The Movie Blog

Top 10 Villains Of The Summer 2008

Features - by John - September 3, 2008 - 10:20 America/Montreal - 61 Comments

Great bad guys make great movies. A compelling villain can make or save an average movie and make a good movie great. This summer hasn’t had the richest crop of great screen villains, but there certainly were a few notable ones. So now I present to you The Movie Blog’s top 10 villains of the Summer of 2008. (Remember, this isn’t a list of the best movies or best actors, just the best villains)

#1 - JOKER (THE DARK KNIGHT) No doubts. No debate. No close calls and no chance of error. Heath Ledger’s Joker was the crown jewel in this year’s biggest box office movie. Without question Ledger will at the very least get an Oscar nomination (it’s too early to say if he deserves to win or not since there are a lot of movies still to come out this year) and in my opinion was the best comic book movie villain of all time.

#2 - PRINCE NUADA (HELLBOY 2) There is something extra terrifying about villains who believe they are on the side of right. Who believe their cause is just and noble. Prince Nuada had that plus other attributes that make a great bad guy. He could kick your ass and is frighteningly intelligent. Every second he was on screen was great stuff. Too bad he wasn’t in it more.

#3 - TAI LUNG (KUNG FU PANDA) This was one of those movies that totally surprised me. Yes, I expected cute characters with witty little one liners, but what elevated all of that was a legitimately scary and frightening threat… the bad guy of the film Tai Lung. Smooth and slick, beautifully designed and perfectly voiced… Tai Lung almost seemed like he belonged in a more adult film.

#4 - CHUCK “THE TRUCK” WALLANCE (THE FOOT FIST WAY) Differnt types of movies call for difference types of villains. In a movie like The Foot Fist Way, a guy like Chuck “The Truck” Wallace was exactly the type of character you needed. Slimy, dirty, underhanded… and yet hilarious at the same time. He was the best part of this movie.

#5 - EMIL BLONSKY (INCREDIBLE HULK) Even though I appreciated the first Hulk movie for what it was, it was universally agreed upon that one of its biggest weaknesses was the horrible villain… phantom Nolte. If this new Hulk film did nothing else except upgrade the bad guy, it would have been a 25% better movie. Upgrade the bad guy they DID! Even before he become Abomination, Blonsky was a formidable character. Driven. Dangerous and focused. A huge step up from the Hulk daddy of the first film.

#6 - MAHOGANY (MIDNIGHT MEAT TRAIN) This is a great example of what a solid villain can do for your movie. I personally ended up not enjoying Midnight Meat Train all that much… but without Mahogany the film would have totally sucked. This character alone nearly makes the movie passable. He’s silent, never speaks a word in the movie… and yet that does nothing but add to the creepiness of his presence. Had the film been a bit better, you could have built a franchise around this guy… he could have been the new Jason.

#7 - TED JONES (PINAPPLE EXPRESS) Once again, in a film like Pineapple Express you need a slighly different kind of villain. Has to be legitimately intimidating, but ridiculous at the same time. King dope dealer Ted Jones (how perfect is that name for him!!??!) fit the bill perfectly. Every scene he had he spouted something hilarious, and yet you never doubted he’d kill you in a split second if you inconvenienced him in the slightest way

#8 - SLOAN (WANTED) Just the fact that Morgan Freeman rules is enough to make this character great… but there was a lot more to Sloan that just the actor reciting his lines. The caretaker of a thousand year old fraternity of assassins, cunning, well educated and brilliant. Calm in demeanor and cold in his goals… this is one guy you don’t want to mess with

#9 - KING MIRAZ (PRINCE CASPIAN) King Miraz, a man who killed his own brother to take the throne of Narnia is a cold, calculating strategist who manipulates and deceives to achieve his ends. But as decent as he was, this is another example of when the villain can either make your franchise better or worse. The last Narnia film had the White Queen, who was just amazing. Poor King Miraz could live up to that villain, and so Prince Caspian as a whole couldn’t live up to The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe.

#10 - OBADIAH STANE (IRON MAN) Stane was a nice little villain and served the film well… up until he became Iron Monger, then he got a silly over the top and silly. Still, up to that point Jeff Bridges served the film well. But here’s the thing, and I know I’ll take a lot of heat for this BUT I STAND BY THIS: If you just switched villains between Iron Man and The Dark Knight… Iron Man instantly becomes the better movie of the two. That’s how much power the villain has in a movie.

So there you have it. Like I said, it wasn’t the best summer for villains, but man there were a couple of sweet ones. Which ones would you knock off that list (if you knock one off, you’ve got to suggest who should take his place). Which villain did I forget about that you think deserves a spot on there?

Does Nudity In Movies Matter Anymore?

Features - by John - August 28, 2008 - 10:54 America/Montreal - 55 Comments

Knockers. Boobies. Tits. Canons. Mounts of Olympus. Jugs. Mounds of Joy. Ta Tas. Melons. Nipple Holders. Breasts. Lovely Lady Lumps. Baby Feeders. Bazookas. Cans. Cupcakes. Rack. Milkshakes. Hooters. Fun Bags.

Yes, young teen and pre-teen boys are so obsessed with women and their breasts that over the years we’ve come up with literally hundreds of slang phrases and variations of those phrases. That’s just how much we think about them. All the time. Non stop. It’s sad. It’s pathetic and juvenile, but the cold hard fact is that it’s also nature… and if women didn’t know that, they wouldn’t wear push up bras with low cut shirts. But that’s a rant for another blog.

Yes, our adolescent preoccupation with “boobs” doesn’t end in our teen years either. As we get older, some of us men just learn to mask and hide our genetic fixation and act more civil about it… but make no mistake about it my friends, it is still very much there and still very much alive, and any man who says otherwise is either A) Living out an alternative lifestyle, or B) LYING THROUGH HIS LYING TEETH OF LIES!!!

If you’re a woman, and you’re having a face to face conversation with a man… trust me… the moment you look away at something, he’s checking out the boob meat. A skillful man will let his eyes feast just long enough that he can get his eyes lined back up with yours just before you turn your attention back to him. In some respects, we are ninjas that way.

We aren’t objectifying you. We aren’t disrespecting you and we certainly aren’t belittling you. You simply have something we love, fixate on and are genetically driven to desire… and as kids, the only way most of us would get a chance to see the object of our desire was in movies.

Yes, for many of us, movies (not porn, just the regular ones) were our gateway, our conduit if you will to the wonderful world of nudity. Yes, the benevolent magical porn elves of the forest would sometimes leave dirty magazines around for us to find in the woods, but for the most part, regular movies held the potential to show us that thing we infatuated about the most… naked women. Yes yes yes, I understand how pathetic that sounds, but it is what it is.

I still remember my first “exposure” to a movie with nudity. I was 11 or 12 and I saw “Police Academy”. I was already in love with movies by that age because of Star Wars, but I was about to discover a whole new purpose for movies… to show me boobies! What man among us didn’t fantasize about Callahan at some point?

But now let me fast forward 20 or so years. It’s now 2008. The internet is here. As full grown men all of us have seen “boobies” in real life. Full blown porn is available to us for free… anytime… 24/7. We no longer need a Hollywood movie to provide us with images of naked women, because we can get that just about anywhere any time. And yet… we still obsess about it.

I’ll be honest, the main reason most men (including myself) had any sort of anticipation level about the new Woody Allen film “Vicky Christina Barcelona” was because we heard last year that there was going to be a threesome in it involving Penelope Cruz and Scarlett Johansson. Just look around the interweb, and that’s the part everyone was talking about.

This week a new 80’s style comedy flick called “College” is opening up. The main draw of the film is that it promises nudity and sex (and hopefully it’ll be funny too). But the reality is that if I’m dying to look at some nudity or sex, I don’t have to wait till Friday, drive the the movie theater and pay $12 to get in to see it while surrounded by hundreds of other people. If nudity and sex are what I’m looking for, I don’t need the movies at all anymore.

So why do some of us still give any weight or importance to the idea of nudity in film as a drawing point, if nudity and sex are available 24/7? Why do some studios still rely on it as a selling point? Even kids today don’t need the magical porn elves of the forest anymore. Watching the scrambled channels late at night in hopes of a fraction of a second of clarity on a nipple is a thing of the past.

I’m not talking about artistic nudity, like Viggo Mortensen in “Eastern Promises” fighting nude in the steam room. That made sense. It had a purpose other than trying to be sexually titillating. Sexually titillating scenes can also serve a purpose and the story at times when used right. No, what I’m talking about is gratuitous nudity for it’s own sake just as a selling feature. Does it matter anymore?

So let me ask you this. AND BE HONEST… we all know that the promise of nudity in a movie USED TO appeal to you a great deal, but does it anymore? Does the free availability of nudity on the web, or age or maturity negate the draw of sex in a movie for you? If it still holds some drawing power for you (I admit that it did for me a little with the “Vicky Christina Barcelona” example), why do you think that is?

All Time Biggest Box Office Draw Movies

Features, News Chat - by John - August 26, 2008 - 10:37 America/Montreal - 85 Comments

There has been a lot of talk lately about the biggest box office movies of all time due to the insane amounts of money that The Dark Knight has been raking in at the box office. The film will reach $500 million domestically, which will make it the #2 all time money making movie just behind Titanic.

However to me, when talking in the context of “all time” box office success, the dollar amounts don’t really mean all that much to me because the cost of tickets changes drastically over time. Imagine if there was a time when making a basket in basketball only counted as 1 point instead of 2. If you tried to compare between a modern player and one from the “1 point per basket” era in terms of who was the best at making baskets, looking at points would be irrelevant. You would instead look at the number of baskets each player made, not the number of points.

Thus, when looking at “all time” box office success and trying to compare films from radically different eras, it’s pointless to compare dollar amounts. The best gauge is instead to look at tickets sold. How many people bought tickets to see that movie?

So even though “The Dark Knight” is now #2 all time in the MONEY department… how does it stand up all time against other movies if it didn’t have the advantage of higher inflation ticket prices? Would it still be #2? Would it drop down to #5 or #6? Actually, if you measured movies all time by how many people actually went to the movie theater and bought tickets to see it… then “The Dark Knight” would currently only sit at #35 all time. In other words, if all the movies ever made all sold their tickets for the exact same price, The Dark Knight would be the #35 all time box office movie.

So here is your list of the all time box office champions:

Name That Torso # 11

Features - by Doug - August 25, 2008 - 14:42 America/Montreal - 38 Comments

Last week’s correct answer was Tim Burtons Ex Lisa Marie!

And now the game continues with the eleventh installment of NAME THAT TORSO!

The answer will be revealed next Monday. The winner will have bragging rights and garner international respect!

****RULE #1 **** If you find the picture online, please don’t post the link and ruin the game for others *****

****RULE #2 **** NAME THAT TORSO!

The Movie Blog’s Top 20 Sequels Of All Time

Favorites, Features - by John - August 25, 2008 - 13:11 America/Montreal - 147 Comments

Last week a viewer sent in a question for us on “The Movie Blog: Uncut” show asking about sequels that were better than the originals (a very rare thing). That got me to thinking about what I consider to be the greatest sequels ever. After seeing my friend Brad over at RopeOfSilicon do his 10 best sequels list today, I thought I should throw mine up too.

If nothing else, the films on this list are a testament that sequels can be a great thing. Often people (me included sometimes) will moan and complain when they hear about a sequel coming out… saying there’s no creativity left in Hollywood and that they’re all terrible and just cash grabs. Well, I’m glad studios don’t listen to that sort of talk, because if they did, none of the magnificent films on this list would exist.

Remember, all lists are totally subjective and no 2 lists will look exactly alike. Having said that, I now present for your consideration and debate, The Movie Blog’s Top 20 Sequels:

#1 - LORD OF THE RINGS: RETURN OF THE KING The movie holding the record for the most Oscars (11) is still what I consider to be the greatest overall achievement in cinematic history. When you consider all the film making elements of cinematography, acting, art direction, visual effects, music, direction, story, no film in history has brought them all together in a package as nearly perfect as The Return of the King. An incredible ending to only the second trilogy in history to have all three of its films nominated for Best Picture.

#2 - THE GODFATHER PART 2 More than just an amazing story, The Godfather Part 2’s real genius was in how director Francis Ford Coppola told the story. Disconnecting the linear timeline and in essence telling two separate stories book ending the time frame of the first Godfather movie. Many will argue (understandably so) that this should be #1, and I can respect that because the film is just so flat out amazing. Still, for me part 1 is still the best of the franchise. One of the best, most tragic and haunting endings to any film in history. (The other trilogy to have all 3 films nominated for best picture)

#3 - RETURN OF THE JEDI Like many many many other people out there, I’m a certified Star Wars freak (only of the original trilogy, otherwise Star Wars is dead to me now), but unlike most others, I actually think Return of the Jedi was just a little bit better than Empire. As you can see below, I think both were magnificent, but to me Jedi had something extra that’s hard to define. The Vader/Skywalker battle in the Emperor’s throne room and the music that accompanied it is one of my favorite single scenes in film history. Not to mention the greatest space battle scene in movie history that STILL hasn’t been beat.

#4 - THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK Sweet hotness! I still remember as a little kid seeing Empire for the first time. I thought I was going to wet myself when we saw the Star Destroyer for the first time shooting out the probe droids. I definite darker tone than the others in the franchise made for maybe the best dramatic storytelling in the franchise. And today, with all the M. Night Shamhammers running around it’s hard to appreciate a good “twist” anymore… but man, back in the day Darth Vader telling Luke he was his father was MIND BLOWING! I still remember as a kid wondering how Grover because a Jedi on some swamp world.

#5 - INFERNAL AFFAIRS 2 To this day my favorite cop movie of all time is the original Infernal Affairs (which as some people still don’t know is what the 2007 Best Picture winning film “The Departed” is a remake of), and yet Infernal Affairs 2 just might be even better. Filled with twists and revelations, the movie is a prequel to the original with many of the key cast returning and younger versions of some of the original cast filling in the gaps. A completely killer film.

#6 - INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE This is actually my favorite film of the entire franchise. One would think it impossible to meet or top the achievements of the Indiana Jones films at that time, and yet somehow Lucas and Spielberg found a way. Brining on Sean Connery to play Indy’s father is probably one of the best celebrity additions to a franchise ever. The chemistry between Ford and Connery was fantastic and carried much of the charm of the film. Funny, exciting and everything else you’ve come to expect an Indiana Jones movie to be (minus the nuclear fridge).

#7 - TOY STORY 2 The funniest thing about Toy Story 2 was that it was originally supposed to be a straight to video sequel, and that at some point the execs looked at it again and said “holy crap… this is actually turning out really well. Let’s release it in theaters!”. It’s a damn good thing they did. Not only did the film make nearly $500 million world wide, it is the only wide release film to hold a perfect 100% on Rotten Tomatoes as well.

#8 - THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS Following the amazing achievement of Fellowship of the Ring (a LOT of people expected that movie to suck) people were bracing themselves for a let down. “The first one was a fluke” I heard more than one person say. Even I thought the franchise had nowhere to go but down. Wow was I wrong! The Battle at Helm’s Deep stands as one of my favorite battle scenes in history as the story of the ring got deeper and better. Many felt this film was robbed of the best picture Oscar… I’m one of them.

#9 - ALIENS Where the first Alien film leaned more towards being a Sci-Fi suspense film in many ways, the second burst into a different direction as a balls to the wall action film. The film is just loaded with memorable scenes and fantastic one liners (”Game over man”). It was the first action film I’d ever seen that I could literally say had me on the edge of my seat the entire time. The film will hold up forever.

#10 - X-MEN 2 The first X-Men movie single handedly resurrected the superhero genre movie after Batman Nipple Lord vs Austrian Ice Ham” nearly single handedly killed it several years earlier. X-Men 2 took it up a notch. Right from the incredible opening scene with Nightcrawler breaking into the White House to the end where we catch our first glimpse of he Phoenix (that only fans of the comic book recognized and freaked out over when the fiery shape came on the screen), X-Men 2 redefined just how good Comic Book movies could be. To this day it’s still my favorite Comic Book movie.

#11 - TERMINATOR: JUDGEMENT DAY Who among us didn’t thing the new liquid Terminator was the damn coolest thing we’d ever seen when this movie first came out. But the T-1000 wasn’t just cool visual effects. The cold passionless killer that Robert Patrick gave us was also one of the scariest things my teenage eyes had ever seen. Damn that guy gave me nightmares. The story was excellent, Linda Hamilton just ruled (I still think Cameron is a bloody idiot for cheating on that woman) and seeing the Arnold Terminator as a GOOD guy was fun too.

#12 - THE DARK KNIGHT Director Christopher Nolan did what many people thought couldn’t be done… he topped his own Batman Begins with a film broader in scope, deeper in story, more exciting in action all topped off with a classic villain given new incredible life by the single greatest performance ever in the history of comic book movies. The Dark Knight, while not perfect, delivered everything a Batman fan could have hoped for to send them home happy. The movie struck an obivous chord with comic and non comic book fans alike, quickly becoming the second highest grossing film (not counting inflation) in history.

#13 - CLERKS 2 To many people Kevin Smith and his films are an acquired taste. To be honest, as much of a fan that I am of Smith, I’m not actually that thrilled with many of his films. Having said that, I honestly think Clerks 2 is one of the sharpest, funniest and yes smartest comedies I’ve seen in a long long time. Smith shows he’s more than just fart and fuck jokes. Clerks 2 has so much heart to it that many people miss. Real issues struggled with by a lot of people entering their mid 30’s, issues of friendship, home, belonging, dreams, all dealt with within the context of Smith’s edgy humor. I unapologetically love this movie

#14 - STAR TREK 2: THE WRATH OF KHAN The first Star Trek film just blew chunks of refuse, so to many at the time a follow up film was a bit of a surprise. However, the idea behind the film was nothing short of pure genius. Going back and directly making the movie a sequel to AN INDIVIDUAL EPISODE of the TV show was a move that save the franchise. Ricardo Montalban instantly became one of the greatest villains in movie history reprising the role of Khan. If you didn’t feel the blood rushing through your veins when Khan quotes “To the last, I will grapple with thee. From hell’s heart, I stab at thee. For hate’s sake, I spit my last breath at thee” then you are totally dead inside.

#15 - SPIDER-MAN 2 I nearly lost my mind the first time I saw this flick. Just about everything a Comic Book movie should be. Great visual effects, terrific action, loads of wild cheer moments, fun, funny and character who stick surprisingly well with the spirit of their comic book counterparts. Tragically overlooked in this film whenever it’s discussed is the performance of Alfred Molina as Doc Ock who brought that extra dimension to the film that Spider-Man 1 (as good as it was) missed. Such a shame Spider-Man 3 went completely to shit.

#16 - ROCKY 2 The original Rocky (which I know most people these days haven’t seen) was a different kind of sports movie. It was more about the character and his story than the sport. Rocky 2 began to float more towards the “action” elements that the franchise would become known for, but at the heart of it was still this terrific character… Rocky Balboa. How this simple guy went from nothing to celebrity status, how it effected himself, the relationships in his life and his dreams. One of the most electrifying ends to a movie ever.

