review
Watchmen Chapter I, a review
What can I say about Watchmen that hasn’t already been said… is what I would say if DC hadn’t just released the first part of an animated two part adaptation of what is considered one of the finest comic books of all time. But let’s talk about the comic book first.
Released as a 12-issue limited series in 1986 and rendered into a trade paperback combining all twelve issues in 1987, the creation of writer Alan Moore, artist Dave Gibbons, and colored by John Higgins, Watchmen was a critical and commercial success and has remained so since its release. It would win a Hugo Award in 1988 and be added to Time Magazine’s 100 All-Time Best Novels list.
Hotel Transylvania: Transformania | Film Review
Despite the growing recognition in the West that animation is not a medium made expressly for children, there is an expansive industry that revolves around productions that aim specifically for that audience. Ahem… Disney? Heard of ‘em? There are a number of outfits that play in that space these days. Warner, Illumination, Pixar, DreamWorks, Universal, and Sony Pictures Animation, in no particular order, are a smattering. Each studio has their own “voice” but Sony’s Hotel Transylvania franchise is a series of films that speaks in its own voice, and that voice is Genndy Tartakovsky.
And yet, Tartakovsky’s participation in the fourth entry in the tetralogy is limited to writing the story, co-penning the script, and acting as an executive producer. Instead, the helm was handed off to co-directors Derek Drymon and Jennifer Kluska, who are both first timers in the director’s chair (that’s a big chair.) Tartakovsky wasn’t the only one to decline participation in this latest, and reportedly final, installment, either. Most notably, Adam Sandler was replaced by Brian Hull as the voice of Count Dracula and Kevin James’ Frankenstein was replaced by Brad Abrell. Trust me when I say that you won’t miss them. The replacements are almost exact matches, indicating that star power just isn’t necessary to support feature-length animation. All it does it foster bloated production costs.
Sony describes Hotel Transylvania: Transformania as follows:
When Van Helsing’s mysterious invention, the “Monsterfication Ray”, goes haywire, Drac and his monster pals are all transformed into humans, and Johnny becomes a monster. In their new mismatched bodies, Drac, stripped of his powers, and an exuberant Johnny, loving life as a monster, must team up and race across the globe to find a cure before it’s too late, and before they drive each other crazy. With help from Mavis and the hilariously human Drac Pack, the heat is on to find a way to switch themselves back before their transformations become permanent. [SOURCE: IMDB.com]
At its core, Hotel Transylvaniais both an homage to classic luminaries of the Golden Age of animated shorts like Wily Coyote, Tom & Jerry, Popeye the Sailorman, and even more contemporary adherents to classic animated hijinks like Roger Rabbit and Ed, Edd, & Eddy (a meta turducken, if you will) and entirely its own thing, something like Rush is to rock music or Ben Folds Five is to alternative.
Nuts & Bolts
As the fourth entry, HT4 is a solid evolution of the defined art style, but it doesn’t stray from the franchises established parameters. This is no Spider-Verse and yet the color palette is rich and bright, lighting and luminance effects are excellent, and the correct application of bokeh and the lens effects bring believable depth to most scenes. It’s clear, that Sony has been working hard to refine their process. That said, some of the textures don’t look great (the rock slide in the opening musical number looks like crap) which is a big oversight on such a high-visibility production.
Character designs, on the other hand, are peak franchise, hewing closely to the immutable nature of classic cartoon character design that said characters are iconic and must remain recognizable. They only change in service of a gag and always return to their pristine base form when the gag is complete. This is the same basic rule that defines all character designs from all cartoon where these icons always wear the same clothes, et al. Imagine Fred Flintstone wearing actual pants or Jessica Rabbit wearing something other than her signature red, sequined dress… oh. Well, not that, but you get the idea. Thanks, Disney Whitewashing Division…
The story telling is solid, if a bit on the basic side, something I’d expect of Illumination’s work. It’s not bad, but it’s also not sophisticated. The comedy revolves almost entirely around the physical gags which, in turn, defines the entire film. In a film that is more a buddy adventure flick, ala the far superior Emperor’s New Groove, then another entry in the HT canon it works to a degree, but not entirely. There’s little to no meta humor that pleases both adults and kids alike, depending on your depth of knowledge. It comes down to the gag, and that gag is always a physical comedy bit. The approach takes away from the core conceit; two people coming to terms with each other by walking in each others shoes.
Unexpected hair loss syndrome…If anything jumps out at me it’s that the film feels claustrophobic. We start in Drac’s house, then the hotel, the plane, the provincial town, the bus, the jungle, and the cave, then back to the hotel. While the story is about Johnny and Drac and their journey towards acceptance of their differences, and spending time in each others shoes, it pulls back from the more expansive world-building as exemplified in the Tartakovsky-helmed entries. Since each scene needs to serve the setup for the next visual gag, any potential avenues for additional, foundational scope and scale is ditched in favor of setting up for the next gag.
