story or even just smash it all in one film, a bit of a lengthy film, but perhaps one that doesn’t sputter so close to the finish line.

Overall, though, The Death of Superman is a strong DC Animated film. It stumbles a bit as it builds momentum, but for fans of these animated superhero tales, I think there’s a lot to like on display here. It definitely sets up the sequel really nicely and made me all the more excited to see the conclusion. This is a Superman film for Superman fans.

 

4/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

1

[Batman Day] Batman Begins (2005)

Director: Christopher Nolan

Cast: Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Liam Neeson, Katie Holmes, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Cillian Murphy, Tom Wilkinson, Rutger Hauer, Ket Watanabe

Screenplay: David S. Goyer, Christopher Nolan

140 mins. Rated PG-13 for intense action violence, disturbing images and some thematic elements.

  • Academy Award Nominee: Best Achievement in Cinematography

IMDb Top 250: #116 (as of 9/14/18)

 

Happy Batman Day, everyone! Celebrate with some comic books, cartoons, and Batman movies, like Batman Begins.

The Batman franchise was in a bad place in the early 2000s. After the trainwreck that was Batman & Robin, the franchise was limping and needed to be fixed. Even myself, a hardcore non-retconner, can say that there was no other way. In stepped Christopher Nolan (Interstellar, Dunkirk).

Batman Begins takes the story of Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale, American Hustle, Hostiles) all the way back to its not-so-humble start. By now, we all know the big piece, the death of Bruce’s parents, but Batman Begins delves into his complex relationship with butler Alfred (Michael Caine, The Quiet American, Sherlock Gnomes), his combat training with The League of Shadows, led by Ra’s Al Ghul (Ken Watanabe, The Last Samurai, Isle of Dogs), and the mistakes he makes along the way to the hero we all know and love. As Bruce is honing his skills, crime boss Carmine Falcone (Tom Wilkinson, Michael Clayton, Denial) and corrupt psychologist Dr. Jonathan Crane (Cillian Murphy, 28 Days Later, TV’s Peaky Blinders), working for an unseen nefarious foe, are setting Gotham City down the path to destruction from within, and Batman, with the help of Sergeant Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman, Darkest Hour, The Hitman’s Bodyguard) may be the only one who can stop them.

This was the kick in the ass that the Batman franchise needed to stay fresh. Something I’ve learned in the years since Batman Begins is that there will always be a new Batman. He’s like Robin Hood and Peter Pan. They just keep coming back. This comeback, however, is just that damn good.

Christian Bale kicks ass as both Bruce Wayne and Batman. He chose to portray each half of his persona as a completely separate character, as it he had multiple personality syndrome and Batman is just another person living within him. Then there’s The Voice. I’m a firm defender of The Voice within Nolan’s realistic take on the Caped Crusader. Otherwise someone would eventually be able to figure it out. It is notable that he packed on the muscle for the role, the insane method actor that he is, having just come off The Machinist.

Speaking of the realism, Nolan took special care to craft a Gotham as realistic as possible. The gothic tone of the World’s Greatest Detective is still there, but Batman’s tech is as grounded in reality as possible. Even its villains stick to somewhat tangible backgrounds, with Crane’s Scarecrow become a truly horrific legend. Murphy’s portrayal is near and dear to my heart with the Scarecrow being my favorite Batman villain, and while originally I took issue with the way Nolan elected to recreate this character, I soon found myself heavily engaged in his frightening take. Ra’s Al Ghul is another character that usually takes on an otherworldly visage in that, if I am correct, he is often shown as having survived for over 600 years, dying and reviving due to The Lazarus Pits. Now, it could be true of the character we see in the finished film, but Nolan never once brings it up. In fact, the way he portrays Ra’s Al Ghul is haunting in its simplicity.

What’s great about Bruce Wayne is how compelling he is without the Batsuit, and how driven he is, just like his counterpart. Being the World’s Greatest Detective is something that applies to both Wayne and Batman, and Nolan, alongside co-screenwriter David S. Goyer, gave us time to connect with Bruce before introducing his superheroic other half.

I think if there was one thing I didn’t like about the film, it falls to some marketing mistakes and the fact that the film doesn’t firmly enough plant itself as being a reboot. Much like the ill-fated Ghostbusters: Answer the Call, Batman Begins almost plays itself up as a prequel to the 1989 Tim Burton Batman. There are clues as the film goes on, most notably in the death of Bruce’s parents, but as the convoluted mythology of the previous Batman series never really had itself nailed down, one wondered if the film was connected, and it wasn’t until its follow-up, The Dark Knight, released in 2008 that we finally got our answers. I just think fans struggled throughout the film’s runtime trying to figure out what it was.

Nitpicks aside, Batman Begins is nearly perfect. There are some slight issues with things like placing the film within a franchise timeline and a few acting slips (looking at Katie Holmes on this one), but all in all, Batman Begins isn’t just one of the best Batman films, it’s one of the best films of any kind.

 

4.5/5

-Kyle A. Goethe

 

 

For my review of Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar, click here.

For my review of Christopher Nolan’s Dunkirk, click here.

 

For more Almighty Goatman,

1

[Batman Day] [Editorial] The Batfleck Situation

Hey goat herd,

I’ve been pretty busy as of late so I don’t have a new Batman movie review for you today.

I did, however, want to take a few minutes to discuss the controversy surrounding Ben Affleck’s future in the DCEU. So I’ll start with this…

I love Ben Affleck’s portrayal of the Dark Knight. I think he was the best of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. The movie had a lot of issues but not a single one stems from Affleck’s acting performance. I think it’s absolute bullshit all the hate he got for taking the role. He’s a lifelong fan of Batman, and the way fans have treated him is unjust and cruel. I really wish he could find joy in the role again.

Now, I’ve heard a lot about whether or not Affleck will continue as The Batman, and I personally believe he isn’t done with the role yet. For starters, Justice League is the second film of his three-picture contract (I’m pretty sure his cameo in Suicide Squad had nothing to do with his contract). So he has one Batman standalone left. Now, yes, Warner Bros. and DC may choose to release him from his contract early, but I don’t think they are ready to give up on him yet. And money talks. Maybe Warner Bros. drops a big stack of cash on him and he accepts. I refuse to believe that his engagement with the role has dwindled so quickly.

But what do you think? Is Ben Affleck the Batman we need? Who else could take on the Caped Crusader in his absence? Let me know/drop a comment below. Happy Batman day.

 

-Kyle A. Goethe

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