#17 - ARMY OF DARKNESS I understand that most people feel that if you’re going to put an “Evil Dead” movie on this list, then Evil Dead 2 should be the one to get the nod. Sorry, but to me Army Of Darkness is the king of the franchise and always will be. Perhaps no film in history has ever been as purely quotable as this cult classic. As a matter of fact, a lot of the most famous quotes in various movies and video games were all direct rips rips from Army Of Darkness. It’s the movie that elevated Bruce Campbell to god status who now dwells in the halls of the immortals.

#18 - STAR TREK 4: THE VOYAGE HOME Ok, if I were a movie studio executive back in 1984 and some guy came into my office with an idea for a new Star Trek movie that focused on the crew of the Enterprise going back in time on earth to the 1980’s, looking like hippies and on a mission to save the whales, I would have thrown that dude out of my office and fired him on the spot. I guess sometimes the dumbest sounding ideas can be executed in such a way to make a classic. This movie is just so damn charming and fun. Scotty trying to talk to the 1980’s computer is a classic scene! “Oh, a keybord. How quaint”.

#19 - SHREK 2 The first Shrek film was pretty good, but there was something about the sequel that will always give it a special place in my heart. Blatant pop culture reference jokes rarely hit with me, but for some reason they way the material was handled in Shrek 2 had me grinning, giggling and laughing pretty much the whole way through the movie. Puss In Boots was a great addition to the cast of characters and that musical number of “I need a hero” near the end still gets my heart thumping. Like Spider-Man 2 however, it’s a shame the next film was total garbage.

#20 - DIE HARD 3 Kind of like the Army of Darkness pick, there will be many out there who will feel that Die Hard 2 deserves the place on this list. However, to performance of Jeremy Irons, the heist plot and the chemistry between Bruce Willis and Samuel L Jackson pushed this one over the top. Come to think of it, in terms of just the “heist” portion of the film… it may be one of my favorite heist movies ever. The plan was so freaking great!

So there you have it folks. Like I mentioned at the beginning, all film is subjective and no 2 lists will look exactly alike, so I’m sure that even if you love or hate my list, there are things you agree or disagree with. What would your list look like? Which films would you put on there that I left off? Which ones would you boot off? (just so you know, I amended this list to include Clerks 2 which I originally forgot to add).

Name That Torso # 10

Features - by Doug - August 20, 2008 - 15:07 America/Montreal - 23 Comments

Last week’s correct answer was Djimon Hounsou!

And now the game continues with the tenth installment of NAME THAT TORSO!

The answer will be revealed next Monday. The winner will have bragging rights and garner international respect!

****RULE #1 **** If you find the picture online, please don’t post the link and ruin the game for others *****

****RULE #2 **** NAME THAT TORSO!

R.I.P. Star Wars Obsession 1977-2008

Features - by John - August 19, 2008 - 12:42 America/Montreal - 101 Comments

It has been said that all good things must come to an end and those words throughout the ages have always been proven true. The best one can hope for is when something “good” approaches its end, it gets the chance to go out in a blaze of glory. The hope that it will be allowed to go out on top, to exit the stage in its finest form and to leave us all wanting more and lamenting its finish.

Sometimes things work out that way, but other times they don’t. Often something “good” slowly starts to degrade. It erodes upon itself, still clinging to past visions of greater glory in a deluded self perception of continued relevance. It leaves the rest of us with no other recourse other than to stand around its proverbial death bed and watch its flame finally extinguish as nothing but a shell of its former self.

These sad events can often be seen as a company existing long past its usefulness (can you believe Friendster is still around?), professional athletes that play long past their prime… and for me, worst of all and the most tragic of all the examples… when a beloved movie franchise turns itself into a laughing stock, loses all touch with its true fan base and finally becomes so bad that even the most die hard and loyal supporters of the franchise are forced to look in the mirror and acknowledge that the glory is gone, and accept the beloved object of their fandom is dead.

As a life long Star Wars fanatic I had to face the facts and finally say the words. STAR WARS IS DEAD, AND MY OBSESSION HAS DIED WITH IT.

And I’m not alone. Around the world the great masses of former Star Wars legions spoke loudly with their silence this weekend. A new Star Wars movie opened (granted, it was animated which accounts for a little bit) this past weekend and pulled in numbers so low I had to pinch myself. A Star Wars movie… had an opening weekend of UNDER $15 million.

To all those who would try to rush to defend those number with excuses ranging from “this was a kids movie”, or “it’s only because it was an animated film” or worst of all “You just don’t get it”… I ask this question: If this EXACT movie had been released 10 years ago… do you think it’s even possible that it would have made a dollar less than $50 million opening weekend? Not a chance!

So what happened?

Return of the Jedi ended the original trilogy in magnificent fashion. The most dramatically brilliant lightsaber duel between Luke and Vader in the Emperor’s throne room set to a musical score that will live forever, the single greatest space battle scene in the history of film or television and the perfect completion of Darth Vader. It was brilliant, it was awe inspiring, it was legendary, it was a trilogy of near perfection. It left us satisfied, it left us cheering and the only sadness that came from it was the knowledge that it was over. Film would never be the same again.

The downfall of the franchise has been discussed, debated and argued extensively, but some points warrant some repeating.

The Phantom Menace started right… and everything was going fine until… until that moment… that pivotal moment that changed everything and forever shook the fans faith in George Lucas forever. JAR… JAR… BINKS!

It signaled the beginning of the end, and that Lucas had lost both his way and his touch with reality. His idea was to make something that little kids would love. Here’s the problem that has resonated throughout the Star Wars franchise ever since… there is a huge difference between making a character that kids will ALSO like, and making a character SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED JUST FOR LITTLE KIDS. When you take a character designed just for little kids and drop his into the middle of a franchise that was NOT meant exclusively for little kids, you spoil the soup and ruin the taste of all the other ingredients. And that’s what Jar Jar, and George did.

But being the faithful Star Wars fan that I was, I continually held out hope that the next one would be better. Somehow, Lucas would right the ship and get the Star Wars universe back on track and revive the former glory of the franchise. Yes, Phantom, Attack of the Clone and Revenge of the Sith all had elements that were good, certain scenes that stood out… but as a whole the essence of the franchise had been irreparably changed and damaged.

Star Wars had always been something that all ages could enjoy. Both kids and adults could adore R2-D2, we could all be scared of the Rancor, we all dropped our jaw at the size of the Death Star and kids and adults alike could agree that Darth Vader was the greatest character in all of fiction! But with Phantom and Jar Jar, that all changed. Now children were the target demographic. Fart jokes “Pee-UU-Sa” and cultural puns “Esqqueeeze Me” were now the norm.

Even as we got to Revenge of the Sith, the scenes that could have been really poignant and dramatically stirring were sanitized and dumbed down.

After Revenge of the Sith, although my favorite of the new prequels, something died in me. The naive optimism that still existed in me was extinguished… but I didn’t know it, and it took me a couple of years and the release of the new Clone Wars to discover it (as I sort of posted about the day I was heading to the premiere of Clone Wars). It was true, my Star Wars obsession, and fandom, had died. It died a slow, painful, humiliating death.

Seeing Clone Wars was the last nail in the coffin. Yes the action was great… but it was empty action whose enjoyment had nothing to do with the fact that it was a Star Wars movie. Clone Wars was the last gasp of life in the franchise as it gave itself over totally to the dark side (becoming nothing but a little kids franchise dropped into the continuity of an all ages franchise).

Ahsoka Tano, the annoying little orange Jedi Padawn who replaced Jar Jar’s “Pee-UU-sa” with calling Anakin Skywalker (her Jedi Master) “Sky-Guy” and R2 “R2 Two-ie” is the true heir the the mantel of franchise killer once held by Jar Jar. Yes, Ahsoka is the new Jar Jar, only worse… because there is no tiny grey area with her… she is 100% and unapologetically a WB kids show character aimed directly at children.

It was the final nail in the coffin, the nuking of the fridge and the jumping of the shark all rolled into one and confirmed the already existing truth. Star Wars was dead, and actually had been for a few years already and now there’s really nothing left to do but start the grieving process and begin to accept it.

So good bye Star Wars universe. You were a critical part of my life for almost as long as I’ve been alive. You helped shape my imagination, you made me fall in love with movies, you influenced the movie industry like very few other movies had and above all you entertained me more than any other property in the entertainment industry. It breaks my heart to see what you have become, and I’ve tried to be a faithful fan… but you’ve been unfaithful to me and the rest of us. Good bye, fare thee well and may the force be with you.

Why Do Some People Hate Remakes?

Features - by John - August 15, 2008 - 13:11 America/Montreal - 51 Comments

Every year they make up a certain percentage of the films that get released, and every time one of them gets announced a lot of people get upset. Remakes. Films that have already been made that some studio decides for one reason or another to make again.

You can’t really blame a lot of people for rolling their eyes when the possibility of a remake gets brought up. After all, the roster of remakes is filled with movies that deserve to be on the dirty end of used toilet paper. I mean with crap like:

-The Invasion (remake of invasion of the Body Snatchers)
-Poseidon (remake of the ‘Poseidon Adventure)
-The Fog (Single Handedly killed the potential movie career of Tom Welling)
-Planet of the Apes (reason #154 of why I don’t like Tim Burton)
-101 Dalmatians
-Godzilla (I like Matthew Broderick and all, but why was he in this?)
-When a Stranger Calls
-The Wicker Man (To be fair, the original sucked ass too)
-The Pink Panther (Steve Martin what are you doing?!?!)-

And many many more. As a matter of fact, even more remakes are on the boards at every studio in Hollywood. Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street for example are being developed for remakes as we speak as are dozens of others.

Now let’s balance this out. There are good remakes out there. Sabrina (hugely underrated film in my opinion), Ocean’s 11 is 10x better than the original, Scareface and a bunch of others.

So while I understand a sense of apprehension many people feel when hearing about a movie getting remade (look again at that bad list above), I’ve never understood the almost militant attitude some people have about the whole notion of remakes. Here are some arguments some people make against remakes:

A) THERE IS NO CREATIVITY LEFT IN HOLLYWOOD

Without fail, whenever I post about a remake going into production, at least one person will make some variation of the comment “There isn’t any creativity left in Hollywood”. To me, this is a ridiculous statement for a couple of reasons:

1) Source Material
Lots of movies are based on other source material. In that sense, remaking a film isn’t as different as you think from making a movie based on a book, or making a movie based on a video game, or making a movie based on a comic book (why aren’t all these people complaining how making The Dark Knight was just a lazy thing to do by a Hollywood that’s run out of creativity?)

2) Adaptation is HARD
I know a lot of screenwriters, and a many of them tell me that adapting a piece of work can actually be more difficult creatively than doing something from scratch. Doing a totally original work presents no boundaries to you. You’re free to go or do whatever you want, and so running into obstacles is no big deal because you have a million options. However with adaptations, you’re forced to think more creatively because there is an existing framework you need to stay within. I’m not saying adaptations are BETTER, I’m just pointing out that creatively adaptations can be even more challenging.

3) There Have Always Been Adaptations
For as long as the movies have been around, a certain number of them have been adaptations of other works or even remakes. YES there are more remakes and adaptations today than ever before… but that doesn’t really mean anything because there are more movies in general put out every year than ever before… almost triple the amount from just 13 years ago. I would argue that while there are more remakes today, the proportion is still probably about the same.

So there goes the argument of creativity.

B) IT RUINS THE ORIGINAL

I hear this one all the time and to this day I have no idea what they’re talking about. It’s almost as if they believe that if Uwe Boll decides to do a remake of Sparticus, somehow Kirk Douglas’ performance in the original will mystically become wooden. Somehow the original masterpiece will melt on DVD store shelves everywhere and all we’ll be left with is the Boll rendition. The fact of the matter is that if Boll does a Sparticus remake and it sucks… I STILL HAVE THE ORIGINAL! The original hasn’t been touched or soiled or sullied or “ruined” in any way shape or form. As a matter of fact, a remake will get people talking about the original again and maybe even influence more people to check out one of the best films ever made that they never would have thought about had the remake not come along.

The only exception to my argument is when George Lucas comes along and actually starts changing the originals… but that’s a blood thirsty rant for another time.

C) REMAKES ALWAYS SUCK

No, as a matter of fact they don’t. As I already mentioned, Ocean’s 11 is better in every way from the original, Sabrina just ruled, where would cinema be today without Al Pacino’s Scarface? But there are other notable ones too. Cape Fear was fantastic and is underrated for how much it has influence a lot of cinema today, Dawn of the Dead is considered by many to be superior to the original. The Fly rocked and I don’t care who says different! The point here is that remakes can and have worked.

Now… do the majority of remakes suck? YES! They absolutely do. But guess what… the majority of movies that get released in general suck, so why should remakes be any different?

Look, I’m not saying we should all jump up and down in an enthusiastic happy dance whenever yet another remake gets announced (For the record, I have little to no hope for the Friday the 13th or Elm Street remakes I the works). All I’m really trying to say here is that I don’t completely understand the massive presumption that remakes in general are a bad idea.

So if you’re someone who hates the idea of remakes, why do you feel that way? If you don’t hate the idea of remakes, why do you think some others do?

Editor’s Desk: Go Make Your Damn Movie!

Features - by John - August 13, 2008 - 13:45 America/Montreal - 21 Comments

I remember a bunch of years ago when the Sony vx1000 3ccd miniDV camera first came out. People were floored by this thing. The image quality was like nothing that had ever been seen before on a camera of this nature, and it was pretty much the first serious camera that utilized the “new” miniDV technology, taking advantage of a firewire transit system that just about any computer (especially macs) could connect to and use. Combine that with the relatively low cost desktop video editing programs that were popping up (Final Cut, Adobe Premiere) and it became obvious that a revolution was on our hands.

Just as the web democratized the sharing of thoughts, ideas and information, this new technology held the promise of democratizing the making of and sharing of film. Many people speculated at the time that a whole new generation of filmmakers will emerge because now just about anybody can grab a $3000 camera (instead of a $500,000 camera) and cut on a $2000 computer (instead of a $100,000 editing system).

Those predictions didn’t quite come to fruition as quickly as some prognostications guessed, but it is coming, and I’d go so far as to suggest that the tools are now here to do just that.

More and more films are being edited on the relatively inexpensive Final Cut Pro platform (goes for around $1000). It’s an elegant editing tool that I’ve used before that is extremely powerful and surprisingly easy to learn (it takes a while to MASTER, but you could pick up the basics and be editing in an hour).

As far as cameras go, we’ve come a long way from the vx1000. Directors Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor just finished shooting “Crank 2″ in May, shooting basically the entire movie with the simple Canon XH A1 High Def cameras. You can pick these things up in some lower end electronic stores for heavens sake. You can grab one brand spanking new for just over $3000. Is that something the average high school kid can run out and grab on his paper route money? No, but the point is that it’s now much more within the reach of average people without $100,000 in the bank account to pick up some gear and start shooting.

With the internet being what it is, a project doesn’t need a distribution deal to allow people from all over the world to see it. Just upload it and let people know it’s there. No, the old “if you build it they will come” fairy tale cliche won’t work, but at least now the obstacle for indie filmmakers of not having a VEHICLE to present their work is taken out of the equation.

The tools are available. The tools are affordable. The tools are easy enough to use.

The one giant obstacle still standing in the way of aspiring filmmakers (which is all of us really) is still the same one that it’s always been. Not tools, not money, but talent.

Sure, the internet has democratized information and ideas… but some people thoughts that just because a TOOL was now there to share their ideas with millions of people around the world, doesn’t mean a million people were going to bother spending time on their website. You still needed the talent. The talent to write. The talent to express. The talent to entertain or engage or to provoke. Tools without talent are nothing more than personal projects for your own personal enjoyment (and there’s nothing wrong with those either).

The same can be said for the filmmaking world. The tools are there. Yeah you still need to raise a little bit of money, but it’s just a fraction of what it used to be really and is something I think just about anyone can raise. Yes, the tools are there and they are now more affordable and higher quality than ever… but the issue is still talent.

Yes you can grab a $3000 camera. Sure you can install Final Cut on your computer. But do you have a story to tell? Do you have the talent to bring that story to life? DON’T ASSUME THE ANSER IS NO! Why not try? For that much money, why not do something instead of sitting around dreaming about it? What’s the worst that can happen? Your movie sucks and no one likes it… but who cares??? At least you’ll be doing something that everyone else talks about but never has the guts to try. At the very least it could be one of the most fun experiences of your life.

Come up with an idea. Write out a script. Once you’ve got the script to the point that you love it, show it to some people and start trying to get a little bit of money together. Beg family and friends to help you out by being actors or “crew”. Then just do it. Make your damn movie. It’s affordable, it’s easier than you think (by easier I mean really really really hard… but not impossible) and you’ll be doing something almost everyone else wishes they did but never had the nerve to attempt.

Could your movie be the next Clerks or Blair Witch? Sure, it’s highly unlikely, but why not? I did a documentary last year called “Prince of Peace - God of War” for just over $10,000. It was my first attempt at doing anything like that and I discovered I was a horrible documentary filmmaker! But guess what, I had an AMAZING time doing it, it played at a whole bunch of festivals, got some great reviews and I actually made profit off it, selling out all the DVDs and it’s still selling online downloads (shameless plug: You can get the movie here).

But even if your movie sucks… even if no one watches it besides you and your friends… even if you don’t play it at any festivals… even if you are someone with tools but no talent… WHO CARES?!?! Do it anyway! Have fun! Make something even if it’s just for you. It’s an experience no one will ever be able to take away from you and one you’ll cherish forever. YOU MADE A MOVIE. Do it with some friends and you’ll have a bonding experience like nothing else.

One of the perks of my job is that fans send me their home made videos all the time. Yeah most of them suck ass, but some of them are hilarious and completely make my day when I watch them… and no matter how bad your film is, it’ll probably still make someone’s day!

So instead of just talking about films all the time… why not make one. The tools are available and you may discover you have the talent. And even if you don’t it’ll be one of the richest experiences of your life, something you can look back on, something that’s yours.

And maybe I have something to announce in the next week or so. :P

Editor’s Desk: Seeing A New Star Wars Movie Today And I’m Not Excited

Features - by John - August 10, 2008 - 12:27 America/Montreal - 76 Comments

Anyone who knows just about anything about me knows that I am and always have been a Star Wars FREAK. My earliest childhood memory is of my mom taking me to see the first Star Wars for the very first time. I was too young to have vivid memories, but I can still remember the sensations, the feelings, the awe and the wonder. It was Star Wars that started my love affair with the movies that continues on to this day (and is even now my job).

I still remember as a child hearing that there was going to be ANOTHER Star Wars movie. Holy crap… I had never conceived of a “sequel” at that age. To me, this was the greatest news in the history of mankind. All I could think about was if Chewy was going to have a wife or if Darth Vader would be back as the bad guy (these are the things a 7 year old thinks about). I named my first cat “Luke Skywalker”. I had Star Wars bed sheets and I was the only kid around who could tell you how many rebel ships attacked the first Death Star (it was 30 by the way).

