Peter David's Blog, page 41

Cowboy Pete saddles up for “Fantastic Four”

Just came back from seeing what is reportedly the single worst comic book movie ever made.

Herewith my thoughts:

You’re all insane.

Seriously. You are all freaking nuts.

“Superman IV” was a terrible superhero film. “Howard the Duck.” “Spider-Man 3.” “Elektra,” “Catwoman,” the first “Hulk” movie, “Ghost Rider,” “Constantine” (Tilda Swinton aside), “X-Men 3″ (so bad that it was written out of continuity), “Batman and Robin,” “The Return of Swamp Thing.” These are all worthy of being deemed truly bad superhero movies, not to mention bad films in and of themselves.

“Fantastic Four”–good film. Better than the “Fantastic Four” film from a few years ago.

Is it perfect? Heavens no. The pacing isn’t great and the plot is uneven. But the acting is fine, the effects are fine, and the fan bitching is ridiculous.

Oh my God, Victor Von Doom is an obnoxious genius! As opposed to when he was first introduced in the Lee/Kirby origin story where he was an obnoxious genius. Oh my God, the Thing isn’t wearing blue shorts! Because unlike previous films where his body is transmuted, in this one we see him actually being covered with an explosion of flying rocky debris which adheres to him, so there is absolutely no reason for him to be wearing clothing of any sort because the rock is a massive covering. Oh my God, Sue Storm doesn’t travel with them to the alternate dimension! Right, because she winds up staying behind and being the one who activates the equipment and retrieves them from the other dimension, saving their lives. Oh my God, it’s so serious! Yeah, because in the previous two FF films, fans bitched endlessly about the humor.

Maybe I just liked it because my expectations had been so lowered. When the film scores so much lower than so many films that I believed were ghastly, I was anticipating that it would be virtually unwatchable. Instead it’s a perfectly fine movie about a group of explorers. I swear, if they had been given different powers, different names, and not been called the “Fantastic Four,” I think most fans would have been fine with it. But the simple fact is that people have been gunning for this movie for a year and the narrative has to conclude with this film being as terrible as “John Carter,” which I absolutely loved.

So see it, don’t see it, whatever. But do NOT come to me and bitch about how you know it’s so awful without having gone to see it, because it’s really not.

PAD

Let’s put Trump’s run in perspective

Trump is currently polling at something like twenty-four to twenty-six percent. That means that three quarters of Republicans don’t want any part of him. As various GOP candidates drop out, the voters will head toward other politicians. And I am reasonably sure that those remaining seventy-five percent are not insane, so they will probably gravitate toward Jeb Bush.

There is no way that Trump will be the GOP nominee. None. His entire candidacy is media driven BS.

PAD

Cowboy Pete’s Movie Round Up

So I’ve been doing some movie going and I figured I’d bring you up to speed on my film thoughts. These are pretty much spoiler free:

ANT-MAN: Ant-Man conclusively proves that Marvel can do a variety of films. After movies in which the stakes range from millions of lives to planetary destruction, Ant-Man is basically–at its core–a family film. Two dads, Scott Lang and Henry Pym, have other concerns certainly that stem from Pym’s work as a miniaturizing scientist, but ultimately it’s about two fathers trying to connect or reconnect with their daughters. Considering that the only other Marvel film with serious daddy issues features a dad who rules Asgard, Ant-Man is unique. I should also mention that it is unquestionably the first Marvel movie that truly benefits from 3-D. I don’t say that lightly and I have actively complained about previous 3-D efforts from Marvel, but this one knocks it out of the park.

TRAINWRECK: Amy Schumer writes a screenplay in which she plays a magazine writer named Amy (clever) who spends her romantic life aggressively pinballing from guy to guy while she remains determined never to form a connection with them. Her plan derails when her boss, who is apparently the boss from “The Devil Wears Prada,” assigns her to do an article about a sports physician played by Bill Hader. Boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl. It’s honestly all rather formulaic, although Hader is a delight to watch as he tries to understand what is going through her mind at any given moment. I dunno, people are raving about this film like it’s the second coming of Tracy and Hepburn, and I thought it was okay but not great.

MR. HOLMES: An aged Sherlock Holmes, having retired to bee keeping, strives to remember the details of his last case while forming a fatherly relationship with the young son of his housekeeper. It’s not exactly a thrill ride, and there is a largely pointless side trip to Japan that could easily have been cut entirely and the film wouldn’t have lost a step. But the pace builds and developments in the last half hour will gut punch you. Plus fans with long memories will adore a sequence where Holmes goes to a movie based on the Watson-written version of his last case, and the film Holmes is portrayed by none other than Nicholas Rowe, the star of “Young Sherlock Holmes,” who has grown up into an exact version of the Sidney Paget illustrations.

INSIDE OUT: The best movie of the summer. Possibly the year. If you haven’t seen it, what the hell is wrong with you?

PIXELS: Why is everyone trashing this movie? I mean, the same people who complain when Adam Sandler overacts condemn him for underplaying his role this time. Is it the greatest movie ever made? God, no. It’s basically Ghostbusters light as Sandler and his team battle aliens who are, by any reasonable measure, monumentally stupid. I’m told that it’s a rip-off of an episode of Futurama. Then again, I’m also told that Inside Out is a rip-off of Herman’s Head, so I have no idea how much validity there is to that. All I know is this: It’s a harmless way to kill two hours, there are some funny jokes in there, and there is a dazzling array of 1980s cameos including Max Headroom (voiced by Matt Frewer) to make it worth your while. And it’s better than Ghostbusters 2.

PAD

Star Trek: The New Frontier–The Returned

So fans have been asking me for years when STAR TREK: NEW FRONTIER was going to return.

Well, finally the answer is: Now. If you go to Amazon right now, you can buy the first of three ebook novellas that will be coming out this year.

And when it’s done, naturally the follow-up question will be, When is the next one?

The answer to that is: If the novellas sell well, there will be more. If they don’t, there won’t be.

And of course, now will come the excuses. “It’s not available in (whatever format I read.)” “Sorry, I only buy paperbacks.” “Sorry, I only buy hardcovers.” “I’ll put it on my wish list.”

To which there is a simple response: If enough people don’t buy it for whatever reason, then this is the end of NEW FRONTIER.

Up to you.

And to those who have already bought it: Much thanks. I hope you like it. If you do, please post a review and let everyone know.

PAD

Dear Pete Docter: Please stay in animation

Pete (may I call you Pete?) I loved “INSIDE OUT.” Everybody loved “INSIDE OUT.” It’s got something like 100% approval rating. People are wondering what you’re going to do next.

I beg of you: let it be animated. Stay the hell away from live action.

Now I have no idea if you are even considering live action, but if you are, don’t.

Andrew Stanton. Huge Pixar success story. Director of “WALL-E” and “FINDING NEMO.” Both huge hits.

He went live action. Directed “JOHN CARTER.” I loved it, but people didn’t bother to come see it. Lost millions.

Brad Bird. “THe IRON GIANT.” Moved to Pixar and gave us “THE INCREDIBLES.” His name was associated with quality.

He went live action. Directed “TOMORROWLAND.” I loved it, but people didn’t bother to come see it. Lost millions.

Don’t be strike three, Pete.

PAD

So wait. Is Riley from “Inside Out” bi?

I mean, yes, “Inside Out” was wonderful. A terrific response for any Pixar nay-sayers who claim the company can only do sequels, etc.

But I’m wondering: All of Riley’s mom’s emotions are female. All her father’s are male. All the teacher’s are female. The ending sequence went by so fast that I didn’t note the genders of the other characters (except the bus driver’s, who were definitely all male.)

But Riley’s are three female, two male. Does that indicate something about her future sexual personality? Granted, she does have a fantasy male boyfriend, but all that indicates is that she’s contemplating boyfriends. But we don’t see her with any boy. She bumps into one at one point, but we don’t see her display any sort of romantic reaction. We see her with female friends, but no males.

Or is it that when she becomes an adult, some of the emotions will change genders, so they’re uniform like her parents?

Just has me wondering.

PAD

So I’ve been wondering about “Jurassic World” and “Aliens”

I’ve been reading some angry fan comments about Bryce Howard’s character in “Jurassic World.” How incredibly sexist her portrayal is, mostly because she has a character arc rather than starting out as Ellen Ripley from the beginning. Fans seem outraged that she begins as a corporate shill but ends up so worried about her nephews and thus somehow has acquired maternal instincts. Even though Ripley effectively has something of that same arc, being willing to risk her life by the end for a little girl who ends up embracing her and calling her “mommy.”

And as I thought about Ripley, it made me wonder about “Aliens” and, more specifically, the character of Burke.

And I wondered, if Burke had been a female–with NO change in dialogue or characterization other than gender–would any fans have decried that as sexist? Would they have said that the only reason she was so nasty was because the writer felt the need to balance out the strong female character of Ripley with a total villain?

Thoughts?

PAD

I can certainly relate to this

I find it interesting that people are comparing the “Supergirl” trailer to the Black Widow spoof on SNL.

This despite the fact that the Supergirl trailer is actually evocative of the feel of the Silver Age Supergirl: the story of a young girl trying to adjust to using her powers in an environment that doesn’t know her, and figure out her place in the world. The Black Widow sketch spoofed some of that attitude, but the series is starting there and will ideally grow from it. What in the world is wrong with that? Yet some people actually seem to believe that a sketch that aired three weeks ago influenced a TV pilot that was shot three months ago.

Been there, done that. I got SO sick of people claiming that I was ripping off “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” when I was writing the Supergirl comic. People declared that Buzz was a rip off of Spike even though his creation preceded Spike in the series. One guy declared that I ripped off an episode of Buffy that had aired THAT WEEK for the first time in an issue that came out the next day. Because I had no idea what to put in that issue and, after watching Buffy, I stole the story and we got the entire book written, drawn, colored, lettered and printed in 24 hours to make shipping.

I’m sorry, the Supergirl pilot looks fun and I’m personally looking forward to it.

PAD

You Forget It’s Not Just You

I can very much sympathize with Joss Whedon’s recent abandonment of Twitter, and the astonishing spectacle of jerks letting loose on the creator of one of the greatest female heroines in fiction as being a misogynist hater of women. Why? Because they disliked his treatment of Black Widow in “Age of Ultron.” (Yes, