Thursday, July 24, 2008

Who Watches the Watchmen Trailer?


I saw the Watchmen trailer as soon as it became available on Trailer Addict and, of course, saw it in front of The Dark Knight. It is now available on Apple.com in several different versions.

Like most devoted comic book fans, I count "Watchmen" among my favorite comics of all time. Indeed, I wrote a paper on determinism for one of my philosophy classes based on the character of Dr. Manhattan. It is easily the finest super-hero comic series that has ever been created; its influence cannot be overstated.

I am also a devoted movie fan, which puts me in an interesting predicament when it comes to the prospect of the movie. The comic geek in me is instantly cynical; there is no way that a movie version of such a fantastic comic book could possibly live up to the original, especially because "Watchmen" was conceived specifically as a comic book. There are far too many aspects of the original work (such as the "Black Freighter" comics that intertwine with the main storyline, the fictional newspaper, magazine, and novel excerpts at the end of each issue, and the specific elements of the panel layout and pacing) that simply cannot be replicated in a film. The movie is guaranteed to do the original a disservice.

At the same time, the movie geek in me reacts with unbridled excitement. The potential for fantastic visuals, intriguing performances, and for the story to reach a wider audience makes me giddy with excitement. A look at the cast list reveals a bevy of talent without any big stars; I cannot fault the casting of any of the characters except, unfortunately, with Matthew Goode as Ozymandius. With the small caveat that I have never seen him in any of his films, I think that he is simply the wrong man for the role.

I am basing this opinion entirely on superficial grounds; visually, he doesn't work as Ozymandius. In the comic, he is friendly-looking, always cheerful, an all-American hero kind of guy. Goode, in the promotional shot that was released (as seen on the left) and in the trailer looks brooding, mysterious, and imposing. Rather than appearing as the affable businessman with some peculiar habits, he comes across as a scheming, well...supervillain. And that's the main issue; Ozymandius must be likeable and trustworthy for the story to work.

I'm also surprised and annoyed that they chose to include the infamous bat-nipples on his costume. The fake muscles are also an annoyance; I understand that tights don't work on-screen, but surely they don't need fake muscles. Also, and I assure you this is the last comment on his costume, I am dismayed that they went with a dark colour-scheme for Ozymandius. We're talking about someone who markets his own image to children in the form of toys and an animated series. There's a reason his costume is bright and cheerful looking in the comic.

The trailer itself is a hodge-podge of scenes in the infuriating slow-motion style that destroyed 300 for me; I'm hoping that Zach Snyder does not consider this his signature style and that those shots were slow-motion only for the trailer. If not, it will show that he has no understanding of pacing and how panels control pacing within a comic book. The most egregious example is the opening scene of the trailer showing the death of Dr. Osterman in the intrinsic field generator. In the comic, this moment when Osterman is torn apart is shown in one splash page. When reading the comic, the eye absorbs the scene in an instant; it's a sudden jump, which means that the action on the page is instantaneous. Snyder, on the other hand, drags the action out in slow-motion, showing every detail.

Snyder seems to think that when he is making a movie based on a comic book, he should do his very best to imitate the still-images on the page, right down to the "still." With 300, he could essentially get away with it because the source material was short enough. Watchmen won't let him get away with that. There is simply too much material to cover; at least, that's my hope. I'm praying that he's using the slow-motion specifically for the trailer.

In regards to the trailer, Snyder did an interview with Wizard Magazine exactly one year ago and had this to say: "With 'Watchmen,' from a marketing standpoint and as a filmmaker - the movie and the marketing are the same thing to me - I think, 'Okay, what shots are going to be in the trailer?What images can tell people to come see the movie? If you don't look at your movie that way, you're naive to the process." It's clear to see why the trailer looks the way it does: there's little in terms of actual story being shared, simply a series of random images that are meant to be compelling.

Unfortunately, this strategy likely will not work for Watchmen the same way that it did for 300. The latter has a simple, easy-to-grasp premise that is easy to communicate: any one of a dozen shots of badass Spartan soldiers will solidify the concept in the mind of the audience. Watchmen, on the other hand, has a complex storyline that isn't even remotely hinted at in the trailer. Those unfamiliar with the storyline will be unlikely to understand any of the images shown in the trailer and will be confused rather than intrigued. The disingenuous "In 2009, everything we know will change" near the beginning doesn't help matters either.

