Man of Steel (2013)

Title: Man of Steel (2013)

Director: Zack Snyder

Cast: Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon, Russell Crowe, Diane Lane, Kevin Costner, Antje Traue, Laurence Fishburne

Review:

Without a doubt Man of Steel is the hottest ticket in town; the quintessential ‘movie of the summer’, it’s the “gotta see” of the summer season; so of course I was excited as hell to see it. I had my ticket a whole week before it was released, nothing was gonna stop me from seeing this one! The anticipation was a turn on as they say. The last cinematic incarnation of Superman was Bryan Singer’s Superman Returns (2006). Those of you who saw it know it was disappointing in the sense that we rarely saw Superman doing anything very super; unless you count being a super stalker, a super power. He spent too much of his time brooding over Louis Lane rather than kicking some ass. So naturally, the big question on everyone’s mind is will this new Superman finally kick some ass? The answer to that question is a resounding yes! There’s so much ass kicking on this movie that you won’t know if Superman is saving or destroying Metropolis!

Since this is the first film in a new chapter of Superman films, Man of Steel has to go through the rite of passage of telling, once again, Superman’s origin story which we’d already seen in Superman (1978) and Superman Returns. But don’t worry, the good thing is that Man of Steel does it through a series of flashbacks, we don’t really dwell too much in Superman’s teenage years. Like the story of Jesus in the bible, Clark goes from being a child to being 33 years old in the blink of an eye, which by the way is also Jesus’s age in the bible. Same as Jesus; Kal-El is sent by his father to earth to “save them all”, so the parallels with Jesus Christ are pretty blunt on this one, actually there's more of them: Clark ends up being a fisherman, just like Jesus was a fisherman. Hell, Superman’s father tells him “you’ll be a God to them”, so yeah, there’s tons of biblical references on Man of Steel. Superman is even portrayed as having Catholic beliefs, which for me is one of the weak points in the film because this was never a part of who Superman is, its one of the reason why I lowered the score a bit. But unfortunately, according to this film, Clark is brought up in a Christian family. Clarks earth mother Martha Kent (played by Diane Lane) even wears a crucifix on her neck throughout the movie, so yeah, Superman’s a catholic on this one. Why did the filmmakers choose to go this route with the character?  

The thing about Superman is that he is supposed to represent the best in humanity, our best qualities, our highest morals, so I’m guessing this is why they gave him a Christian background, because Christianity portrays itself as a belief system with high moral values, never mind the pedophilia and the mass murders they’ve committed throughout history, Catholicism is supposed to be wholesome, keywords here being “supposed to be”. So then we have Clark sort of trying to hide the fact that he’s Superman because his earthly father, Jonathan Kent tells him the people of earth simply wouldn’t be able to deal with it, one lady who witnesses Superman’s strength starts saying that he is a God send. So Clark is always walking that dubious line between maintaining his secret, or coming out to the world as a super powered alien being. I enjoyed how they explored that angle of Superman changing people’s perceptions of why we are here. They go a bit into how Superman’s existence finally answers the question “are we alone in the universe?” I wish they’d gone a bit deeper into that, I personally think a whole new religion would pop up that would worship Superman, but they don’t go that far into it. So as you can see, this Superman movie gets quite existential. 

"We going to church today mom?"

Superman has always been portrayed as an American icon. His very suit is made up of two of the colors of the American flag. In the old television shows he was portrayed as a character who stood up for “truth, justice and the American way”. So I guess that’s why there’s so much product placement on this film! I counted Sears, 7-Eleven and IHOP amongst the companies that paid moola for their name to appear on this movie. I personally hate that whole “American Way” aspect of Superman, because really, a guy that powerful would be a citizen of the world, not of the United States. If Superman is that noble, that wholesome, he would see past borders and nationalities, he wouldn’t be “as American as they come”. But that’s the way they want to portray Superman on this film and with this movie they’ve really gone all the way with that whole idea. I mean, right before the movie started, they gave a commercial for the U.S. Army in which they compare the American military to Superman as if saying that American soldiers are real life heroes, never mind that most of them die in the line of battle for their countries egotistical reasons, sometimes for reasons that the soldiers themselves don’t even understand. Never mind that the American military is used to invade and conquer other countries simply because they have lots of oil, never mind all the atrocities they’ve committed, like bombing schools and hospitals, never mind that they are the nation that has killed the most people in one single swoop; they are heroes! So, this is a movie that takes Superman, the most powerful being on earth and puts a ‘Made in America’ stamp on it. The most powerful being on the planet is an American, and he’s working side by side with the U.S. Army! Barf. Personally, I hated that about this movie, but no worries, this didn’t hinder my enjoyment of this massive summer movie blockbuster.

And when I say massive, I mean massive! When Supes and General Zod go at each other it is a dangerous affair which puts the citizens of Metropolis in true peril. On this one you won’t get people eating Ice Cream and talking on the phone as Gods are fighting each other destroying the city like in Superman II (1980). Nope, on this one the citizens of Metropolis have to run for their lives or get killed in Zod’s wake! Buildings are toppled, cars fly up in the air and massive amounts of concrete is destroyed when these guys go at each other. The battles are epic and certainly surpass the fight between General Zod and Superman in Superman II; a film which I still enjoy very much. Before this whole superhero revival thing that started with X-Men (2000), Superman II was the best of the superhero movies for me. But of course, it was quickly surpassed by many of the superhero films that are so common today, like say for example The Avengers (2012), which set a new standard for superhero films. And there’s no denying that this new Superman movie is influenced immensely by The Avengers, we get dimensional portals, an alien invasion in a major city and superheroes dueling in the skies; sound familiar? It’s because that’s exactly what The Avengers was all about too. But don’t fret, this isn’t a Xerox copy of The Avengers, yet there’s no denying the influence that film has over this one. I would go on to say that it’s the first official film to be influenced by The Avengers in that it’s trying to reach the same levels of destruction and epic scope.

Yet, the film goes its own way offering us many original elements. For example ‘Krypton ‘, Superman’s home world is a wonder to behold; I loved how they portrayed the different levels of political hierarchy. The technology of the planet mixes the organic with the technological in a really interesting way. The whole deal with Superman’s father, and who he was on his planet, loved that whole bit. We get to see why the suit, why the ‘S’, why the super powers, basically, all the ‘why’s’ about superman are answered. This film simply explains things better. But what we really wanted to see with this new film is Superman kicking ass right? So don’t worry my friends, there’s tons of that! This movie delivers on the spectacle arena, you won’t be disappointed. As a summer blockbuster, this movie functions to perfection, without a hitch. Casting wise the film is perfect, Henry Cavill as Kal-El was perfect casting, he looks the part. There was a moment where I thought I saw Christopher Reeves face, but it could have been my nostalgia goggles messing with me. Amy Adams as Louis was great, she isn’t bitchy or cartoony, she’s just a smart reporter, though I do feel that Louis and Clark’s love on this movie comes out of left field because there’s nothing to really validate it or spark it, it simply happens, it feels like they fall for each other simply because that’s what happens between Louis and Clark, not because they genuinely fell in love. Michael Shannon is great as Zod, but I was expecting a more intense portrayal of the character coming from Shannon, who is used to playing intensely nutty characters. Still, he doesn’t mess things up, it’s just that I thought he’d do something just a little more over the top.

  

Bottom line is this movie didn’t disappoint with its spectacle and massive amounts of destruction, the only reason why the film looses a couple of points for me is for using Superman to spread patriotism (which to me is simply another form of fanatism) and for making him a catholic, which just sucks, Catholicism was never a part of the equation; but the rest of the movie? Freaking awesome! A great summer blockbuster that won’t disappoint in terms of constantly showing you cool stuff. I mean, how cool was it that Superman finally used his heat vision and his super speed? Trust me on this one you’ll see Superman doing stuff you’ve never seen him do on any other movie, like for example, seeking the council of a Catholic priest. After the film finished, the audience stayed behind expecting one of those cliffhanger endings that the Marvel and Fast and the Furious films have popularized so much, but don’t waste your time, you’re not going to get it here. The filmmakers opted not to give us a cliffhanger as if saying: "this is a DC movie not a Marvel movie and don’t you forget it!" I'm positive that this movie will make obscene amounts of money, and I'm sure a sequel is certain, actually, both David Goyer the films writer, and Zack Snyder, the films director are signed to return. The success of Man of Steal will determine if we will ever see a Justice League movie, so if you want to see that movie happen, go on and see Man of Steel. If Man of Steel is any indication, we should be in for something  special, DC style. 

   

Rating: 4 out of 5  

Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey (1991)

Title: Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991)

Director: Peter Hewitt

Cast: Keanu Reeves, Alex Winters, William Sadler, George Carlin, Pamela Grier, Joss Ackland

Review:

Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure was the sleeper hit of 1989, nobody expected it to become a hit, yet, there it was, making millions at the box office. For a movie that only cost 10 million, making more than 40 million at the box office is a big deal, so of course, a bigger and more expensive sequel went into production; this time with twice the budget and better special effects. The result was Bill and Ted go to Hell, or as it was later re-titled: Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey. The reason for changing the title was that in the United States, you cannot advertise anything on television with the word ‘Hell’ on it before 9 P.M., so in order to promote the film more effectively, they just changed the title. A stupid rule if there ever was any, how’s using the word hell going to affect a kid? So, whatever, they changed the title to Bogus Journey, which is a cool substitute title anyways. This film underwent many changes on its way to the silver screen, many of them had to do with the film being “too scary” for kids. I guess they figured this film was aimed at 12 year olds even though the main characters are young adults? This was one of those movies where studios get all nervous about marketing. If it’s too scary for kids, or too silly for adults, then there’s a possibility that the film will tank at the box office.

R.I.P. Bill and Ted! 

Thankfully, this didn’t happen to Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey. It went on to recuperate its budget at the box office simply because there was no denying this movie was fun times, it was cool, it had that rock and roll attitude, it had two likable lead characters, cool effects and heavy doses of comedy. It feels like the overall vibe while making this movie was “the crazier the better!” I remember seeing the movie in theaters when I was about 15 years old and leaving the theater excited and satisfied. And I remember it was after I heard KISS’s ‘God Gave Rock and Roll to You II’ on this movie that I started to listen to KISS and I started to like them. I mean, according to the film, this was the song that was going to bring unity to the entire universe! It was thanks to this movie that I am a hardcore KISS fan! So I thank this movie for introducing me to the hottest band in the world. The soundtrack was pretty rocking too, I mean, here’s a soundtrack that had all manner of cool bands at the moment. Even cooler, the rest of the films rock and roll score was done by guitar legend Steve Vai;  how cool is that? The soundtrack included tunes from KISS, Megadeth, Primus, Faith No More and Winger. It also had a really catchy tune that was used to promote the film called “Shout it Out” by a hair band called Slaughter. I remember really liking that one too. It was these type of hair bands that dominated the popular music scene back in the early 90’s, this was just prior to the arrival of Nirvana, Pearl Jam and the death of hair bands. We could say that Bogus Journey captures the last vestiges of that party rock that was so popular in the 80’s. Hair bands had an expiration date, they just didn’t know it yet.

On Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey we find Bill and Ted a little older, but not a little wiser, in fact, they are just as dumb as ever. Here we find them contemplating marriage! They even get engaged to ‘the babes’ and as engagement rings they give them plastic rings that seem to have come out of a Cracker Jack box! They innocently wonder if the babes will stay over after they marry? Ha! They are also trying to get into the battle of the bands. You see, according to the first film, Bill and Ted are supposed to be the saviors of the universe, bringing peace and unity to the galaxy through their rock and roll, unfortunately, they are having trouble living up to the prophecy because according to Mrs. Wardrobe the organizer of the Battle of the Bands competition, they stink! Meanwhile, in the future, a dictator known as De Nomolos is sending two evil robot versions of Bill and Ted (known throughout the movie as Evil Bill and Ted) to the past to kill Bill and Ted so that he can rule the future with an iron fist. Worst part of the whole thing is that the robots are successful, Bill and Ted are killed and that’s where their Bogus Journey through the afterlife begins. They meet God, Satan and everything in between, they even give The Grim Reaper a visit, hell they even play Battle Ship with him! Will they ever get a chance to live again? And just when and how will they become the saviors of the universe?

One of the things that I enjoy about this one is how inventive it is with its special effects and its visual gags. From start to finish we get a nonstop assortment of special effects. First we get to see ‘Bill and Ted University’ where Rufus, Bill and Ted’s mentor, is a professor. Cool part about this university is that if the students need to know who Benjamin Franklin is, Rufus just gets on the time machine and brings him right into the classroom! So anyhow, then Bill and Ted die and we go to hell, where meet Satan, who looks exactly how you’d expect him to look, like a giant red demon overseeing hell. Bill and Ted manage to greet him, “How’s it going Beelzebub?” Then Bill and Ted head on over to limbo and play a couple of board games with The Grim Reaper, who then takes Bill and Ted up to heaven, to meet God himself. So it’s a film that is constantly taking us to visually interesting places, it’s never boring that’s for sure. We even get to meet two little Martians called ‘Station’ who join their bodies and become this giant Martian scientist! And then we have both good and evil robot versions of Bill and Ted; if this all sounds like a huge mess of a movie, then you know what? You’re kind of right, this movie is all over the place! But that’s exactly what I like about it, how offbeat it is.

The film was actually even crazier then what I’ve described. I sometimes wish they would've released a director’s cut of this film because it would be an even cooler film, the stuff they left out was the edgier stuff, the stuff deemed too scary for kids, or stuff that the producers thought would be too confusing for audiences. For example, there’s a scene in which Evil Bill and Ted open up their robotic chests and take out three canisters, each canister containing one of Bill and Ted’s fears. They actually filmed a scene in which Bill and Ted are headed towards the Battle of the Bands on their van and they suddenly confront nightmarish versions of Bill’s Granny, The Easter Bunny and Coronel Oats! It becomes a showdown between Bill and Ted and hellish versions of their worst fears! The evil bunny rabbit looked positively evil! A pity it was left out of the film! 

This nightmarish Bunny Rabbit was cut out of the film if you can believe it! 

Another deleted scene had Evil Bill and Ted revealing that Evil Bill was actually Evil Ted and vice versa, now this part I know would have been confusing for audiences, because what the hell right? Evil Bill was actually Evil Ted? And Vice Versa?  Totally nuts right? But what the hell, the whole movie was crazy from the beginning anyway! There was also a deleted scene in which Bill and Ted are in Hell, hammering rocks with sledge hammers with a demon overseeing their work, and they say something like “I kind of like this!” and then the demon that’s watching over them eats a rat and one of them says “I heard a guy found one of those in a bucket of chicken!” I guess that was deemed to gross? Whatever, these deleted scenes simply show that Bill and Ted’s Bogus Journey was a film filled with so many ideas that they had to leave some of them out in order to make the movie flow, or to shorten running time. Cool to know that director Peter Hewitt shot an epic Bill and Ted film! This movie was going to be even more epic than it already is!

This deleted scene actually made it on to the comic book adaptation of the film done by Marvel Comics! 

Which is cool when we take in consideration that this was Peter Hewitt’s first film ever. Back then, this  28 year old British lad was chosen out of 50 other possible directors. He was chosen because of the strength of a short he had made called ‘The Candy Show’. After directing Bogus Journey Hewitt stuck to directing family films like The Borrowers (1997) and Garfield (2004). The rest of the cast has also gone on to do great things, Keanu Reeves of course went on to become the mega star he is today, and Alex Winter went on to become a director of children’s films and television shows like Ben 10. He is currently trying to get a remake of The Gate (1987) in 3-D, but that’s been in development hell like forever. I hope he does manage to get it made though! He also went on to direct the make-up effects heavy film called Freaked (1993), gonna be reviewing it soon. But what of Bill and Ted’s further adventures through time? Well, there’s been talk of a Bill and Ted 3, actually, I hear there’s even a screenplay written for it, written by the very same guys who created and wrote the first two films, Ed Solomon and Chris Matheson. According to Alex Winters himself, nothing is holding Bill and Ted 3 from getting made; it’s just that these things take time. I wonder if Keanu would go back to playing Ted again? I know I wouldn’t mind seeing another one! Maybe a new danger is threatening the peace of the universe? Bring it on! I wouldn’t mind seeing another one! Party on dudes!

Rating: 4 out of 5  

For an interesting and informative take on Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure (1989), the film that started it all, check out J.D. Lafrance's review on Radiator Heaven! 

Director Peter Hewitt talks over a scene with Martian Scientist 'Station'

The Long Kiss Goodnight (1996)

Title: The Long Kiss Goodnight (1996)

Director: Renny Harlin

Cast: Geena Davis, Samuel L. Jackson, Brian Cox, David Morse, Craig Bierko

Review:

The deal with The Long Kiss Goodnight is that it’s the kind of movie that makes you wonder why it tanked at the box office in such a big way. I mean, here’s a film that’s action packed, fast paced, has a great cast, and is quite frankly pure adrenaline filled fun, yet it didn’t manage to get audiences’ butts to the theater. There are a few reasons that we can blame for that, but I’ll get into them later. I hadn’t seen The Long Kiss Goodnight in such a long time that I decided to give it the old re-watch/reassessment, just because Shane Black is back on the radar writing and directing big budget action films like Iron Man 3 (2013). You see, Shane Black got a lot of heat for selling the script for The Long Kiss Goodnight for four million dollars! He suddenly became the highest paid writer in Hollywood, but also one of the most hated. I chalk it up to jealousy, anybody who is offered that much money for writing an action film is going to take the money! I know I would! The ones spewing the hatred were just jealous it wasn’t them getting paid four million dollars, that’s all. So this movie is notoriously famous for that alone;  but also because it was a huge flop. After this movie tanked the way it did, Shane Black went into hibernation, hiding away from Hollywood. Did The Long Kiss Goodnight deserve to flop so hard? Does the film stand the test of time? I say hells yeah! I’m glad I bought this one and re-watched it, its fun times all the way!