My obsession continued on into adulthood, watching the trilogy at least 3 times a year. When “The Phantom Menace” came out, I drove 1000 miles so I could see it for the first time at a movie theater that was better than the one in the city I was living in at the time (no, I’m not kidding) and even though I was driving to Toronto to see it, I still camped out in the Saskatoon cold with some friends to buy tickets… even though I wasn’t going to be buying any… I just wanted the experience of being in the line.

My first amateur movie that I was involved in was a Star Wars fan film that crossed The Phantom Menace with The Godfather called “Rise of the Tradiz” which played at the Star Wars Celebration convention in Indianapolis. From the convention, I drove almost 2000 miles to Edmonton Alberta to see an advance screening of “Attack of the Clones”.

The point here is that I’m clearly a Star Wars maniac.

The other day I got an invitation to attend the world premiere of the newest Star Wars film, “Star Wars: The Clone Wars”, here in Hollywood. Actually, I’m leaving in about an hour to head over there. Here’s the strange thing, about 20 minutes ago a shocking thing struck me… I’m not excited about going to see it.

Me, the Star Wars fanatic. The guy who drove a thousand miles just to see a Star Wars movie on a bigger screen, and then drove almost 2000 miles just to see it a week before it came out. The guy who named his pets after Star Wars characters and whose earliest memory is of Star Wars. I’M NOT EXCITED ABOUT SEEING A NEW STAR WARS MOVIE!?!?!?!

IS IT BECAUSE IT’S AN ANIMATED MOVIE?

I doubt it. I actually love animated films from 2d to 3d and beyond, I always have.

IS IT BECAUSE THE PREQUELS LET ME DOWN?

I doubt it. I actually really liked (not loved) “Revenge of the Sith”, and when I’m a fan of something, I tend to be a fan of it for life. Hell, the Toronto Maple Leafs have been a disgrace for as long as I’ve been alive, but I still bleed Blue and White baby and would jump at the chance to see them play anytime, any place!

IS IT BECAUSE DOING A MOVIE IN BETWEN EPISODES 2 AND 3 IS A STUPID IDEA?

This MIGHT be it. I’ve always thought if they were going to do a new movie (animated or otherwise) it should either be between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope, or after the events of Return of the Jedi. But still… can a little thing like time line choice alone derail my Star Wars fanaticism?

So here we are… about an hour away from me leaving my place to fulfill one of my minor dreams… attending an actual Star Wars Premiere… and yet I’m not pumped. I’m not jumping out of my skin. To be honest I’m more looking forward to going to play poker with SoulVideo and Kris Tapley tonight… and that shouldn’t be the case!

Do you guys have any thoughts or theories as to why someone like me, a rabid Star Wars fan, wouldn’t be completely pumped about seeing the premiere of a new Star Wars flick?

Why Heath Ledger Can Be Replaced As The Joker

Features - by John - August 4, 2008 - 03:56 America/Montreal - 129 Comments

It was, in this writer’s opinion, the single greatest performance given by an actor in the history of the comic book genre of film. It was also the performance of a lifetime which only adds to the tragedy of his early demise. Heath Ledger’s performance playing “The Joker” will long be remembered and long be talked about. A performance so strong, that it makes us forget he’s not with us anymore. A performance so strong that its presentation overshadowed the shock of his passing. A performance that will be his legacy, and one that will probably earn him an Oscar nomination 6 months or so from now.

But as “The Dark Knight” finishes its life at the box office and the excitement of the DVD release comes and goes, we will once again be reminded of the fact that Ledger is not with us any longer. When our thoughts turn once again to the NEXT Batman movie we’ll be revisited yet again by the sad truth that Ledger will not return to play the Clown Prince of Crime.

The question will be raised by some: “Who should be next to play The Joker”? It’s an inevitable and also fair question to ask.

But as much as the asking of the question is certain… one of the responses is just as certain. There will be a great number of people who will answer that question (and indeed are already saying as much) that no one should play the Joker again, because (in their opinion) no one will ever be able to do as well as Ledger did.

That response is understandable due to the brilliance Ledger brought to the role, but it’s also a response I 100% disagree with.

Before I go into the reasons why I reject the idea that “no one will ever be able to play The Joker as well as Ledger did”, let me briefly address another issue I’m hearing some people bring up. Some people are suggesting that having another person play The Joker at this point would somehow be an “insult” or a “slap in the face” to Heath Ledger. That notion to me is utterly absurd.

First of all, do you think Heath Ledger put all his heart and sole into that character, sank so much energy and effort into the role to elevate it and raise the bar… just so the character would be retired if he couldn’t play the part anymore??? That’s sheer nonsense in my opinion. That’s the equivalent of saying “The best way to honor the magnificent career of Michael Jordan and to thank him for what he did for the game of basketball is to shut down the NBA after he retired”. Or “Lance Armstrong was so good at being an inspiration to people in his recovery against cancer, that no one else should ever try to overcome the disease and inspire others”. If WB doesn’t want to use The Joker again because he doesn’t fit into their future story plans, that’s totally fine. But to not use The Joker (who Ledger worked so hard to elevate and raise the bar for) because of some misguided notion that it would somehow be disrespectful to Ledger’s memory is one I reject outright.

Secondly, just because an actor does a wonderful job portraying a character, does not suddenly mean the character BELONGS to that actor. Ledger did his job magnificently… but his job was only one part of brining The Joker to “The Dark Knight”. The director who guided Ledger owns The Joker just as much as Ledger does. The Nolan brothers who wrote all the things that The Joker said and did owns The Joker just as much as Ledger does.

So would getting another actor to portray The Joker in the future be an “insult” to Heath Ledger? No, not even remotely. On the contrary, it could be the greatest honor you could give him.

But now let’s address the main issue here. The notion that no one could ever do as well as Ledger did playing The Joker. As amazing as Ledger was… i reject this idea. So due to the following reasons, here is why I believe Heath Ledger can be replaced as The Joker:

#1 - HEATH LEDGER WAS A GOOD BUT NOT GREAT ACTOR
During his career, Heath Ledger turned in some truly exceptional performances. Brokeback Mountain (which despite how good Ledger was in it, I believe was an overrated movie) and The Dark Knight showed us how good Ledger could be when he was really on his game. But unfortunately, for every one Brokeback performance, there were 2 Casanova’s and The Order’s. For everyone one “The Dark Knight”, there seemed to be two The Four Feather’s and A Knight’s Tales. Ledger was hit and miss. That fact doesn’t detract from his accomplishment as The Joker one little bit… but there are many better actors out there than Ledger, and to suggest none of them have the potential to turn in an even better performance than Ledger did is pretty myopic and short sighted. It’s not to say that anyone WOULD be better… but that there are actors out there who carry the potential to do even better if they were really on their game like Ledger was on his. I’m not saying it’s PROBABLE… I’m saying it’s POSSIBLE.

#2 - WHAT IF GUY PEARCE GOT THE ROLE INSTEAD OF LEDGER?
Let’s play “what if” for a moment. Let’s say that Christopher Nolan ended up choosing Guy Pearce to play The Joker instead of Heath Ledger. Ok, now let’s assume that Pierce did an amazing job (when does Pearce ever do anything less?) playing The Joker, let’s say just 0.0005% less well than Ledger ended up doing. Ok… now follow me here. We’d all be praising Pierce for the great job he did right? Now can you imagine how much you would be laughing at me if I came out of nowhere and said “I bet Heath Ledger would be an even better Joker than Pearce just was”. I would have been laughed out of town. “Pierce’s Joker was perfect” people would be sure to tell me. “No one will ever be able to do it as well as he has”. Yet little do they know that Ledger would have been better… even if only by 0.0005%. It would therefore be naive of us to not acknowledge that out there are some people that would be 0.0005% better a Joker than even Ledger was… and probably names that we would laugh at in our ignorance, just as we would have laughed at Ledger’s name 2 years ago.

#3 - IT CAN ALWAYS BE DONE BETTER
There was a time when it was said no one would EVER be as dominant or equal the accomplishments of Arnold Schwarzenegger in the world of professional bodybuilding. The man won the Mr. Olympia 7 times. You’re an idiot if you think anyone will ever do it better! Yeah well… that sounded safe enough to say until the day Ron Coleman won his 8th Mr. Olympia in a row. Whenever anyone says something has been done as well as it will ever be done… someone comes along and does it better. That’s the nature of things. Remember at the beginning of this post I mentioned that it is my opinion that Ledger’s performance as The Joker is the best performance in the history of the genre? That’s true… but it won’t be forever, or maybe even for long. Someone else will come along, probably someone we don’t really expect, and will beat it… and that’s a great thing to think about if you’re a fan of the genre.

#4 - ONLY CRISPIN GLOVER CAN BE THE JOKER. ONLY LACHY HULME CAN BE THE JOKER…
I remember back before Ledger was cast for the role, the online message boards were filled with casting ideas for The Joker… and usually the word “ONLY” preceded their name. ONLY Mark Hamill can be The Joker. The only person to play Joker is Guy Pearce. No one else other than Crispin Glover can really make the role work. The only person they should consider is Jack Nicholson again! Yeah, everyone had their idea about who the “ONLY” person alive was who could adequately play The Joker. Turns out they were all wrong, because Heath Ledger came in and rocked the hell out of that role. But now people, refusing to learn their lesson, are once again using the word “ONLY”, but this time it’s with Ledger. The lesson here is that there is NEVER “only” one person for a role.

At this point we have no idea if The Joker was even in the plans for the next Batman movie before Ledger died, so all this discussion could be for nothing. My only point here is to say, as great as Ledger was as The Joker (I believe great enough to warrant Oscar consideration), to believe that no one can possibly do it as well or better is completely naive in my opinion. And being aware of that fact is in no way a “slam” on the breathtaking performance he gave us, but rather just a recognition of how life and reality works.

Should they have The Joker in the next Batman flick? That’s a totally different question. Maybe the character doesn’t fit in with the story arch plans they have. But if they do have a story in mind that involves The Joker character, then it is possible that another actor could do the role just as well or even better than Ledger did, and to do so would be honoring and a tribute to the level that Ledger brought that character to in his final, and most brilliant performance.

Why Heath Ledger’s Joker Sucked - Sticking To The Source Material

Features - by John - July 30, 2008 - 15:17 America/Montreal - 130 Comments

“I can’t believe how stupid some people are and how easily they get brain washed by marketing. Why are people saying Heath Ledger’s Joker was so good in The Dark Knight? It totally baffles my mind when obviously Heath Ledger’s Joker was total bullshit. Why did they even bother naming that character “The Joker”? That so called Joker was nothing like the real joker. They should have called him something else like “Scary White Make Up Man” or something along those lines.

First of all, the real Joker is INSANE. Not eccentric, not wild, not misunderstood. He’s certifiably and clinically insane. He is the paradox to Batman’s order. The so-called-Joker in Dark Knight was totally wrong. He was just eccentric, but also really calm. Yeah he was evil, but he wasn’t insane.

Secondly, what the hell was with the razor cuts? Show me where the hell in the comics where The Joker got his iconic and legendary smile from razor cuts? That was a spit in the face to all Batman comic fans. The Joker’s smile is as iconic as the Superman Emblem. What do you think people would say if they suddenly replaced the Jor-El family crest with a crayon drawing “S” that some dying kid in Hospital gave Superman early in his career? They’d riot in the streets! Joker got his smile from razor cuts??? Why not just make an Aquaman movie where Arthur can’t actually swim. That would make about as much sense.

Third, the white face. The REAL Joker has a white face that he disguises sometimes with flesh colored make up, but this so-called-Joker in The Dark Knight does completely the opposite thing. We all know how the Joker got his white skin, but apparently Christopher Nolan couldn’t be bothered to read a comic book or two to find out for himself. This was blasphemy to any self respecting comic book fan.

The Dark Knight could have been a good movie, but that character they had in there as the bad guy wasn’t The Joker. It was someone else that sort of bore a resemblance to The Joker in some ways, but that wasn’t him. They messed it up totally, and if you like Heath Ledger’s so-called-Joker, then you know nothing about Batman or comic books. Nuff said.”

____________________________________

Ok, now everyone take a deep breath and put your gun away. I don’t really think any of those things I wrote above. So why did I write it? Well, because this issue seems to come up whenever a comic or literary story gets brought to the big screen.

Just this morning I got an email from someone telling me about why The Punisher movie was going to suck because of a list of details that this movie has that are in conflict with some details from the comic book. Same discussion has been going on with the origins of Wolverine. We all know the debates that went on over the design of Megatron in the Transformers movie. Hell, there were tons of real reasons to hate Jessica Alba for Sue Storm in the Fantastic Four franchise, but just because she’s not a natural blonde isn’t one of them.

My argument, when talking about how strictly movies should stick to the source material, has always been that adaptations sometimes need to be made between mediums. Just because one thing works on a comic book page doesn’t mean it will work on a movie screen, and so compromises are sometimes needed. My main question is “Do they stick to the SPIRIT of the characters, rather than making sure they have the right eye color or size of shoe.

Really, the bottom line is “does the character work in the movie or not”, not “how perfectly does the character match the comic character”. The fake note at the beginning of this post was one that I expected to read about 100 times from various people… but thankfully I haven’t got more than 2 or 3 of them.

Ledger’s Joker NEEDED to be adapted for the story and world that Nolan had created. Jack Nicholson’s Joker simply would not have fit with Nolan’s Dark Knight world. He would have come off as silly and ridiculous in this setting. To really nail the spirit of The Joker in the context of Nolan’s world, those changes NEEDED to be made… and I think 99.9% of us agree the changes were for the best and worked perfectly.

If people were consistent with how the expect other comic characters to be exactly like how they are on the printed page, then letters like the one above would have been pouring in. Thankfully that hasn’t happened… so thanks to the Joker, maybe in the future less people will jump up in arms when they see deviations from the source material in an upcoming movie. Maybe if the first designs of Thor come out and he’s not wearing feathered wings on his head… that it MIGHT still be ok. Maybe.

Why Punisher: War Zone Is Doomed

Features - by John - July 30, 2008 - 10:16 America/Montreal - 59 Comments

Somewhere in Los Angeles right now, Thomas Jane is sitting back in a leather chair, possibly smoking a cigar with one hand and holding a goblet of wine in the other, tilting his head back in a very satisfied state and whispering out loud… “I TOLD YOU SO”.

The 2004 version of “The Punisher” (in which Jane carried the big gun) failed to impress a large audience, but although the movie had some major flaws I ended up having some fun with it and thought the potential was there for an improved sequel. A sequel seemed unlikely considering the lack of box office success that the studio was looking for… but that never stopped Thomas Jane from advocating and campaigning for a sequel. He really liked the character and believed that another Punisher film, with the lessons learned from the mistakes of the first one, could be something pretty special.

Then came the news… there would indeed be another Punisher film… but quickly after that news came he first sign that the project was doomed to fail as the biggest cheerleader for the movie, Thomas Jane himself, thought what he saw coming together was so bad he had to drop out, even though no one wanted the movie more than he did. How badly did he want this movie? This is what he said at the time he dropped out:

“I can’t tell you how completely broken up I am about it. After busting my ass at the gym four days a week for almost two years, watching every character driven action pic that any fan would ask me to watch while I was standing in line buying egg whites and Tuna fish after countless Saturday nights making notes and drinking soda water and munching on seaweed sticks while my daughter slept on my lap to the sound of automatic gunfire, (now she can’t sleep without it. I had to make a tape of automatic gunfire to play in her room at night) after hauling myself to any ‘Guns! Knifes! Ammo!’ show in any small town that I found myself in shooting Killshot or The Mist or Mutant Chronicles, after torn ligaments, screwed up rotator cuffs, thousands of $$$ on ridiculously huge vitamins, overly long conversations with frighteningly tall men about The Fastest Way To Kill Someone With Your Bare Hands, and after a dude refused to sell me a Fatburger at 2am on Santa Monica Blvd, I am, sadly – no, make that heartbrokenly – fuck it - just rip out the heart and stomp it into the pavement a couple of times – pulling out. Punisher fans are already fighting an uphill battle as it is. And I’ve always felt a responsibility to fight that fight for them and with them so that Frank Castle gets the treatment he deserves.”

Now let me be clear here… I’m NOT saying the Prunisher looked doomed because the great Thomas Jane wasn’t going to be in it… I saying that it looked doomed when the guy (whoever that is) who was the most enthusiastic about getting the movie made decided it was looking too horrible for even him to participate in it. That was a BAD sign.

But like all things in Hollywood and the rest of the planet, life moved on and “The Punisher: War Zone” started to take shape. An interesting development with Lexi Alexander coming on as the director (kinda cool to see a woman director fora comic book based action flick) and Ray Stevenson was added as The Punisher himself… but everything else has been dark news.

Early script reviews came out sounding abysmal… the first teaser trailer came out and looked stupid as hell and just failed to capture the Punisher feel… and then came the big hammer… the studio canned the director. Lexi was taken off the project and the editing has been handed over to other people to finish up. YIKES! Can you imagine how bad this thing was looking?

Then at Comic Con they put the Punisher stuff at the most awkward times (an 8pm panel??? Who the hell goes to panels at 8pm?). A press reception at 4pm in the afternoon? It was almost like they were hiding the Punisher at the Con, but didn’t want to flat out cancel their appearance there.

Look, I haven’t seen Punisher: War Zone yet, so I can’t say the movie will suck, nor can I say the movie will rule for certain. However, I can look up at the sky, see tons of dark clouds forming and take a guess that it’s going to rain. Punisher has a lot of dark clouds surrounding it with sounds of rolling distant thunder. I think it’s a pretty safe bet it’s time to pull out your umbrella.

Name That Torso #9

Features - by Doug - July 28, 2008 - 12:53 America/Montreal - 33 Comments

Everyone guessed Lindsay Lohan’s Torso last week!

And now the game continues with the ninth installment of NAME THAT TORSO!

The answer will be revealed next Monday. The winner will have bragging rights and garner international respect!

****RULE #1 **** If you find the picture online, please don’t post the link and ruin the game for others *****

****RULE #2 **** NAME THAT TORSO!

3 Reasons Why Aaron Eckhart Is The Soul Of The Dark Knight

Features - by John - July 21, 2008 - 11:20 America/Montreal - 67 Comments

The other night I was being interviewed on WGN in Chicago and the one and only topic of conversation was The Dark Knight. We were basically talking about how great the movie is, how Heath Ledger deserves an Oscar nomination and all that jazz… when the host suddenly said: “You know, our station Film Critic said the only thing that was really horribly about The Dark Knight was Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent”. To which I replied: “Then your station critic is an idiot”.