On the plus side, the attention to detail is impressive and Snyder certainly delivers the pretty visuals and it's clear that he is remaining very close to the comics for many of the shots. There's an extensive comparison of the scenes in the trailer to their corresponding scenes in the comic over at Rope of Silicon. I love how Rorschach looks and the rest of the characters look about right as well, excepting, of course, Ozymandius. I can't get over how menacing he looks against his bank of TV screens; I really think they made a mistake with his character and it concerns me.

As a final note, I did think that the use of "The Beginning is the End is the Beginning" by The Smashing Pumpkins was a solid choice. The song, of course, was on the Batman and Robin soundtrack, so it's a subtle comic book movie reference. If Watchmen pulls references from comic book movies in the same way that the comic referenced classic comic book archetypes and tropes, I will be very excited. For the moment, I am still skeptical; I will undoubtedly see Watchmen when it comes out, but I am entirely uncertain whether I will enjoy it or not.

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Batman: The Dark Knight


It is incredibly difficult to begin to critique a film like The Dark Knight. The amount of hype that was built up around the film prior to its release was to the point of absurdity and was only heightened by the tragic death of Heath Ledger. This unfortunate event will be inextricably tied to the film and has created as much, if not more, interest in the film as the return of both Christian Bale and Christopher Nolan to their respective roles of lead actor and director.

It's a testimony to his skill as an actor and his dedication to the role that I only once was reminded that the Joker was played by the late Australian, as the Joker plunged to his seeming death from a tall building. The thought was brushed aside as a grappling hook brought the Joker back for one last exchange of dialogue. It should be sufficient to note that Ledger's performance is brilliant and deserves every ounce of Oscar buzz that has been generated over the last couple weeks. This is Ledger's finest performance and, if it had to be his final performance, it was a good one to go out on. Hopefully The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus won't ruin things, though I have faith in Terry Gilliam.

There were plenty of skeptical people, myself included, when he was first announced for the role. My introduction to Ledger was the underrated 10 Things I Hate About You, where he proved he could add depth to the typical pretty-boy. His subsequent roles in The Patriot and A Knight's Tale certainly did nothing to shake his pretty-boy image, but he increased his respectability, as well as his notoriety, with fine performances in Brokeback Mountain and Casanova in 2005. Still, many wondered whether he would be able to play the Joker, especially given the classic portrayal of the character by Jack Nicholson in Tim Burton's original Batman. The first teaser trailer did little to assuage these fears, as he initially sounded as if he was aping Nicholson's voice. The first publicity photos that were released also caused some concern among fans.

For me, those fears were laid to rest when I saw I Am Legend in IMAX. The opening scene of The Dark Knight played out in its entirety and completely destroyed any concerns I had with Ledger's performance. He completely stole every scene he appeared in, from shoving a pencil through a guy's skull (it's magic!) to openly laughing in Batman's face as he throws him around an interrogation room, to cross-dressing as a nurse in Gotham General, the Joker had myself and everyone else in the room laughing at all the wrong moments, perfectly portraying the Joker and erasing the Jack Nicholson-era Joker from everyone's mind.

Now, the Joker was easily the highlight of the film, but pretty much every review of The Dark Knight contains little more than continuous praise for Ledger's performance. So, I'm done. No more rave reviews for Ledger in this review.

Nolan's first bat-film, the origin re-writing Batman Begins, dealt with the theme of fear. This time around, the theme is on the nature of good and evil. The Joker clearly shows the side of evil, with Batman representing the side of good (a particularly grey area of good, but good nonetheless). In between the two, lies Harvey Dent, who is introduced as Gotham's white knight, the crusading District Attorney out to clean up the streets of Gotham City and get rid of the gangs and mobs that control them. With so much interest being paid to Batman and the Joker, it was surprising to realize that the film was really about neither of them, instead focusing on the rise and fall of Harvey Dent.

Aaron Eckhart puts in a fantastic performance, giving his portrayal a keen edge that makes his transition to the insane Two-Face near the end of the film entirely believable. There's an undercurrent of anger in his pursuit of justice, seen clearly well before half of his face is burned off, as he punches a witness in the face in a court proceeding (he was attempting to shoot Harvey at the time) and later beating a paranoid schizophrenic in the Joker's employ in an attempt to get information. In public, however, Harvey Dent is that white knight, and even convinces Batman himself. This makes his fall a tragic one, but one that is unfortunately not pulled off perfectly.

