I Didn't See A Batman/Superman Film This Weekend

The writing is beyond the walls, and the consensus has largely digested a pretty clearly shared distaste for certain filmmakers this weekend. In many ways, I feel like I shouldn't even have to comment on any of this. It's not a place fot a review because to put it any more plainly, what many of us witnessed, wasn't something any film pundit, theorist, or armchair theorist could dissect outside of an autopsy. I didn't see a Batman/Superman film this weekend. I truly didn't. I didn't see the adverts plastered across every third corner of my L.A. living eye, and say to myself that what was contained within the two plus hours of footage, something that resembled a coherent story filled with discernible beats, engaging characters, thematic throughlines, and even an attempt at capturing the most important element in such common superhero tales, the essence of these mythological beings, and the ethos they each uniquely stand for.

It's not enough that I dislike Batman v. Superman: Dawn Of Justice, it's more that I find it's existence to be pretty much tragic.

I don't see merely failed storytelling. I see board meetings soon after the glow of Harry Potter, and the Dark Knight Trilogy fading into the distance, while Sony crumbles from awkward start to post-internet hack panic attack. I see film executives fumbling over how to best repair the damage done by hoping that throwing money at auteurs, and expecting workable franchises with no real personal investment in a shared universe, nor its slate of popular characters.  That's right. This entire debacle can be traced back to when WB said nevermind to Justice League soon after the Iron Mans took flight, and Asgardian royalty graced Earth with his presence. I see a cat, scrambling desperately after diving into a tub of scorpions after thinking that might be a good idea. No, cat. There is no grace to be found. Licking your paw, feigning innocence will not help you today. This is what many of us would like to call either hubris, or a deliberate attempt to renege against the very task you chose . A work of corporate art, undone by juvenile, throbbing, gnashing, bile duct expending, knee-jerk, anti-human. borderline sociopathic emotion, far less interested in storytelling and world-building than it is in flexing its muscles in the name of creating an anti-altar for those it deems lesser than they.

That is right. In a nutshell, this film hates you.

However, this project cannot find any more clever means of expressing this hate than nods to Benghazi, a middle finger to democracy, and shooting a beloved boy photojournalist square in the face. If one were a conspiracy nut, it might not even be a stretch to assume that those involved were taking their reflexive stance on the very idea of this film, and plugging in what they feel is a "necessary" counterpoint to the more all-inclusive, community-centric, closer to centrist politics of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It felt that a certain demographic had indeed found itself largely ignored in multiplex cinema, and figured the opposition during a contentious time of political turmoil, required a voice. This film openly doesn't care about the endless nods to FDR and the spirit of the New Deal that inspired the classic Superman character. It's not that the film simply doesn't understand him, it sees him as problematic in their view. They cannot reconcile with his very existence, even in fiction, so this is what we get. In fact, similar comes in the shape of a grizzled, homicidal Batman, who's motivations feel less organic to the tormented billionaire playboy, and more to a painterly violence fetishist with the reasoning of an abused pre-teen. The film simply doesn't work, not because it fails to tell a story, but because those in charge never listened to the warning signs posted writ large by films such as 300 & Watchmen. Films that adore the punishment of the morally compromised, and the aggrandization of extremism over conversations. They saw pretty pictures about fascists, and thought that was good enough.

And what they have on their hands, is something both blander, unintentionally funnier, and uglier than I could ever have imagined. Like sending a loved one a bag of feces in protest, when all one had to do was walk away from what looked on paper to be a bad deal. With my day job as help for a powerful law firm in a Century City high rise, suddenly, the title makes total, telling, completely honest sense. If it's not merely desperate to sell based on a battle that barely lasts for seven minutes, it is desperate to call to attention the legal clusterfuck hovering over a studio scrambling for something resembling a clue.

Or perhaps it's merely an engravement on a tombstone? Either way, it's a raging sigh for a culture awash in its own poor choices.