Now, I said that sort of as a joke because obviously all film is subjective and I later felt bad because as the conversation went on I forgot to say I was kidding about him being an idiot. But that’s not what this post is about. What that interview highlighted for me was that in the midst of all the praise we seem to be giving The Dark Knight, in the craze of talking about how much Ledger deserves that Oscar nomination, how good the story was yadda yadda yadda… we all (myself being quite guilty of this too) have seemed to over look the person I would say was actually the soul of The Dark Knight… Aaron Eckhart.

So right now I’d like to propose to you 3 reasons why I believe Aaron Eckhart was indeed the soul of The Dark Knight:

#1 - He Was The Embodiment Of The Hope Of Gotham
Now don’t misunderstand that statement. The highlight of the movie was Ledger, the driving force was Bale… but in the midst of this battle of two conflicting world views of the Joker and Batman, Harvey Dent’s character was the one who embodied and represented US. He was the manifested spirit of Gotham’s hope and of what the city COULD be. In essence he was the tangible realization of Batman’s dream. Do you realize how easily other actors could have made the character slip into some cheesy boy scout wannabe?

#2 - He Grounded The Film
No one will agree with this at first, but think about it for a moment. If you remove Harvey Dent and the way Eckhart played him to perfection, The Dark Knight would basically devolve back to simple (although still really intense) comic book movie. It would have just been good vs bad. Batman vs Joker. But Eckhart brought an extra dimension. He really was Nolan’s secret ingredient that changed the flavor of the whole soup. He takes the film to another level by making The Dark Knight about he people of Gotham as well as the titans (Joker and Batman) of Gotham.

#3 - The Relatable And Fallible Hero
One of the things that takes the edge off of many movie heroes is the perceived infallibility of the heroes. Heck, despite some self doubts, even Batman comes off that way most of the time. Unbeatable, incorruptible, unwavering. Perhaps those qualities are important for the character and they have to be that way, but it still leaves him being unidentifiable for most of us. Harvey Dent is a different character. Completely steadfast in his ideals and beliefs, but when faced with the madness the Joker brings, or with the life of his true love being threatened, he shows that he’s only too human, that he has weaknesses, that he’s fallible. I don’t think most of us realize how nearly impossible pulling that sort of diversity off can be for an actor in the midst of a movie like The Dark Knight. Eckhart pulled off both aspects so well, that Dent become our identifiable point in the movie. He become our anchor.

I can’t say enough good things about the job Aaron Eckhart does in The Dark Knight. I’d go so far as to say that he nearly does just as well as Ledger does as the Joker (it’s just that the Joker is a far more charismatic and extreme character and thus much more noticeable). The fact that Eckhart just blends into the story instead of standing on top of it is a testament to the job he did as an actor. So for the next couple of years we’ll all talk about how great Ledger was (and rightfully so), and we’ll talk about how Bale is the best Batman ever (and rightfully so), but let’s not forget the job done by Aaron Eckhart, who by his performance gave this great movie it’s very soul.

TMB’s The Dark Knight Podcast

Features, Uncut Podcast - by John - July 18, 2008 - 15:33 America/Montreal - 182 Comments

Hey there folks. Well, in this special 35 minute podcast Doug and I discuss everything we liked and disliked about The Dark Knight. This special podcast is FILLED with spoilers and is intended only for people who have seen the movie. It’s all of us international friends chatting about the film we all already saw.

So dig in, sit back, relax and listen to Doug and I talk about the pros and cons of The Dark Knight!

 

 Standard Podcast [37:14m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Off The Rack: Team America World Police

Features - by Doug - July 17, 2008 - 21:13 America/Montreal - 24 Comments

We are starting a new feature around these parts, and we’re calling it Off The Rack. OTR is going to simply be a place where we can shoot the breeze about films that we enjoy that are no longer in theaters and must be sought out at rental shops, ordered online, or streamed for your delight. For those of you that have seen the film - join in on the discussion and for those of you that haven’t - get a hold of a copy and join us! And without further ado - here is our inaugural Off The Rack.

Today I will give just a few reasons why you should take Team America World Police Off The Rack.

Everything Is Funnier With Marionettes

Take something funny, get a marionette to do it, and the hilarity is amplified ten fold. This film proves the aforementioned mathematics time and time again. Stand out moments of the film include a doll on doll sex scene (full of lurid and perverse acts not fit for man nor beast) and a drunken vomiting scene that may be the funniest moment in any film I have seen! The decision to bring this story to life using marionettes was flat out genius, and the execution was second to none. (Watch the special features for a mini doc about the work that went into the making of this film - it’ ll blow your mind!)

Trey Parker and Matt Stone Rule

I am a fan of South Park, enjoyed Orgasmo greatly, and even have a soft spot for Baseketball. I fancy the comedy stylings of this creative pair and consider them as prized a duo as Laurel and Hardy ever were. These two dudes got thrust into the limelight because of their insanely crude and knee slapping-ly funny show South Park. Fast forward a few years on, pour money into their wallets and what do they make - an action/comedy using marionettes. This film would never have been made, nor would anything this kick ass have ever come out of the marionette universe if it wasn’t for these two gentlemen. Trey and Matt are visionaries with the balls to get ridiculous, and the talent to make it good.

Cameos, the Cameos MATT DAMON?, the Cameos.

So many celebrities and world figures get the piss taken out of them in this film. They are helpless to defend themselves as marionette avatars go on to do and say horribly embarrassing things; and we are better for it. If you have ever wanted to see Matt Damon with the intelligence of a donkey, or Kim Jong Il singing show tunes to himself - then this is a must see film for you. Special props goes out to Alec Baldwin who actually wanted to voice his own marionette.

The Title Track

The song America - FUCK YEA! Pushed the volume to 11. It’s played at multiple times throughout the film and even has a slow version for a very sombre moment. I will still get this song in my head at any given moment in my life, and I sing it all day long.

In Conclusion

This film is one of my most beloved comedies. It has high re-watchability and an amazing special features section that’ s a must see. You should definitely rent this, but may want to buy it for posterity. I consider this film to be a classic, and when my nephew is old enough to see it, I will give him my copy as a rite of passage. If for whatever reason you haven’t seen this picture - please, please do so and share your first time thoughts with the rest of us. For those of you that have seen the film, please share what you loved (or hated) about it.

Why The Hyper Praise For The Dark Knight Is Bullshit

Features - by John - July 14, 2008 - 07:45 America/Montreal - 113 Comments

The Short Version

• The Dark Knight is a great movie
• It’s not even close to being the “darkest” or “Grittiest” or “violent” or “best crime drama” movie ever
• It’s ok to love a movie without the need to make up fake praises and to admit its shortcomings

The Full Version

We’re now just a few short days away from the opening of one of the most anticipated movies of the year. The Dark Knight (the sequel to Batman Begins) and huge swells of movie going patrons will storm theaters this weekend… the wait is over. But dear international friends… as your friend I feel the need to warn you in advance. IGNORE THE BLOG FANBOY CRITICS (like myself) who are hailing this Batman flick as: “The darkest”, “the grittiest”, “the revolutionary”, “the masterpiece”, “The Ultra Violent”, “The instant Crame drama classic” film that some of them are making it out to be, because you’ll be disappointed.

Let’s get something straight. I loved The Dark Knight. I gave the movie an 8.5 out of 10. It’s fantastic on many levels. Very fun movie… yadda yadda yadda. But it seems like some guys had so pre-invensted themselves into believing the movie would be awesome long before they ever saw it, that when the movie turned out to be really good, they praised it like it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. It’s not.

Now, if you’ll allow me to play a little Penn and Teller, here are a couple of false praises the film gets, and why they’re bullshit:

1) The Dark Knight Is One Of the Darkest (Or Grittiest) Films I’ve Ever Seen
This statement (or some variation of it) is one of the staples in the blog fanboy quotes you’ll see in most Dark Knight reviews. When I read those quotes all I can wonder to myself is “what the fuck movie were they watching and what made them think it was Batman?”

Bullshit: Let’s get the straight. The Dark Knight isn’t really all that Dark and it isn’t really all that gritty. Oh it’s dark and gritty for a COMIC BOOK MOVIE. Sure, I’ll agree with that. Compare this film to X-Men and you can call it dark and gritty. Compare it to Spider-Man and you can call it dark and gritty. But don’t even pretend like The Dark Knight is even in the same league as Apocalypse Now or American Psycho (also featuring Christian Bale coincidentally) or The Killer. The Dark Knight looks like a G rated family film next to real “dark” films. Dark and gritty for a comic book movie, sure… but just leave it at that.

2) The Dark Knight Transcends Being A Comic Book Movie And Becomes An Instant Crime Drama Classic
Good grief, reading this statement in a couple of fanboy reviews is what really convinced me some people were just making up ways to praise this film (that’s good enough that it doesn’t need people making up fake things to say about it).

Bullshit: Instant crime drama classic? If I ever smoked drugs, I’d want some of what these guys are having, because in my opinion, that statement is nothing short of absurd. Godfather, Goodfellas, The Usual Suspects… these are crime drama classics, Dark Knight is not, nor does it try to be. I’m sorry, but aside from Heath Ledger, the “criminals” in The Dark Knight (including Eric Roberts, whom I normal love) were terrible and acted like they came straight out of… well… out of a comic book. Please don’t tell me The Dark Knight is a new Crime Drama classic with a straight face when a copy of Reservoir Dogs and The French Connection are sitting on the shelf behind us.

3) The Dark Knight Is Ultra Violent
Again, I don’t know what movie these people are watching. Reading one of the blog fanboy reviews would lead you to believe that Heath Ledger walks around slitting the throats of women and children at the local Dairy Queen just to pass the time while waiting for his Blizzard.