The main issue I have with this film is in the character of Rachel Dawes. While Maggie Gyllenhaal certainly gives a better performance in the role than Katie Holmes, the character seems entirely superfluous. It seems her entire purpose for being in the film is to provide a mild dose of romantic tension and a reason for Harvey Dent to go insane. She's just not believable as a character and, unfortunately, I felt no sense of loss when she died. Because of this, it was far more difficult than it should have been to sympathize with Harvey Dent as he became Two-Face. In order to make him a fully-sympathetic villain, the audience has to feel the same way as he does about Rachel's death. As callous as it may seem, there wasn't much reason for the audience to empathize with her death. With the Joker in the movie, the deaths come fast and furious through the first half of the film, so by the time we reach Rachel's death, it's just another added to the list.

I only have one other issue with The Dark Knight: Christian Bale's notorious bat-voice. While I understand the reason's behind it (it's a way not only for Batman to be more intimidating but to disguise Bruce Wayne's voice), it got intensely annoying towards the end of the film. Batman Begins got away with it because Batman did not have any lengthy conversations while in costume. The Dark Knight is not so lucky in this respect. He and Commissioner Gordon exchange words several times and he has a lengthy interrogation scene with the Joker; both made me wonder how Batman avoided going into a coughing fit from having to growl so much.

Now, if this was just a minor annoyance, I might not even mention it. Instead, it feels like a misunderstanding of the character. In the comics, it has long been held that Batman is the real face of the character and Bruce Wayne the playboy is the mask. The view is that Batman is who he really is and that he merely acts as Bruce Wayne. The origin story we see in Batman Begins supports this view, as Bruce Wayne does not even know how to act like Bruce Wayne when he returns to Gotham. Eventually he learns to play up his playboy personality to throw off suspicion and to provide an easy alibi. The bat-voice, on the other hand, belies this notion. It feels far too much like Bruce Wayne putting on a scary voice, playacting as Batman.

Even though I feel like it does a disservice to the character, the issues I have with Bale's bat-voice are definitely nitpicking. This is a brilliant film that deserves the high praise it has received. Despite its length, it's a remarkably tight film. Even the potential throw-away character of Reese, an accountant with Wayne Enterprises who stumbles upon the Bruce Wayne-Batman connection, becomes a crucial part of the plot as the Joker threatens to blow up a hospital unless someone kills him before he gives away Batman's secret identity. Of course, the Joker blows up the hospital without even checking if Reese was dead, but that's pretty typical of the Joker in this film.

Strangely enough, evil wins out in the end in this film. Harvey Dent is twisted by the Joker's actions and begins to play chance with the lives of those he holds responsible, flipping his famous coin to decide whether they will live or die. By the end of the film, Harvey has killed several people and threatens to kill Jim Gordon's son before being finally stopped by Batman. Good has been twisted, evil wins. The only way out for Batman and Jim Gordon that they can find is to lie, to hold Batman responsible for the murders committed by Harvey. There is one loose end, however: one of Dent's targets had the coin land good side up and knows that Dent went around the bend. I suspect that Detective Anna Ramirez (I was very much hoping her name would be Renee Montoya, but no luck) will have a role to play in the inevitable sequel.

As Stan Lee would say, "'Nuff said." Go see this movie.

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Hellboy II: The Golden Army


My wife and I have a tendency to see supernatural comic-book action movies when we go out on dates. On our very first date, we saw Constantine and we went out of our way to see Ghostrider, despite knowing it would be terrible, simply because it was a supernatural comic-book action movie. So, it was only natural that we see Hellboy II: The Golden Army when it came into theatres.

Hellboy II is visually stunning and incredibly fun, but it had the opportunity to be so much more. While I enjoyed the film immensely, I was ultimately disappointed.

The character of Hellboy is rife with potential for exploring the themes of alienation and inner turmoil. He's a monster (specifically a demon) raised by a human (specifically a Catholic). As the perennial outsider longing for acceptance, the appearance in this movie of a community of similarly strange creatures is the perfect opportunity to explore this theme. So, what happens when Hellboy is given the opportunity to truly belong?

Well, not a whole lot.