Post Script: There is another telling moment in the denouement, where Bruce Wayne posits to Diana Prince (Gal Gadot, who's Wonder Woman, is gravely underused) that the so-called Metahumans, should eventually band together (in a nod to the possibly-now-not-upcoming Justice League feature?) . And when questioned about this by Diana, Wayne (not looking her way) replies with the supposedly arc-completing line, "Men are still good". This is after certain female characters are seen to be killed in a suicide bombing, targeting a place of power. 

Take from that what you will..

Man Of Steel (2013) Movie Thoughts

During the final hours of the planet Krypton, the illegally born son of high delegate, Jor-El, is sent hurtling towards a future life as an earthling. And in the years to follow, he will continue to face the clear as day questions that befall the superhuman being he has grown to become. Even as he travels  the world, longing for answers to his origin, fates are bound to collide as a violent remnant from the past comes to earth in his quest to rebuild this once great world - even if it means destroying ours in the process. Comic book movie darling, Zack Snyder finds himself in more solemn waters than normal with his Christoper Nolan produced take on the Superman legend. And what results is something actually resembling a piece of film that takes the notions seriously, but might go down too lightly for what it implies. As a leaner, more sober rendition of the classic mythos, Snyder (with Batman Begins' David Goyer as head writer) hunkers down, and finds what while gravitas indeed possible, the road to earning it isn't quite so simple. Nor is it easy to make the character relevant in a world rife with distrust, surveillance, and an overall lack of faith.

Speedy confession time: while I had long known that the Superman character and mythology was set to be brought back to the screen, a part of me had initially seen the choice of Snyder as something to be a little twitchy about. Even as his take on Dr. Manhattan was one of the shining lights of his WATCHMEN adaptation, I wasn't sure if the material and the director were the most harmonic match. Most of Snyder's films have largely been visual affairs, often flirting with slightly denser-than-average graphic novel fare, with only middling results. It isn't that I find him to be a poor director, but rather less interested in the affairs of people as opposed to how they will look in almost stereoscopic fashion amongst opulent backgrounds, and questionable music cues. The tale of Clark Kent/Kal-El, as he struggles to retain his goodness whilst accepting himself as both Kryptonian and human is one of greater sensitivity alongside rousing bombast. For all the romanticism the character carries with him, there is also a bevy of human characters that shape and mold him. There is a greater need for these characters to inspire him, to challenge, and to help make him the legend he will inevitably become. And to varying degrees, this has been achieved more than once on film, but it is something that has since eluded Snyder for whatever reason - mostly that the works he has served duty on have often been moodier affairs that are often strewn in viscera of one manner or another. And even if filmmakers choose to go "dark" with the character and his world, it takes a certain amount of layering to make it work.

So does it?

Yes, and no. For all intents and purposes, this is easily the one Snyder film that doesn't make me renege on the few scenes he makes that actually leave an effect on me. Man Of Steel whizzes by at such a breakneck pace, and has enough gall to make even non-superhero fans quake in their seats. There are some truly breathtaking moments and images populating major sections throughout. And Henry Cavill (Clark/Kal-El/Superman) is boosted by some impressive supporting performances. Even his performance has shades of true charm as the conflicted alien, but like so many other things here, much of it is buried in that oh-so-familiar need for summer blockbusters to just gun headlong into the action, which in this film is jaw-dropping to say the least.

Right away, this is a film eager to establish its own identity upon the world with the reinvention of Krypton, and an expansion of how its civilization condemned itself into ultimate cataclysm. In an unexpectedly drawn out prologue, we are given full view of Jor-El & his wife, Lara's wish to alter course on a home that is already far gone, even as their comrades turn on one another. And with a presentation that evokes memories of even David Lynch's DUNE, there is plenty to enjoy on the artistic and conceptual level that it almost buys itself a pass. It's a sequence that in many ways encapsulates the film as a whole; visually arresting and packed with imaginative possibility, but distant in ways that are difficult to quantify. It is as if the film knows how personal it has to go, but will not, because feelings are perhaps a little too icky? I wish there were a more eloquent way of putting it, but there it is. What the film offers up as a new sheen, is at times very close to something that could be one worthy of endless re-examination, but as it is, it's happy to go about unrestrained, and often bereft of the emotional baggage a film like this perhaps needs at its core.

Even as it goes out of its way to re-introduce the characters, there is an air about the film that screams a wish to replicate previous success. From the arrival of Kal-El on Earth, to the rapid-fire flashes back & forth that is meant to fill us in on his life as a Kansas farm boy, and his subsequent journey of self-discovery, the whole is attempting to achieve the mostly terrific non-linear structure of one Batman Begins, but lacks any of that film's thematic focus. We are also introduced to a much more knowing and aggressive reporter, Lois Lane (Amy Adams) as she is obsessed with trailing the adventures of a special man with an unerring habit of saving those in need wherever he seems to stop. It is here that the structure problems make themselves the most apparent, as we are given almost unforgivably brief glimpses into Clark's younger days. And while we do luck out, and have some of the film's best quiet moments here between teen Clark (Dylan Sprayberry), and adopted father, Jonathan Kent (played by the much missed Kevin Costner), these scenes are never give a chance to breathe. And this is the core issue, if we are to take this bold new course with such a character, then it is essential for us to understand why this character feels the way he does about a people he will learn to have a unique relationship with. This section is an opportunity for us to bond with his yen for good, and while we get a general idea, we never feel the weight of it. One of Begins' biggest strengths lies in that film's need to establish why Bruce Wayne will not kill. And Nolan & Goyer do so by illustrating the coldness of a firearm, and the seductiveness it offers. Visually, the film never lets us forget what is at stake for young Bruce Wayne should he ever seek the easy solution. No such dilemma or examination is made in MoS, and it in many ways hurts any chance we get at connecting with him beyond the fact that he is Superman. So much of the groundwork is rendered perfunctory, and assumed, and that is a troubling trend I have witnessed quite a bit lately.

So when worlds finally (and literally) find themselves on a collision course, placing Clark into a wildly unsubtle end game against the driven and vicious General Zod (Michael Shannon, in a fantastic turn), we are forced to cast aside the thematic, and are witness to the expected action barrage. Cars are smashed, bullets ricochet, buildings collapse, and entire areas are laid waste, but the emotional foundation upon which all of this depends seems lost in the cacophony once the conflict hits Smallville, and inevitably threatens the world. (because what else could be threatened?) And even as the context is top light, there is much to enjoy here as Snyder does what he had long yet tried, which is apply filming in mostly open environs. Surroundings that actually allow the action to have a sense of gravity. It's a touch that never ceases to add that little extra something to a big production like this, and for what it is, it is deeply impression making.

So how about the relationships forged between Clark, his family, and his comrades. As mentioned before, they are mostly made on the move, and largely lacking the kind of intimacy needed to make the action matter. Most notably unexpected, was the connection between Clark and Lois. While one can almost imagine Nolan balking at the classic "mild-mannered reporter" claptrap, there is something altogether strange about forcing these two together now that they are not established early on as co-workers. The dichotomy of Kent as a good-natured weenie is eschewed completely, thereby making Superman a much larger part of the story, often to the point of being patently goofy. Especially considering how many people see him without his iconic glasses. It's to the point that the world must accept him as alien, full stop. It seems to be the film's singular driving force, and what we have in return, while interesting, seems light on the potential. We do get some sweet moments here and there, even with Diane Lane as Ma Kent, but again, we are never give the kind of coverage that is necessary to counterbalance all the plot obfuscation happening throughout. Clark begins as a ghost, and pretty much ends the film as one. So when we are meant to take all of this as prelude to the Superman we all know and apparently love, it becomes a little tough to buy.

And even as the film screams to be seen on a subtle level, there are far too many themes fighting for dominance to make any significant statement. Even as Snyder's team lays out large black text messages representing varying intentions on both the human and radical Kryptonian sides, so much focus is lost as the film seems to be victim of additional re-shoots up to the last second. Where the myth has long leaned toward Superman being an ultimate immigrant, a man pitted between two worlds, the film vacillates between being concerns of national security, and an overall need for a society to seek its long forgotten pluralistic roots. It becomes kind of difficult to suss out when a film cannot decide what to focus on, so we eventually just throw up our hands and rely on the spectacle to do the talking. 