Bullshit: I’ll go back to what I said about the dark and gritty point. Yes, for a COMIC BOOK MOVIE this film is quite violent. I’ve said before that this movie is not for little kids, but to call the stuff on screen in The Dark Knight “intense violence” is quite frankly laughable. Big spoiler here folks… the Joker shoots some people. There’s another scene where he does something pretty cool to a guy… but we don’t even see it really. Come on… phrases like “intense brutal violence” are for movies that have… you know… intense brutal violence. Films like Aliens, Hostel, Battle Royale, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance… these are intense brutal violence movies. Dear heavens Dark Knight doesn’t even come close to being a part of the discussion.

IT’S OK TO LOVE A MOVIE AND ADMIT ITS FAULTS AT THE SAME TIME

Regular Movie Blog readers know how much I loved Transformers. I bloody flipped my lid for that movie beyond all reasonable limits. I said it was the most fun summer flick I’d ever seen and I said it was the best visual effects I’d ever seen. However, if you read my stuff, or if you listened to the Transformers DVD commentary that we did, you’ll know that I openly talk about the many weaknesses of the movie. The painful dialog in places, the poor choice in certain characters they used, the horrible lack of dialog between the decepticons (how can you have a transformers movie and only have 1 single line between Megatron and Starscream?!?!)

Just because I acknowledges the film had a lot of flaws didn’t mean I couldn’t still love it

Also, I praised the film for what it was (fun, great VFX). Even though I loved the movie, I never felt the need to say it had the best acting, or the best story, or the best comedy or the most “intense brutal violence”. That would have been just making shit up to artificially justify my love for the movie… when I don’t need to justify my love for a movie. None of us do.

The Dark Knight never tries to be a Crime drama. It doesn’t try to be one of film history’s most dark and gritty movies. It doesn’t try to be ultra violent. It is what it is… and it’s damn good at it! There’s no need to reach up our collective asses to pull out false praises that the film doesn’t even qualify for. It’s good enough on it’s own without all the hyperbole.

Please be clear, this is not a “hate on The Dark Knight” post. I LOVE the movie… I love the movie enough to let it stand on its own actual merits without the need for the internet’s collective hyper exaggerated praises about it. It’s a wonderful movie and I think you’ll love it… just be very very very cautious of the bullshit some people are spraying in advance.

Anyway, just my grumpy subjective opinion written at 7am when I haven’t been to bed yet.

As a side note, another good read on the Hyperbole (he actually uses that word in his title) over the new Dark Knight movie, check out Devin’s (who I think it probably the best pure writer in the movie websphere even though I often disagree with him) post over at CHUD.

Should There Be Another Hulk Movie?

Features - by John - July 10, 2008 - 11:44 America/Montreal - 71 Comments

Five years ago we were treated to the first live action Hulk movie under the guidance of award winning director Ang Lee. Lee gave us a different vision of a comic book movie. He made the film more personal, more character centric… more human (with some hulk dogs thrown in for good measure). The vast majority of film fans seem to have hated that Hulk film (I liked it… but I can also see why others didn’t). So being just five years ago it struck us with a lot of amazement that Marvel was taking a crack at re-launching the franchise.

It’s not unimaginable to reboot a franchise obviously… but one that was only 5 years old (granted, there was only 8 years between George Clooney’s Batman and Robin and the Christain Bale Batman Begins)? It seemed terribly soon for a reboot… especially when you consider that the general movie going audience still had such a bad taste in it’s mouth from the first one.

But Marvel believed in the character and pushed forward… and it looks like a lot of people are happy they did as the majority of people seem to agree that this new Incredible Hulk is a lot better than the Ang Lee version. Fantastic. But here’s the catch… The Incredible Hulk is entering it’s 5 week of wide release (last weekend it made just over $3 million) and at this point it has made LESS money than the first Hulk film. Add on top of that the fact that this one cost more (just under $15 million) to make.

So while a lot of people can agree this Hulk was a solid effort, you’ve got to think that at this point the board rooms over at Marvel are debating weather another Hulk film is even a possibility financially. And I’ll tell you right now… THERE IS A VERY STRONG POSSIBILITY YOU WILL NOT SEE HULK IN THE AVENGERS MOVIE.

When all is said and done, The incredible Hulk will break even and probably make a little coin for the studio… but when a movie costs between $150 - $200 million to make (you know they’d have to make the budget for the next one at least a little bit bigger), just barely getting your head above water on the last film just doesn’t cut it. There is far too much money to be lost for a new production company like Marvel at this stage of the game.

Iron Man is a different story. That movie has made more money domestically (over $300 million) than Hulk has made internationally ($220 million world wide so far). It’s a no brainer to do a sequel to that film. The profit margin is huge. Not so much with the Hulk (if it ends up making profit at all when all is said and done).

WHY WE COULD SEE ANOTHER HULK FILM

Despite all the negatives listed above, not all hope is lost for the big green guy. Many could look at the box office results for The Incredible Hulk and see it as a big victory. After all… only 5 years removed from a previous version that just about everyone hated… and it STILL is going to make about the same amount of money? Doesn’t that suggest the possibility that since you now have a film people LIKED, then the next one could be even more successful? Iron Man didn’t have that giant monkey around it’s neck. No previous version with Kevin Costner as Tony Stark that everyone hated. It had a clean slate and it cleaned up. One could argue that The Hulk now has a clean (or better than clean) slate from which to move forward from. That’s no guarantee… but it’s at least something to think about.

Marvel clearly has grand plans, and we know that making another Hulk film in the next 3 years isn’t one of them. His appearance in the Avengers movie is questionable at this point considering he would be the single most expensive element in the entire film to bring to screen and it doesn’t look like he’s a huge attraction to the audience. It’s hard to call at this point.

Personally I really hope we see The Hulk on the screen again… in his own film and in the Avengers, but you certainly couldn’t blame the execs over at Marvel if they decide to go in a different direction.

So what do you think. Put your personal feelings aside for a minute and answer this: If YOU were an exec over at Marvel, would you look at continuing The Hulk character at this point, or would you move in another direction? Why?

Pixar And The Difference Between Kids Movies and Kid Friendly Movies

Features - by John - July 8, 2008 - 14:50 America/Montreal - 43 Comments

It’s no secret around here that I believe Pixar is not only the best animated movie studio in the film business today, but also the best movie studio period. They are a perfect 9 for 9 with their films… not only big box office success, not only big critical success, but also huge audience success. This company squats and craps out excellence with everything they do… and now they’ve given us the best film of 2008 (thus far) in Wall-E

But an interesting discussion broke out the other day when one commenter asked why Pixar just makes little kid movies. Why not make movies for adults?

This got me thinking a little bit about the nature of the movies that Pixar has done in the past and continue doing right through to today. My conclusion was this:

PIXAR DOES NOT MAKE LITTLE KID MOVIES. THEY MAKE MOVIES THAT ARE KID FRIENDLY.

Now I understand that on the surface this looks like little more than a mere issue of minor semantics. But if you look more closely you’ll see there is actually a world of difference in both style and substance between the two and the end result are VERY different movies.

There are many 3D animated films that are specifically kid movies. Films like “Kung Fu Panda”, “Madagascar”, clearly “Madagascar 2″, “Robots”, “Shark Tale”, “Shrek” and so on and so forth. Films like these (and many others like them) are writen, produced and completely geared toward entertaining children, and there’s nothing wrong with that philosophy in and of itself if they’re done well. Oh sure, sometimes they’ll throw in the odd pop cultural reference that will fly over kids heads and is aimed at the adults… but the themes and language (both visual and verbal) and style are conceived of and aimed at kids. They are Kids Movies.

But then there’s is Pixar. Yes, Pixar does have some excellent “Kids Movies” on it’s impressive resume like “Bugs Life”, “Toy Story” and to a certain degree “Monsters Inc”. But then a shift became visible that we say elements of in Toy Story 2, and when “Finding Nemo” came out a full fledged new philosophy in Pixar’s creative workflow because evident.

Pixar was no longer just making Kid Movies. They were making films for everyone that were made in such a way to also be very kid friendly. The entertainment of the kid was no longer the guiding principle… but rather making a universal movie for everyone to experience and enjoy while keeping the kids engaged and entertained at the same time. It’s not an easy task, but it’s one that Pixar has mastered and is more than just a semantical variant.

FINDING NEMO
Themes of fatherhood. Life lived in precaution due to tragic loss and the notions of wanting to shelter your child and the desperation of both fear and action when your child is at risk.

THE INCREDIBLES
A slightly past middle aged man reflecting on former glories… but also former potential. Finding himself in a life and life style you never would have pictured. Struggling to understand the balance between the importance of self-actualization, and the responsibility and joy in sacrificing personal goals and ambitions for family, children and marriage.

CARS
The decay of the classic and traditional small town America. Issues of modernization inadvertently replacing the fabrics of small town values and senses of community. The loss of the journey to the expedience of the destination.

RATATOUILLE
Standard themes of pursuing dreams are mixed in with issues of breaking out of expectation. Facing generations old biases and preconceptions, learn hatreds and expectations while trying to overcome them with a wider world view by stopping looking at the problem on a race or national (or in this case species) level and looking at individuals on a personal level instead.

WALL-E
The obvious themes of Environmentalism are also layered with warnings of a society developing an over reliance on technology and a less and less social population that engages more with the digital than with real life human beings

Films such as these can not be equated with films like “Madagascar” and just lumped in as if they were made with the same purpose and the same audience… because they aren’t. One is a kids movies… the others are kid friendly. One type is specifically made for and aimed at kids… the other has a main message that is aimed at adults, but made in such a way that the experience is still a great one for kids.