On this one we meet Samantha Caine, a school teacher and a mother.  She’s on the PTA and all that, she’s the perfect house wife/mom type of deal. But there’s one problem though, she can’t remember who she used to be. Two years prior, she woke up on a beach, half dead, unable to recall who she was before that, so she started a new life, a quiet life in the suburbs. Yet slowly but surely, in subtle ways, her old self is resurfacing. She has nightmares in which a mirror image of herself tells her that her real name is Charlie and that Charlie is “coming back!” Samantha suddenly becomes quite skilled at throwing knifes! Suddenly she’ll have these short outbursts of anger and tells her daughter to stop being such a baby! She tells her “life is pain! Get used to it!” These are all things she puts to the side and tries to ignore; she just tries to continue with her normal suburban life. The real problems start when a gang of thugs, dressed as Christmas carolers come knocking at her door shooting at her and her family with machine guns! Why do these guys want her dead? Who was she before being picture perfect mommy?

The Long Kiss Goodnight got a bad rap for a couple of reasons, number one being that this was the film that Renny Harlin directed after Cutthroat Island (1995), a film that was one of the biggest flops in cinematic history. Just so you get an idea of what kind of a flop Cutthroat Island was, it cost 98 million dollars yet made back only about 11 million at the box office! Dang, now that’s what I call a major flop! So anyhow, apparently audiences didn’t trust Harlin as a director because he’d done that “awful” pirate movie that turned out to be one of the biggest turkeys ever. On Cutthroat Islands’ behalf I will say that I never understood why it failed, I think that movie was huge fun as well. I mean, it was no less fun than those Pirates of the Caribbean movies that are so popular nowadays. I guess it was just the wrong time, or the wrong cast, or whatever. Who knows why audiences end up collectively turning their backs on a given project, sometimes it’s the stupidest of things. But in the case of The Long Kiss Goodnight, its failure probably came as a result of Cutthroat Islands colossal downfall. In Shane Black’s own words “I wish The Long Kiss Goodnight hadn’t been released after Cutthroat Island” Worldwide The Long Kiss Goodnight made close to 90 million, but domestically it didn’t even make half of its 65 million budget back.

Sad story too because this movie is a lot of fun, as an action movie, it hits all the right buttons. First we have that intrigue of Samantha having a second personality buried deep within her psyche, this side of the story is always fun because you just know that that second personality is gonna come bursting out at some point. In that sense it reminded me of Angelina Jolie in SALT (2010), a deadly female fatale who doesn’t quite understand her full potential…yet. Geena Davis is fantastic on this one, she plays the innocent, beautiful wife/mom, living the family life, then suddenly she does the 180 and turns into a hellish top secret agent who can kill you with her breath. She turns into a full blown action star on this one! I loved seeing Geena Davis with blond hair, lots of eye liner, holding a machine gun, shooting it with a mean look on her face! She looked freaking great! Mrs. Davis went on to state that she did most of her own stunts on this show, pretty impressive if you ask me! As Samuel Jackson’s character ‘Mitch’ puts it: “What I’m saying is, back when we first met you were all like “Oh Phooey! I burned the darned muffins!” Now you go into a bar, ten minutes later, sailors come running out, what up with that? ” I enjoyed that double personality twist. Mrs. Davis was married to Renny Harlin the director of this film; so Cutthroat Island and The Long Kiss Goodnight signified two back to back turkeys on Mrs. Davis’s resume, worst part is they were both directed by her husband! Kind of makes sense that two years later they divorced.

But all that bull crap aside, I’m of the opinion this movie shouldn’t have tanked at all. The last half hour of this movie is nonstop action! Seriously, it’s a barrage of huge explosions, machine guns, cars flying through the air as they burst into flames….I mean, this one has one explosive ending! This movie is so much fun that both Harlin and Jackson have stated that out of all the films they’ve made, this is their favorite. One thing I found interesting about the script is how the bad guys are trying to pull off a 9/11 by planning a terrorist attack that they will blame on the Muslims, just so they can get more funding for their own purposes! I was like damn; did Shane Black have a magic ball that could look a couple of years into the future when he wrote this? Freaking weird! But thinking back a bit, Mr. Black was probably commenting a bit on the terrorist bombing that occurred on the World Trade Center in 1993, remember that one?

