If I keep this up, I might be goaded into making this a monthly entry! Discipline is the key, I guess.
Work situation is shaky but managable. The day job is a "how many skills can you learn before you become dispensable" exercise that I'm becoming more disillusioned by with each passing day and I'm still waiting for word on my Teaching Assignment and my re-activation as an online tax professional at Clicks & Mortar. That might prompt a follow-up entry if nothing else will!
On the video front, I've just watched "Dreams With Sharp Teeth," the Harlan Ellison bio-film that has received much attention over the past two years on YouTube that was officially released last week as a DVD. I enjoyed it as an interesting overview of the life of a man who continues to define the image of Writer as Renaissance Man but like any work of cinematic art I wanted to see more than what the filmmaker presented. Even Harlan wanted more visual representation of women & minorities, not surprising considering his famous Civil Rights March and ERA participations. While it was fun seeing brief glimpses of some of his famous friends (like Octavia Butler), I would have no doubt that a follow-up film featuring an appraisal of the man from the perspective of his friends, contemporaries & detractors would be far more interesting than what was shown. Granted it would probably be viewed more as a funeral service than a biopic but that might be the point. In the DVD "add-on" Harlan compared the viewing experience to the premature funeral scene in "Huckleberry Finn." At least I had a chance to watch and read new words of wisdom like "You must never be afraid to go there" and "I do what I can do" which serve as charming follow-ups to "The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity" which Harlan posted at the end of his Who's Who entry.
The weather looks promising so I'll do a little shopping. Take care and see ya next month!
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
Four and 1/2 Months Later
At least I'm getting a little better in the frequencies of my entries.
I've watched The Watchmen Movie at midnight this morning. I have no doubt that the fans of the graphic novel are going to nit pick it to death and the "newly initiated" are going to either be impressed or confused regarding a film that doesn't portray superheroes in a positive light but instead presents the idea that "superior" doesn't always means "better" and that the primary purpose of people in power is to stay in power by any means necessary.
There are numerous websites that will explain the basic plot of this story created by two very talented comic book creators, one of which received screen credit while the other demonstrably removed his name from it, so I'll just go over what I liked about this film:
1. It treated the story with the same respect for the historical periods that it took place as costume dramas featuring Ancient Rome, the Civil War and The Romanovs/The Plantagenets/The Tudors/The Windsors/fill-in-the royal family of your choice. While shows like "Cold Case" does that every week, it was nice that Snyder wasn't tempted to modernize the story for the sake of the 15 to 35 year old target audience like films like "The Spirit" did.
2. While the dialog was altered from the graphic novel, as well as who said them, the characters were surprisingly faithful to the original story. Their motivations and their actions were virtually identical. While the second superteam was originally called "Crimebusters" instead of "Watchmen" and Captain Metropolis was the proposed leader of the new group instead of Ozymandias, the other heroes did exactly the same things that they did in the original story. I don't remember if Captain Metropolis' death coincided with The Comedian's but it was never revealed who killed him, prompting the possibility that either The Comedian or Ozymandias would have been implicated which would have been an unnecessary distraction, so I respect Snyder's re-casting in this case. It makes Ozy more controlling and sinister, which tips the story's hand against him, but perhaps this was a path that Alan Moore should have pursued from the beginning. It could equally be argued that it should have remained the same. Movies aren't novels and novels aren't movies.
3. While numerous storylines were explored in the novel, the central theme was given the dramatic weight it deserved. The fans of the novel will be disappointed that "the macguffin" was changed from the novel, but there were people who read the original story and questioned its resolution at the time so I don't see how this ending couldn't have caused similar cynicism from the "World War III was prevented because of this?" crowd. Everybody who saw "Dark Knight" loved it, but nobody questioned that the death of Harvey Dent was a PC maneuver to bury Two Face into anonymity and villainize Batman "for the greater good!" I would be more suspicious of this ending than the cinematic ending of Watchmen. Ozymandias already took steps to tarnish Dr. Manhattan. Was the final resolution that much of a stretch? In Batman Begins, The Dark Knight was portrayed as Gotham's protector. Why would Gotham turn against Batman by believing that Harvey defeated The Joker by dying "a hero's death" that could have been directly or indirectly caused by Batman? Of course Heath Ledger won a posthumous Oscar for his horrifying role as The Clown Prince of Crime so heaven forbid we find fault in the plot of the film that he unofficially starred in!