Even when one wishes to just allow the tale to weave itself, and to envelope us as participants in the trials of our modern mythological deities, it does help to know that deep down, they truly are no different than us. So why is it so difficult to do this when your lead character is as simple as they come? Man Of Steel, while truly visceral in many respects, seems unwilling to level with its own background. While it so wishes to dole out some new wrinkles about the big blue boy scout, it should have done so with a little more faith in what makes him so special; his innate humanness.

Make no mistake, Man Of Steel is a massive achievement of movie wizardry. But it is in the small that such legends truly find themselves capable of flight.

Acknowledging The Paradigm

As hinted at during my most recent post at Anime Diet; would a modern reinterpretation of Naoko Takeuchi's Sailor Moon even remotely resemble the seemingly innocent vibe of young girls using vanity products to change their appearance, and defeat evil? What would it be like if the very notion of your savior was rendered out of date with a world that has long since moved on? The shelf life of certain stories can prove limited when philosophical, scientific, sociological, and even allegorical paradigms shift from their previously settled posts. This is something that has been swirling around the brainpan for several years, and has recently come back to mind when doing the latest writeup. Would doing a modern take of what many would consider a classic legend prove vital when the world has changed so much, and grown so much more sophisticated that a "pure" replay would prove either dated or irrelevant? One can argue that this has happened more than once in high-profile projects in recent years. But how about when the creative parties involved took the extra time necessary to use established properties to help illustrate these changes in at times lyrical fashion? Surface, too. This is something I'd like to call, Acknowledging The Paradigm. Meaning, an update fully aware of the cultural changes, and not only visually retrofitting the production, but also taking a studied, and thematic look into how the previously unchangeable would apply in another, more contemporary context- without holding back.


And in a climate where the term "reboot" has become something of modern anathema, there have been many attempts to acknowledge that the world is a completely different place than when their original creators thrived with their work. This is especially so in regards to superhero properties. When many were initially conceived, often very specific social circumstances helped to make them resonate with their audiences, often creating a specific image of them to the public. And if there has been anything common about fan reaction, it has been derision by those calling out author and artist time and again, that reinterpretations often do not match, let alone agree with certain established perceptions of what made these concepts great, or effective. It doesn't take much to send fans over the edge, so keeping this in mind it stands to reason why so many fear dramatic deviation from past models. It is a difficult ice shelf to walk, but as long as creators find the means to build upon what has been said before, perhaps what is revealed can offer some value to those looking for other qualities within the new story.


Which brings me to a somewhat controversial example. A large part of why I am in something of a minority, and actually appreciate Bryan Singer's Superman Returns, is simply because it isn't shying away from being both an allegory for the fall of previous ideals, as well as a tribute to the Donner film. The very idea that Kal-El would not only be fallible, but in many ways irrelevant in a world that has left him behind is a bold, and often troubling one to consider for many. But this is perhaps the one thing that most captivated me while watching it for the first time in 2006. Much of the film's writing that rendered it confused in places took a backseat for me, and what stood out was an often poignant look at how America's ideals were now at a crucial point, and ready to change into something altogether different. Almost repeatedly, Superman's role in the film is either sideswiped by how the world around him has moved on, or is put second-fiddle to how even the mortal are in some ways empowered. The most telling of which is the James Marsden character of Richard White, son of Daily Planet chief, Perry. As the husband-to-be of Lois Lane, it is made clear that he is by no means considered any kind of one-dimensional romantic rival for Clark/Superman. In fact, he is by all accounts a good, honest man willing to go above and beyond for those he cares for. And when he takes his personal plane to rescue his would-be family, he even saves Kal-El, making the film's central theme that much more concrete. That much of what the former Depression-era-borne icon has inspired lives on beyond even his own function on Earth. There will always been room for him in the hearts of many, and yet he tragically remains an outsider, unchanging in a universe thriving on continuous change. It isn't the easiest pill for audiences to swallow. And even if the film can seem a bit mixed, and unsure of its own identity, there is a sincere enough thread to make it viable to current sensibilities if one is inclined to take a moment.