And that’s where it lies; at the intersection of storytelling and spectacle, with the visuals winning over the written by a long shot. It’s not a terrible movie, to be sure, but you won’t derive much but the most deconstructed joy, the kind that makes a little kid roll around in the dirt with the giggles but generally doesn’t survive the transition to higher modes of cognition that come with age.
It should be a hit for years to come as a go-to for quiet toddler mommy hours worldwide.
iPhone cases & an important charity for Peruvian children
</div>
Phone cases are a dime a dozen.
Well, not literally. They cost real money, but they’re available everywhere for all kinds of mobiles and at every conceivable price point. When it comes down to it, consumers will select the style and price that fits their circumstances and financial wherewithal. Hell, a lot of Chinese phone makers include a (cheap) case in the box that I’m sure a handful of people around the globe actually use.
When I received a press release from Illusion Photograph offering me a review sample of one of their phone cases, I told them up front that they should focus on getting samples to more visible outlets. They insisted, so I did some research and, after learning their story, acquiesced. They sent me a Route 66 case for my iPhone 12 mini, and this, in a way, is a review. So, here it is…
The case comes in a zipper lock sleeve, has a lovely print applied, is glossy, and fits snugly onto my phone. It has cutouts on the top and bottom edges to better facilitate edge swiping, and the button cutouts prevent unintended button mashing while retaining easy access. In other words, it’s a lovely, but otherwise unremarkable case.
Not exactly enough for a full post, but that’s not really the point. Here’s the email I sent Beatrice, the owner of Illusion Photograph and co-founder of the LivingHeart.co charity that illustrates the actual point:
Beatrice,
Tell you what, you can send me a case, but a case is a case. I’d prefer to profile you and your efforts to raise funds for Living Heart. Your words on your website are moving. I fear for the future and my heartache is endless as I worry for our most vulnerable, no matter where they live, how they live, or what they look like. A human is a human. Full stop. And yet we struggle to make any real head-way in human rights around the world.
So, sure. You can send me a case and I’ll give it a nod, but the piece will be about you and your work and your ongoing efforts to find yourself. I fight daily for the same thing, so I feel you.
Sincerely,
Tyler
As I believe I’ve made transparent (see what I did there?), they sent me a case for free and I was planning on posting a piece about their charity. What I would also like to make clear is that I’m doing this for the charity. My only hope is that people either buy cases or donate to the charity.
This seems like a good time to talk about the charity itself. This video, produced in 2012, pretty much covers everything you need to know about how your generous donations are spent.
Most charities focus on much larger targets with narrow goals, but what I believe are the core strengths of Living Heart are its tight focus on a small region of Peru, the education and nutrition of the children of those remote communities, the care to honor and promote local traditions (read: NOT colonialism), and the teaching of sustainable skills instead of just dropping off supplies. By not expanding outward in an attempt to serve more and more communities, the charity can focus its efforts and realize real change in these impoverished regions. Note in the video when they talk about donations of warm clothing they say can be worn underneath the culture’s traditional garb. There’s a level of detail and cultural sensitivity in that you don’t see a lot of.
I urge that you give, or buy a case or five, and/or tell your friends and family to give what they can. I’ll be donating the value of the case I received once I’ve got the spare cash because I think that’s not only fair, but a responsibility I have to my fellow humans on this ever-increasingly miserable rock.
No one has ever asked to be born who they are. We just get the luck of the draw, and these kids aren’t at fault for living in poverty, and by extension their parents. Society has a long, dark history of discrimination and segregation and classism in the extremes, and these Peruvian communities high in the Andes are an example of that.
I think Living Heart is doing something very important here. We should all pitch in.
Happy New Year…
Greenland (2020) | Film Review
Good GOD, what a pig. Sure, Gerard Butler was a staple in mid-budget action flicks, but this dumpster fire isn’t one of his better ones, and it’s not going to inject any enthusiasm into prospects for his ongoing career.
BUDGET: $35 million BOX OFFICE: $47.5 million (worldwide)
Directed by Ric Roman Waugh and written by Chris Sparling, this schlocky disaster flick wannabe already instills a sense of dread before you cue it up after seeing that the movie poster proudly proclaims the movie is from “the” producer of the John Wick franchise, The Town, and Clash of The Titans (that monster hit… get it.)
When was the last time you were excited to see the latest film from your favorite producer?
Look, I’ve tried to write a simple summary of the plot, but it doesn’t make any sense. Gerard Butler’s insipid delivery as structural engineer John Garrity fares as well as expected when joined by the phoned in crap from Morena Baccarin (wife Allison) and Scott Glenn (Allison’s father Dale) and the obligatory kid, played by Roger Dale Floyd. There’s nobody else of note in the film. I’m rather surprised that these three agreed to sign on, but such is the lack of quality in Hollywood these days.
The basic rundown is as follows: John and Allison are in a bad way, but it’s not made clear why. We also learn that a comet is going to just barely miss Earth, then some of it’s going to hit, then all of it’s going to hit. That’s when John gets a call from the government that tells him he’s been selected to survive if he can get his family to a nearby military base before the end of the day. A lot of stupid shenanigans ensue, they get separated, and they get back together, and they survive. The end.
Big whoop.
Simply put, it’s a waste of time. The pacing is acceptable, but there are a lot of story elements that just feel slapped on, like generic tropes strung together to approximate an actual story. There’s zero recognizable character development, especially for Gerard Butler’s role. He’s not developed as a real, feeling, engaging, desperate human. His life circumstances bring no stakes. He’s not redeemed in the end. He doesn’t learn any harsh lessons. He’s just an unadorned avatar. The same applies to Baccarin and Glenn’s characters.
Multiple planes in the sky are clearly copy-pasted. The fires in the neighborhoods are way too big. The compositing is sloppy. Shots throughout are amateurish. All of it lacks any real energy, something I’m pretty sure is necessary for a disaster film. Hell, I’d bet real money that the Greenland shots are stock.
The Takeaway: Don’t bother.
Wonder Woman? Meh.
So, I've seen Wonder Woman now. As was common in the Golden Age of comics, there's a lot of cannibalism. WW effectively is DC's Captain America, complete with a cadre of hardened war vets with distinct personalities, even a Scot with a funny hat. That, however, is NOT why I ultimately didn't like WW. It starts simply enough (don't worry, no significant spoilers).
The Black nanny.
Does anyone in Hollywood know what's going on? We're having a lot of issues with all kind of civil rights things, like trying not to marginalize Black people!? The top of the film features a young Diana Prince (she gets the last name later) running, only to find that she's run away from her Black mammy. Oh please. Diana is white. The Queen is white. Most talking parts are white, though there's one "senator" who gets, what, five words? Then there are issues with the special effects.
Amazon flies off galloping horse, shooting an arrow while flipping, and landing on her feet. That would be nothing except she magically need not obey physics and the laws of motion. A horse is traveling at around 20 MPH, you jump off and try to land on your feet, what happens? If you do it like the Amazon, you smash your face into the ground. A bit later, a high leaping Amazon throws a pair of knives down towards the camera. If you look closely you can see that they leave her hand and minutely correct direction.
The racial and social aspects are also a mostly subtle aspect of the film. First, there's the contrivance of sparks between Gadot and Pine. It's more staged then natural, though that's more a side effect of the less-than-elegantly formed dialogue. If that weren't cliche enough, there's the team. First, we get the Native American who talks earnestly about how the white man took their home and how he is better being free waging war in Europe. Seriously? Here's an idea. Don't steal homes from people, not that we can fix that now (though we can make reparations). Then there's the Middle Eastern fellow, Sameer, who chooses to fight as a mercenary since he isn't allowed to be an actor because of his color. These scenes don't have any honesty in them. They feel spliced in with a blunt butter knife. It's demoralizing.
Then there are aspects of WW that don't add up. In the first battle scene, a sniper is suppressing WW and her team in a courtyard. Mr. Scottish sniper seems incapable of actually sniping (why is he there, again?), so Chris Pine hatches a plan. Three mortals run out and grab an enormous sheet of metal. They hoist it over their heads, and Diana uses it as a springboard to smash the bell tower to bits. I mean, it really explodes. The entire top of the building, gone. So, if she can do that, why can't she jump, what, 80 feet? Besides, she jumps higher than that earlier.
Worse yet is the subtle, almost imperceptible misogyny. Simply put, you can't be a good woman, even a super powered woman, unless you have a man to coax it out of you, even if that man complacently supports the repression of women. While Chris Pine's performance is wonderful, his ultimate role is to be a guide to the real world outside of the sheltered world of Themyscira, the hidden island home of the amazons. They dance. They do it. He navigates her around. She, the nubile naif who doesn't understand the world as it truly is.
I know these feel like nitpicks, and some are. The story, overall, is good. Most people who don't read comics likely don't know it, so it feels fresh. Gal Gadot is great as WW, though there need to be fewer SLOMO scenes of determined walking. Chris Pine is also great. Others have said that he is comfortable playing any role, leading or supporting. I think it's more than that. I believe that he's comfortable in his own skin and enjoys pretending, but doesn't need it. It's like any craft, and he is skilled. I don't, however, believe we've seen what he can truly do yet. I look forward to those days.
I'm a little surprised that this is a blockbuster, to be honest. It's more like a Marvel film, if not quite so tight and lacking the easy banter. DC has set a low bar for entry, though, and Hollywood's latest entries have been, well, crap. So much money spent to achieve so little actual value. Sadly, I don't think Wonder Woman represents a turning point for the DC cinematic universe. I have a bad feeling that this is just an anomaly.
Bummer.