Well, I didn't get to catch Speed Racer (too fast for me and they've already shoved it into the kids' slot daytime schedule here so there's no chance of catching a later screening, but I'll try for the weekend with a bunch of screaming kids!) last night, but I did see Iron Man!
Wow, who knew? I can see why the movie made the dough it did. It actually felt like a grown up superhero movie for "adults". Despite the usual formulaic heroics, I liked that they cast older in the film, as opposed to younger as in Superman so that the cast could grow with the franchise. By doing this (casting older), the franchise feels born ready, with the decent origin story well paced out and doing what it needed to do. I loved that in the original Superman, we don't see him until 53 minutes in...likewise here, it was a good long while before we were intro'd to Iron Man Mk I, and even that didn't really feel like a spoiler for when we meet the (proper) Mk II.
I liked more that Stark made his own stuff (okay, with a preposterous talking computer that could "render" stuff in titanium alloy...right) than just have him order it wholesale, like Bruce Wayne did in Batman Begins. The music score didn't do much for me, but it worked for what needed to be done. Thought the effects were pretty solid too, though I did see quite a few size comparison problems with the CG Iron Man, who wasn't always consistent.
Two things I wasn't sure about came right at the end: Stark's admitting that he was Iron Man doesn't really hold much identity crisis points for a follow-up, while the post-credit intro of Nick Fury kind of has me thinking that the series could get derailed into Avenger territory pretty quickly. I liked having Sam Jackson there, again instead of some younger unknown, but then again having Sam Jackson there felt <I>soooo</I> very 1990s!
A good little movie...pretty tight...but with limited room for scope? Watching the two iron men battle it out on the freeway during the climax I did feel that, "hey, we're about to watch the exact same shots very soon in another Marvel movie, when Hulk fights Abomination!"
Movies of 2008
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 1419
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Well first about his identity, at least with the Ultimate universe, Tony Stark doesn't keep his identity a secret. That's just the way he is and I love him for it. And Sam Jackson as Nick Fury is because in the Ultimates, they specifically drew Nick Fury to look like Sam Jackson so only he could play him if they ever had him in a movie. Obviously Jackson was more than willing to go along with that.Ben wrote:Two things I wasn't sure about came right at the end: Stark's admitting that he was Iron Man doesn't really hold much identity crisis points for a follow-up, while the post-credit intro of Nick Fury kind of has me thinking that the series could get derailed into Avenger territory pretty quickly. I liked having Sam Jackson there, again instead of some younger unknown, but then again having Sam Jackson there felt <I>soooo</I> very 1990s!
Basically, Iron Man is pretty much "ultimates" Iron Man, and it looks like that's what they're going to be doing with the rest of the Marvel movies from now on. Setting up an entire Ultimates universe but on the big screen which is really neat.
edit: And the talking super computer isn't that weird when you realize that Tony Stark is a super genius. He's one of the smartest, if not THE smartest, people in the world. I mean, he built a miniature arc reactor! The super computer isn't that far fetched.
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25589
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
So I had a couple of <I>really</I> annoying computer crashes and mis-renderings this afternoon and decided, while something was re-doing itself, to head out to Speed Racer.
Wow, who knew!?
I can see why the film is underperforming, but I got a big kick out of it. I was surprised by the amount of heart in it - reminding me of Meet The Robinsons in some ways, not least the circular "R" logo! - and there's a reason John Goodman is the <I>man</I> to pull off some of those lines he gets to say.
The visuals were great - so hyper real they <I>were</I> real. I didn't think the editing was any industry shaking innovation, though, as we've seen similar in Forrest Gump (you editors out there will know of what I speak) and Ang Lee's Hulk film. In fact, some of the continuous wiping going on here was a bit too much overkill, like they found a cool way of cutting something and then overused it.
I thought it was probably one race too long, too, and I've had possibly enjoyed the big, Wacky Races styled mountain race to be the capper, since the Grand Prix wasn't anything we hadn't seen earlier.
But it was all dolled up so nice: a pumping score from Giacchino which pushed all the right buttons, sounding equal parts 1960s espionage that he does so well and even with a healthy dose of Jerry Goldsmith in there. Colors popped off the screen, primary style, and it reminded me of what they were trying to do with Dick Tracy and probably could pull off better now with CG grading. Any "twists" could be seen coming from before the movie began, but it all played well.
I did notice the younger kids behind me were awfully fidgety, and it did feel like that odd kind of film that doesn't have a direct-hit audience - too silly for grown ups and too slow in parts for younger kids, even though the opening was like a movie version of ADD.
I was worried it was going to be too much of that, but it was very stylishly done, and Goodman, as noted, brought a lot of weight to it (no pun intended) that smoothed things out.
A very radical departure from anything the Warchowskis' have done before, Speed Racer might not have been the biggest hit whatever way you slice it, but it doesn't deserve to be branded a flop and is a lot of good clean fun.
<I>GO SPEED RACER GO!</I>
Wow, who knew!?
I can see why the film is underperforming, but I got a big kick out of it. I was surprised by the amount of heart in it - reminding me of Meet The Robinsons in some ways, not least the circular "R" logo! - and there's a reason John Goodman is the <I>man</I> to pull off some of those lines he gets to say.
The visuals were great - so hyper real they <I>were</I> real. I didn't think the editing was any industry shaking innovation, though, as we've seen similar in Forrest Gump (you editors out there will know of what I speak) and Ang Lee's Hulk film. In fact, some of the continuous wiping going on here was a bit too much overkill, like they found a cool way of cutting something and then overused it.
I thought it was probably one race too long, too, and I've had possibly enjoyed the big, Wacky Races styled mountain race to be the capper, since the Grand Prix wasn't anything we hadn't seen earlier.
But it was all dolled up so nice: a pumping score from Giacchino which pushed all the right buttons, sounding equal parts 1960s espionage that he does so well and even with a healthy dose of Jerry Goldsmith in there. Colors popped off the screen, primary style, and it reminded me of what they were trying to do with Dick Tracy and probably could pull off better now with CG grading. Any "twists" could be seen coming from before the movie began, but it all played well.
I did notice the younger kids behind me were awfully fidgety, and it did feel like that odd kind of film that doesn't have a direct-hit audience - too silly for grown ups and too slow in parts for younger kids, even though the opening was like a movie version of ADD.
I was worried it was going to be too much of that, but it was very stylishly done, and Goodman, as noted, brought a lot of weight to it (no pun intended) that smoothed things out.
A very radical departure from anything the Warchowskis' have done before, Speed Racer might not have been the biggest hit whatever way you slice it, but it doesn't deserve to be branded a flop and is a lot of good clean fun.
<I>GO SPEED RACER GO!</I>
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 8263
- Joined: October 16th, 2004
- Location: Orlando
- Contact:
Macaluso wrote:if by universally despised you mean universally despised in the world of GeorgeC than I suppose that'd be correctGeorgeC wrote:Iron Man's good... Surprisingly good, and much better than the Iron Man comic book has been in at least 15 years! Robert Downey, Jr. is likeable as Tony Stark unlike today's almost universally despised Marvel comic book counterpart. The current Marvel EIC ought to be tarred and feathered for what he allowed to happen to the printed page counterpart.
Somebody did their research and found a way to make the Iron Man character work again!
Mac,
You obviously don't get out very much and talk to people who read comics.
Iron Man (the original comic book version) has never been this despised in the whole time I've read comics. Iron Man was never Marvel's most popular character, but he was generally liked as was Captain America and most of the classic Avengers. Marvel had to work overtime to make the character as unlikeable as he is now. Civil War was a colossal disaster for this character and many others at Marvel. Marvel might be reaping some short-term sales benefits from this shlock but the long-term after-effects are still working their way through. That's not just my reaction. It's the reaction of thousands of people who actually read comics.
While some people actually like this shlock, I've spoken to people who were spending close to $200 a month on comics who dropped most of what they were buying because they got upset over the editorial direction Marvel was taking. It's very likely those readers are gone forever. There aren't people (re: kids) coming in to replace the turnover of readers. That just hasn't happened for at least 15 years now. And both Marvel and DC (and the industry in general) are reaping the consequences of the stunts they pulled in the 1990s. And they still haven't learned from that experience.
The guys who made the film also read the comics but thankfully they went back to the late 1970s and 1980s period when Iron Man was actually written well and a very likeable character.
That's what's so sorely missing in comics today. Likeable characters and entertainment. Grim and gritty ought to be shoved to the side and not be the day-in, day-out standard for the medium. It's been done to death and driven more than a few people away from what used to be called "funny books." There's no "fun" in "grim."
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 347
- Joined: May 25th, 2007
- Location: Silicon Valley
- Contact:
Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor does not look promising, especially coming from Rob Cohen. What's really amazing about it, though, is the ridiculously butt-kissing comments on Cohen's official site. In a tribute to Jaws, I suspect that most sane people will react to these comments in one of three ways:
Hooper: Laugh uncontrollably in falsetto, causing you to spill the coffee in your styrofoam cup.
Brody: Yell at the computer screen, "YOU'RE CERTIFIABLE!"
Quint: Put an ax through the computer while singing "Ladies of Spain."
As a side note, RIP Robert Shaw and Roy Scheider.
Hooper: Laugh uncontrollably in falsetto, causing you to spill the coffee in your styrofoam cup.
Brody: Yell at the computer screen, "YOU'RE CERTIFIABLE!"
Quint: Put an ax through the computer while singing "Ladies of Spain."
As a side note, RIP Robert Shaw and Roy Scheider.
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 10059
- Joined: September 1st, 2006
Wow, have you guys heard of Distaster Movie? I just now learnt of it, and it sounds horrible! 
Although, I am intrigued of how The Simpsons Movie will be spoofed - live action or crudely drawn animation? Here's an early look at the logo, which differs from the Wiki one.
Although, I am intrigued of how The Simpsons Movie will be spoofed - live action or crudely drawn animation? Here's an early look at the logo, which differs from the Wiki one.