An example of an update that may look visually opulent in places, and yet never bothers to reach such ambitious heights (well, to be fair-most modern reinterpretations fall prey to this) is Tron Legacy. For a film so predisposed toward offering a more cutting-edge sheen to what was initially a wildly experimental universe rendered via extremely rudimentary(see crude) cel-based, as well as primitive CG in order to explore an entire computer based world, the 2010 film fails to acknowledge the vast rift of change to have come in the wake of our current existence via the internet, let alone digital tech. We can hide behind the excuses that the film was bankrolled with the intent that it was meant to speak to kids as well as adults, but it doesn't even acknowledge the current sophistication of children. In a generation post-REBOOT(the 1990s cg animated series), it is easy to see how much of a grandiose missed opportunity it was. To further take matters into intelligence-insulting levels, the film makes little to no effort to fill us in on how the cultural/evolutionary changes in technology have affected groups and individuals within the respective computer and human worlds. As an update of a film that not only tanked due to it being a little too new and subterranean for mainstream audiences back in 1982, Legacy never really bothers beyond vague concepts, and mysticism to deliver what is essentially a biblical metaphor sans subtlety, or even appreciation for human ingenuity. It's satisfied with just saying dad needs to step away from his work, and spend some time with the kids. And with 200 million dollars, and all the effects budget one can hope for, that isn't saying much at all.

More often than not, the latter is what tends to happen. The contradictions often pile on, as nostalgia colors what the public often wants out of their 2000s entertainment. And while there is some mild value in seeing certain worlds, types, and characters brought back to our collective consciousness, there is often a lingering set of doubts one must suppress in order for them to work in any modern context. Being a bit of a Nolan Batman fan myself, I also happen to be part of this problem when in many ways a multi-billionaire playboy seems to make little sense doing what he does, taking on criminals one at a time as Ducard once quipped. But then again, the fact that the films acknowledge this absurdity is part of what helps this interpretation work for me. The counterbalance of this kind of acknowledgement can work in studied measure. But more often than not, this is something that can only connect in certain measures or timbre. Which is why some creations can only remain within a certain time framework. (This has come about several times between friends and I regarding Superman only making truest sense taking place in Depression-era Metropolis. Such a period piece has a lot of potential.)

As is the potential for running the world of Sailor Moon in contrast with the current not-so-ideal vision of Japan today complete with economic turmoil, disaster, declining birth rates, and a general lack of spark, it would be very interesting to see how the characters would function in such a seemingly difficult environment. Especially where feminine roles have begun to shift, despite a seething amount of almost desperate (I take it back, it IS desperate) masculine backlash in popular art such as manga and anime. I suppose it is this contradiction that fascinates me about this idea. Not sure if it would be great, but it would most certainly be interesting to see it play out.

Personally, I enjoy the idea of entertaining previous ideals under pressure due to social and philosophical changes. It in many ways brings what we are becoming into focus, and perhaps even offers hints of where we can go from here. Mere longing for the past has never been a strong suit of mine, and when story can  
help visualize the folly and potential of our current selves, rather than merely admiring passively.

Batman: Under The Red Hood (2010) Review

Leave it to the folks at Warner Bros. Animation to heap on the goods when regarding their DC heroes. Especially when it comes to who is perhaps the enduring answer to the grounded superhero mythos, the Batman. Multiple universes have been explored, several major motion pictures, tv series, and comics renditions have been shared to great acclaim, and yet remains one of the few major tentpoles that can remain potent no matter the number of incarnations. Perhaps it is in the symbolism of Bruce Wayne's alter ego that is most integral to fan's cravings. So even if the world of Gotham City has been reinvented, and reinterpreted countless times, the respect for Bob Kane's classic characters remains at an all-time high. Even as the horrors of very real-world crime, and despair begin to encroach onto what was initially considered to be older children's fare, the ever vigilant Dark Knight detective is the material with which even adults grapple with in extraordinarily trying times.

So when the animators responsible for much of the last 20 years of Batman's adventures on television delve into one of the most controversial events in comic history, the result can either be a rousing success, or a flamebait mess waiting to happen, I'm love to say that it is in most ways the former. The daring Bruce Timm produced, Brandon Vietti directed Under The Red Hood is an adult, bleak, and astonishing new addition to the Batman mythology that helps put to rest wrongs on both sides of the page. In many ways a fascinating look into Batman tales of long past, smashed head on into the harsh realm that is the post-Nolan grit of recent years.

The story begins years prior as Batman is unable to save Jason Todd (aka Robin II) in Sarajevo, Bosnia from the ever monstrous Joker, who has been released reluctantly by none other than  Ra's al Ghul.(A story which many may recall being the backbone of one of DC's most infamous moments, 1988 -89's A Death In The Family, which crushingly allowed fans to call in to decide the fate of Batman's reckless second ward. Naturally, his death was a rare event not long forgotten by fans.) It is in this first, unsubtly brutal scene that establishes an entirely new , unflinching tone for the Batman animated franchise. Flash forward to now as the criminal element is quickly being noosed up by a red hooded vigilante with an ultimatum, to rethink their drug & weapon smuggling ways under threat of death. Gotham is familiar with the Red Hood persona, however the goals here seem to be out to control, and possibly eliminate Gotham's burgeoning new underworld. Even Batman is familiar with various versions of the Red Hood, but none of them were nearly as savage, or as thorough. He doesn't even seem to be a criminal, but rather the very shadow of what Batman has always been. A masked wraith, willing to kill to save the world. To go where even Batman fears to tread.

And as the detective along with the help of the ever reliable Nightwing (Dick Grayson, the original Robin), revelations are surely uncovered that will not only haunt Bruce's waking life, but scorch the city as he is run head on into the very nature of Batman's dogmatic codes of virtue. The pressure runs deeper as Gotham's reigning kingpin, Black Mask with increasing panic begins to consider taking a madman off the leash yet again in a last ditch effort to regain control (which many know is often the worst idea imaginable).

To go any further would be a disservice to another exceptional, yet very grown-up look at a mythological icon amidst a radically changing world. Adding punch to this motif, the newly minted cast while clearly feeling their way into such iconic roles, is rooted firmly into this hybrid mixture of Bat eras, and they are often terrific. Bruce Greenwood now dons the cape and cowl with a more internalized confidence that also nicely implies an aging, pain riddled Wayne. Neil Patrick Harris is a truly fun & grounded Dick Grayson, who offers some of the film's much needed levity to the often grim proceedings. Supernatural's Jensen Ackles' Red Hood is both assured, and appropriately tortured in a surprisingly effective performance where it counts. But the biggest transition award goes to John Dimaggio who's more east coast gangster approach to The Joker is startlingly different than his legendary predecessor. While this may sound like faint praise, there is a hugely menacing presence in this film that is integral to the film's finale, and Dimaggio delivers exactly what this version requires. This is a nasty, horrific take on the character that perhaps requires a little adjusting to but is strong in its own right.

Notable support comes from the voices of Jason Isaacs in the role of guilt-ridden crusader, Ra's al Ghul, as well as a fun turn by Kelly Hu as Black Mask's assistant.

It's been a wild ride for Warner Bros. Animation since Bruce Timm's original Batman:The Animated Series took to the airwaves, and Vietti's direction, featuring a script by Judd Winick attempts to merge multiple variations of the Batman universe into a cohesive whole, which naturally abandons sheer grit, and offers a more lyrical aproach to how dramatically their world has changed over the lifespan of the Dark Knight's endless crusade. From the garish innocence of robbing the local museum of modern art, to the scummy junk joints on the outskirts of town, the film features a look at the junction where the childlike wonder of the hero life soon becomes tainted by the desperation of those resilient to law & order. It's this element that takes on truly dark dimensions near the end of the piece where Batman must confront the very inconsistency that has haunted him from nearly the very beginning. Definitely an end result of the immense success of Christopher Nolan's live action films, Under The Red Hood continues to question the very nature of the self-made superhero, as well as the blurring balance between heroism & vigilanteism with relatively effective results.