Before I get into what I feel is the main failing of this movie, a brief recap is in order; I definitely enjoyed this movie and I don't want to dive too far into the negative so that I lose sight of the positive. The movie opens with Professor Broom, Hellboy's adoptive father, reading a pre-teen Hellboy a bedtime story. The story, of course, is the history of the "Golden Army" of the title and is wonderfully illustrated by what appear to be computer animated wooden dolls. It's a fantastic conceit that captures the imagination and is much preferable to the overwrought narration that could have been used. We learn that the Golden Army was created by the goblins for use by the elven king in their war against the humans. The army, controlled by a crown, is unstoppable, indestructible, and unbeatable, so much so that the elven king regrets his decision and arranges a peace treaty, breaking the crown into three pieces, giving one to the humans and keeping the other two with the elves.

It is abundantly clear from this opening that the recovery of these three pieces will be the central plot of the movie. Unfortunately, the opening also blatantly foreshadows the conclusion. The crown must be worn by someone with royal blood and only works as long as no one challenges his right to rule. Obviously, the army will be stopped by someone challenging the crown-bearer's right to rule. If it wasn't for the fact that this led to a fantastic fight scene in the climax of the movie, I would be very disappointed.

The opening also introduces our villain: the bad-ass elven warrior, Prince Nuada. Kudos to director Guillermo del Toro for avoiding Tolkien-esque clichés in creating his elves, as they are very distinctive in appearance. Del Toro clearly has a way with mythical creatures (see Pan's Labyrinth; seriously, go see it) and the various monsters populating the world of Hellboy II are brilliantly conceived and are a visual feast. Much of the credit should also go to Sammy Sheldon, whose costume designs are wonderful.

Luke Goss puts together a wonderful performance as Prince Nuada, but, unfortunately, Nuada never quite materializes as the sympathetic villain he was meant to be, which is the cause of my main issue with the film. Nuada feels that the treaty between the elves and humans was a terrible idea, as the humans have done nothing but destroy the earth, including the forests that are meant to be the homes of all the mythical creatures. Thus, he intends to reunite the pieces of the crown, take control of the Golden Army, and destroy the human world. Ta-da! We have a villain!

His motivations are, of course, entirely noble and right in his own eyes. In bits and pieces throughout the film we see that the world of monsters and mythological creatures has been reduced and confined by the advancement of mankind and his cities. Nuada sees himself as the saviour of the "people" and that his actions are just. Unfortunately, none of the other fantastical creatures seem to agree with him. When he kills his father, the king, to reclaim one of the three pieces of the crown, there's a general buzz about the room, but no one leaps to the king's aid other than his guards (who are consequently killed in a stunning display of bad-assery by Prince Nuada himself). No one leaps to join Nuada either. Rather than leading a rebel uprising or an army of similarly-minded creatures of myth, Nuada apparently goes into hiding and is next seen all alone tinkering away on a golden egg, which turns out to enclose an elemental or forest god. Which he then uses as a weapon.

This is exactly my issue with Hellboy II. Nuada's only real follower is Wink, a large troll-like creature with a mechanical gauntlet on his right hand that rivals Hellboy's massive mitt. He doesn't lead an uprising against the human world; he's a lone gunman. Indeed, he uses some of the mythical creatures as weapons, such as the forest god and the tooth fairies that Nuada buys and subsequently starves to make them extra hungry and vicious. He is hardly a hero of the "people" and clearly does not represent the monsters in any way. The only other monsters that Hellboy and his pals meet are either afraid to say anything about Nuada or are against him, such as his twin sister Princess Nuala and the no-legged goblin that created the Golden Army in the first place.

So, when Hellboy is presented with the choice of joining Prince Nuada and his fellow creatures of myth against the humans, it's a false dilemma. Nuada presents his offer after Hellboy and his friends have been in the Troll Market, a market bazaar hidden beneath the Brooklyn Bridge. Surrounded by monsters and mythical creatures, Hellboy expresses his joy at the fact that no one is staring at him and making him feel out of place. Clearly the intention is to show that Hellboy would love to be a part of such a community. As they escape the Troll Market after killing Wink, Nuada sics his forest god on Hellboy and the rest of New York. Hellboy climbs up the side of a building to gain the higher ground on the several-story tall plant elemental, and is met at the top of the building by Prince Nuada, who apparently has the magical ability to suddenly appear wherever the plot needs him. Nuada attempts to tempt him over to his side, explaining that the forest god that Hellboy is so thoughtlessly shooting (apparently forest god's have one fatal weakness: bullets) is a beautiful, noble creature that is the last of its kind.