Directing wise, I think Harlin did a great job. This is a director whose films I’ve always enjoyed. He was responsible for Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988), the most successful Nightmare on Elm Street film of them all. He also made Die Hard 2: Die Harder (1990), a worthy sequel to the original and he had a taste of big time success when he made Cliffhanger (1993) with Sylvester Stallone. His career started going down after he did these two huge flops, but they were films that flopped for all the wrong reasons. I’ve seen far worse movies then these make gazillions at the box office, so let’s just chalk these two back to back bombs to bad circumstances. Harlin’s career never quite recuperated from that blow, he ended up directing truly bad films like Exorcist: The Beginning (2004) and The Convenant (2006). But back in his glory days, the guy was on fire! As it is, The Long Kiss Goodnight is so fast paced that I don’t think there’s a shot in the film that lasts more then 3 to 4 seconds! Literally! The only flaw I can find is that sometimes we go from plot point to plot point a bit too fast, so much so that sometimes you feel like there’s a gap in there somewhere, but overall, even with these few hiccups, the film is unabashedly entertaining. Recommend it for a night of over the top fun!

Rating : 4 out of 5

The Crow: City of Angels (1996)

Title: The Crow: City of Angels (1996)

Director: Tim Pope

Cast: Vincent Perez, Mia Kirshner, Richard Brooks, Iggy Pop, Thomas Jane

Review:

When I first saw Alex Proyas’s The Crow (1994) in theaters, I remember the film became an instant favorite of mine. I saw it a few times in the theater, and when it was released on VHS, I showed it to as many people as I could and I made it my own. Why? Well, it was a comic book movie, it was dark, gothic, and had that undeniable rock and roll feel to it. I liked the look of the film, the attitude that it emanated and the fact that it was so poetic and violent at the same time. Then of course, there was Brandon Lee’s powerhouse performance as Eric Draven, the titular Crow. Had he not mysteriously died while shooting The Crow, this would have been the film that would’ve catapulted him to stardom, no doubts about it. But alas, The Crow was to be Brandon Lee’s swang song, but hey, what a swan song! The first film was a complete success, so many elements helped make that film memorable. Of course, a sequel was a no brainer, so Miramax issued a second take on The Crow. Expectations were high for me with this sequel, how did it fare when compared to the masterful original?

Well, to be honest, when compared to the original, The Crow: City of Angels does fall short, mainly in its last half, but I can’t really bring myself to say that this is a bad film, because it isn’t. The film does have a flaw here and there, but I think the film has more pros than cons going for it. I guess the best way to enjoy City of Angels is not to compare it to the original, though you will find this difficult since this films major flaw is its lack of originality. Though this is not entirely the filmmakers fault, Tim Pope the film’s director and David S. Goyer, the films writer, wanted to make a film that distinguished itself both visually and story wise from the original and to an extent I would say the succeeded in this. But Miramax wanted a Xerox copy of the original and so they took the film away from the director and re-edited the thing to make it resemble the first film. Miramax is famous for messing with filmmakers visions, if you want to read a nightmarish tale of how Miramax treats filmmakers, look into the production of Rob Zombie’s Halloween 2 (2009). Miramax has famously mistreated filmmakers to the point where they never want to make another film again! Rob Zombie has stated he never wants to work with them again, and Tim Pope the director behind The Crow: City of Angels never made another feature film again. Could it have something to do with the way Miramax treated his vision? Probably. Both director and writer disowned the film!

Still, even through all these production woes, a watchable film remains. The Crow: City of Angels, is not a total disaster in my book, it had enough redeeming qualities to keep me interested all the way through. So let’s go through the positive points shall we? First off, I enjoyed the films look, which is very obviously a different color palette then the original film, which was shrouded in darkness. At times, the original The Crow looks like a black and white film. In contrast, The Crow: City of Angels is a colorful film. It still retains the grime and filth and the almost post-apocalyptic look, but the visuals are drenched in yellows, reds and purples, loved that about it. I guess some directors think comic-book films always equal lots of primary colors. 

Another way in which this sequel differs to the original is in its setting. This film takes place entirely in Los Angeles, though it feels like a run down, post apocalyptic, maybe even futuristic version of Los Angeles? I don’t know how to describe it really, but it certainly isn’t the real Los Angeles, rather, it’s a fantasy version of Los Angeles where everyone celebrates the “Day of the Dead” as if it was Mardi Gras or something; an eternal festival where everyone is always walking around with skull masks, eating sugar candy. It kind of feels like you turned on a corner and ended up in John Carpenter’s Escape from New York, this in my book adds to the uniqueness of this sequel.