With all those strong points, were there anything that they should have done? Of course there were! But it was a 3-hour film and I have no doubt that what wasn't covered will be featured on the eagerly-anticipated DVD that will probably be out in time for Christmas if not sooner if there's any negative fallout from The True Believers and the WTF Crowd who will probably crucify Snyder for even attempting to do the impossible: turn a visual but literary masterpiece into a cinematic masterpiece of equal splendour. I would personally shake his hand and say, "You're a much braver man than I, sir, and I think you did a fine job."
My verdict: 8 out of 10 with an expectation that the DVD will surpass it by at least 1 point.
I've watched The Watchmen Movie at midnight this morning. I have no doubt that the fans of the graphic novel are going to nit pick it to death and the "newly initiated" are going to either be impressed or confused regarding a film that doesn't portray superheroes in a positive light but instead presents the idea that "superior" doesn't always means "better" and that the primary purpose of people in power is to stay in power by any means necessary.
There are numerous websites that will explain the basic plot of this story created by two very talented comic book creators, one of which received screen credit while the other demonstrably removed his name from it, so I'll just go over what I liked about this film:
1. It treated the story with the same respect for the historical periods that it took place as costume dramas featuring Ancient Rome, the Civil War and The Romanovs/The Plantagenets/The Tudors/The Windsors/fill-in-the royal family of your choice. While shows like "Cold Case" does that every week, it was nice that Snyder wasn't tempted to modernize the story for the sake of the 15 to 35 year old target audience like films like "The Spirit" did.
2. While the dialog was altered from the graphic novel, as well as who said them, the characters were surprisingly faithful to the original story. Their motivations and their actions were virtually identical. While the second superteam was originally called "Crimebusters" instead of "Watchmen" and Captain Metropolis was the proposed leader of the new group instead of Ozymandias, the other heroes did exactly the same things that they did in the original story. I don't remember if Captain Metropolis' death coincided with The Comedian's but it was never revealed who killed him, prompting the possibility that either The Comedian or Ozymandias would have been implicated which would have been an unnecessary distraction, so I respect Snyder's re-casting in this case. It makes Ozy more controlling and sinister, which tips the story's hand against him, but perhaps this was a path that Alan Moore should have pursued from the beginning. It could equally be argued that it should have remained the same. Movies aren't novels and novels aren't movies.
3. While numerous storylines were explored in the novel, the central theme was given the dramatic weight it deserved. The fans of the novel will be disappointed that "the macguffin" was changed from the novel, but there were people who read the original story and questioned its resolution at the time so I don't see how this ending couldn't have caused similar cynicism from the "World War III was prevented because of this?" crowd. Everybody who saw "Dark Knight" loved it, but nobody questioned that the death of Harvey Dent was a PC maneuver to bury Two Face into anonymity and villainize Batman "for the greater good!" I would be more suspicious of this ending than the cinematic ending of Watchmen. Ozymandias already took steps to tarnish Dr. Manhattan. Was the final resolution that much of a stretch? In Batman Begins, The Dark Knight was portrayed as Gotham's protector. Why would Gotham turn against Batman by believing that Harvey defeated The Joker by dying "a hero's death" that could have been directly or indirectly caused by Batman? Of course Heath Ledger won a posthumous Oscar for his horrifying role as The Clown Prince of Crime so heaven forbid we find fault in the plot of the film that he unofficially starred in!
With all those strong points, were there anything that they should have done? Of course there were! But it was a 3-hour film and I have no doubt that what wasn't covered will be featured on the eagerly-anticipated DVD that will probably be out in time for Christmas if not sooner if there's any negative fallout from The True Believers and the WTF Crowd who will probably crucify Snyder for even attempting to do the impossible: turn a visual but literary masterpiece into a cinematic masterpiece of equal splendour. I would personally shake his hand and say, "You're a much braver man than I, sir, and I think you did a fine job."
My verdict: 8 out of 10 with an expectation that the DVD will surpass it by at least 1 point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)