This would have been a wonderful argument, except for the fact that Nuada had just ordered this beautiful, noble creature to kill Hellboy, placing the beautiful, noble creature in harm's way. Congratulations, Nuada, you just sent a forest god to its death. Way to cause their extinction.

Because Nuada is so obviously a villain, the choice that Hellboy must make between humanity and monstrosity is never realized, leaving Hellboy with no significant character arc. The choice is just too easy. At least in the first movie, he had to make a significant choice: cause the apocalypse, thereby saving the woman he loves, or save the world. Here, his only significant choice is whether to punch the bad guy or shoot the bad guy. There is a sub-plot dealing with his relationship with the pyrokinetic Liz Sherman, but it's ordinary and predictable. Does Hellboy care more about Liz or more about everyone else? Gee, I wonder what his answer will be...

In any case, all of this would be less frustrating if it wasn't so clear that it was meant to be a tough decision. Nuada is constantly portrayed as being a sympathetic character (even when he clearly isn't) and Hellboy is rebuffed by the humanity that he so desperately wants to be a part of. After saving the city from the forest god, the bystanders get predictably angry at Hellboy and he's hit by a thrown rock/bottle/some other projectile, which somehow manages to cut him, despite the fact that he was just punched numerous times by a metal fist causing no bruising or lacerations. At the same time, the movie goes out of its way to portray Hellboy's humanity, specifically in a wonderful scene where he and Abe Sapien, his Icthian friend, get thoroughly drunk and talk about their problems with women. It's a hilarious scene that clearly shows how close to being human they really are. It's really too bad that this was never turned into a legitimate conflict.

Fortunately, Abe Sapien and Liz Sherman both have their own significant choices to make. Abe falls for the lovely Princess Nuala, a fellow telepath, and must choose whether or not to give Prince Nuada the final piece of the crown in return for her safety. Unfortunately, he makes his decision based on love rather than reason and almost destroys the world. I'll blame residual amounts of alcohol in his system as well as plot for that decision. Liz also chooses love when her choice comes around; she's informed by Guillermo del Toro's creepy stand-in for the angel of death that Hellboy is destined to bring about the apocalypse and wonders whether she still wants to save his life knowing his destiny. Of course, she's pregnant with twins, so that may have affected her decision as well. She would rather have her children raised in a post-apocalyptic landscape than grow up without a father. Fair enough.

Beyond the missed opportunities to make Nuada a well-rounded and sympathetic villain and present Hellboy with a legitimately serious character choice, the movie is fantastic. I especially appreciated the fight scenes, which eschew hand-held, crazy jump-cuts (favoured by so many modern action films) for clearly shot and beautifully choreographed duels. The closing battle between Hellboy and Prince Nuada is especially brilliant; Nuada leaps and flips around effortlessly while Hellboy attempts to keep up, swinging his massive right fist. It's a beautifully shot scene in an intriguing setting; the giant gears that take up a portion of the room are well-used and make for more than just eye-candy. The battle ends, of course, as everyone knew it would as soon as they found out that Nuada and Nuala are so connected as twins that they share injuries as well. Princess Nuala stabs herself in the heart, killing them both. While predictable, it's still a poignant scene, as Abe Sapien races to her side and shares one last telepathic link with her before she dies.

While it's a missed opportunity, the film is still good summer blockbuster fun, with a large helping of the creativity and innovation that most summer blockbusters lack. The strange creatures populating the hidden fantasy world are worth the price of admission alone. The fight scenes and great sense of humour make this an even better deal. Guillermo del Toro continues to improve as a director; I just wish his English-language films were as intriguing and in-depth as his Spanish-language films. After the strange fairytale of Pan's Labyrinth, Hellboy II just wasn't as fulfilling.

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

The Obligatory Welcome

Welcome to No Spoiler Warnings, a site for movie reviews that give away plot twists, ruin endings, and don't give any spoiler warnings, other than the implied spoiler warning in the title of the website, which is relatively ironic.

And, with that torturously long sentence, we begin. I will be reviewing and critiquing whatever movies I happen to see, whether new or old. I took many film courses while doing my BA in Communications, but my main focus was writing. Thus, while I may and likely will comment on the cinematography and acting, I will generally have more to say about plot structure, dialogue, and character.

The first review/critique should be up soon. I saw Hellboy 2 last night, which is what initially prompted me to start this site.