Iggy Pop plays ‘Curve’ one of the films villains. Here he’s every bit as rebellious and loud as he is in real life. Thomas Jane is practically unrecognizable as Nemo, one of the goons who helps murder Ash Corven. He gets slaughtered by The Crow as he masturbates! Acting wise, the best one in the film is Vincent Perez as Ash Corven, this films vengeful zombie. Perez does a great job as The Crow in my book, he’s got the look for the part and the acting chops too. He successfully conveys anguish and despair over the brutal murder of his son. The weakest part of the film is the Crow’s antagonist, the villain Judah. The final clash between hero and villain is a complete letdown, nothing as epic and dramatic as Eric Draven vs. Top Dollar fighting on top of a gothic church in the middle of a lightning storm. So we get a cool cast, but a weak villain. 

The biggest detriment to the film is that it’s essentially a step by step remake of the original. Sure this is a different crow, but same as Eric Draven, Ash Corven is killed in a fit of rage and out of that rage he returns to avenge what was done to him. After his resurrection, same as the original, the film turns into The Crow killing each of the goons that were involved in the murder. And just like in the first film, the films main villain is a drug dealer who lives in a building, secluded from the rest of society. He is also accompanied at all times by a clairvoyant, same as Top Dollar in the original The Crow. So as you can see, this film merely follows a formula, this could have something to do with Miramax meddling with the film, or the filmmakers unintentionally following the footsteps of the original, all I know is the end result is too similar to the first film to ignore, which is probably what got this one such bad reviews.

The thing with these Crow films is that none of them have been able to top the classic original. All they’ve done is duplicate the formula of revenge, but they’ve never really tweaked it, they’ve never taken the ideas further than the original concept. Still, City of Angels isn’t a total disaster, it’s got an interesting look to it, and its soundtrack ìs filled with lots of cool, grungy, 90’s tunes. We get bands like Bush, Filter, White Zombie, Korn, P.J. Harvey and Deftones; who by the way cameo in one scene. We also get a catchy tune by Hole entitled ‘Gold Dust Woman’ which by the way was used to promote the film, I’ve always loved that song. This is the kind of film that has rock tunes popping up through out the whole thing, which is something they used to do a lot in the 80’s and 90’s in order to sell you that soundtrack, still, cheap gimmicks aside, the soundtrack for this film rocks and is a major plus in my book. It’ll definitely take you back to the 90’s alternative scene. This film was followed by The Crow: Salvation (2000) which has the same quality of not being horrible, but not being memorable either. It was the terrible fourth filmed entitled The Crow: Wicked Prayer (2005) that brought the series to an end, now that one is truly atrocious there’s no denying that! I hear there’s a reboot in the works for this franchise, here’s hoping they can recapture the gothic grandeur of the original.

Rating 3: out of 5   

Crumb (1994)

Title: Crumb (1994)

Director: Terry Zwigoff

Review:

Robert Crumb stands proudly high and above the world’s cartoonists, leading the pack as the world’s best doodler. The guy is a genius; his drawings and cartoons comment on the American way of life. Crumb is the ultimate watcher, his view is that of a god viewing American society from up above. This is probably the reason why he did a self portrait which depicts him as having a third eye on his forehead. He doesn’t pass judgment with his comics; he simply states and shows things for what they are, if you don’t like it, well, tough luck, but that’s the way life is. His art is not filtered; his comics are blunt, over the top exaggerations of real life. How did Crumb get so good? Well, the guy has never stopped drawing. If you were to ever meet the guy in person, you are likely to see him with a pen in hand, doodling something on anything, be it a sketchbook, a napkin, or a place mat in a restaurant.  Crumb’s been drawing comics since he was a kid, he and his brothers had their own little comic book company, and the three would draw and write their own comic strips and sell them to their friends. Coolest part about the whole thing is that he never went to art school; he learned by doing, the pure definition of ‘a natural’.

The guy is one of my personal heroes because my artistic life echoes his in some ways. I also did comics when I was a kid and sold them to my friends, I love drawing ‘old school’ black and white comics, with pencils, paper and ink. No computer boloney, just old school, hand drawn, home grown sketches. I will be self-publishing a magazine this year which will be available to you, my dear readers sometime soon, so look forward to that! But watching a documentary like Terry Zwigoff’s  Crumb is inspiring in many ways because here’s a guy who is completely devoted to doing what he is best at. Here’s a guy who draws for a living, and he does it 24-7; literally, I don’t think Crumb ever stops drawing! Proof of this is his work, if you one day decide to explore Robert Crumb’s body of work you will see that it never seems to end, there’s volumes and volumes of his stuff! I admire the guy for all these reasons, because he is a true blue talented individual with dedication to spare. The other side of the story is that all this talent comes with a life that many would consider downright bizarre. One of my greatest heroes is undoubtedly a ‘weirdo’. But hey, that’s the name of one of his magazines, so it’s not like he’s hiding the fact.

   

And this is where Zwigoff’s documentary comes in and opens the flood gates of Crumb’s life for everyone to see, and it’s a pretty freaky affair. I mean, I love the guy’s work and how truthful and unfiltered it is. One thing I love about his stuff is how autobiographical it is, he isn’t afraid to expose himself to the world. Reading some of his comics is like taking all your inhibitions and throwing them out the door, it’s talking about all those things about sex you wanted to talk about but were afraid to ask. When asked about some of his more offbeat ideas and sexual habits his answer is “I don’t know, you tell me!” As if saying, why are humans the way they are? I don’t have the answer, if you have it then I’m all ears! But honestly, who’s to explain humanities often times bizarre behavior? On this documentary you’ll learn about Crumbs obsession with voluptuous ladies, especially those with a –pardon my French- huge ass. He has a foot fetish; the guy even likes riding piggy back on girls! Crumb has a love/hate relationship with women; he admires their beauty, but at the same time he comes off as misogynistic. So be ready, Crumb truly exposes himself here, he is who he is whether you like it or not. But that’s nothing, Crumb is “normal” when compared to the rest of his family, which by the way you get to meet on the documentary.

And here’s where the documentary gets extra weird in such a strange way that you won’t want to stop watching. You won’t believe how freaky some people in the world can get. For example, we meet Robert’s Crumb’s brother, Charles Crumb; an obsessively reclusive individual who lived with his mother most of his life. He never left his apartment, didn’t care much for personal hygiene, basically, this was an individual filled with self loathing. The saddest part about the whole thing is that before the documentary was released he committed suicide! And that’s just brother number one, Crumbs other brother, Maxon Crumb likes to sit on a bed of nails and eats a string every now and then so that it will “cleanse his system”; “it takes three days to come out the other end” he says. And let’s not get started on Crumb’s mother! Crumb also has sisters, but for whatever the reason they declined to appear on the documentary. One wonders what other levels of weirdness they would have brought to the table! You kind of get the feeling that even with all his sexual antics, and his dark outlook on life, Crumb turned out pretty much alright.

Terry Zwigoff

Crumb was directed by Terry Zwigoff, the director behind Ghost World (2001) and Art School Confidential (2006), two films that have a lot to do with Crumb and his world. Ghost World is a film that’s about this young girl who has an affair with an older guy named Seymour. Seymour is one of these hard core collectors of old records and old art, one could easily think that Steve Buscemi is playing Crumb, hell, the character even looks like Crumb! Art School Confidential is all about an art school student who painfully discovers that art school isn’t as cool as he thought it would be and that it’s all very fake. He ends up meeting a reclusive character who resembles one of Crumbs own freaky brothers. Basically, Zwigoff has always been an expert on Crumb; he took six years to make this documentary! This is the reason why the rest of his films are somehow related to Crumb’s artwork and lifestyle. Three films that are all linked together. Seeing them back to back is a good idea, you’ll feel like you’re watching films that exist within the same universe. Sadly, Art School Confidential turned out to be such a somber and downright depressing film with a not so happy ending that it ended up being a flop, so Zwigoff hasn’t made a film again. But Crumb garnered critical acclaim and attention when it was released. Jeffrey Anderson, critic for the San Francisco Examiner called this “the greatest documentary ever made” and “one of the most bravest and honest films I’ve ever seen” which is absolutely true, I agree, Crumb the documentary is a lot like Crumb’s comics; he isn’t afraid to put himself, and his flaws out there for all to see. I agree very much with Roger Ebert’s take on this film. In his review he says that this documentary “gives new meaning to art as therapy”, which is exactly how Crumbs comics function, you kind of get the feeling that Crumb works many of his own issues through his art, as many good artists do. Brave in deed, and well worth a watch; highly recommended. 

Rating:  5 out of 5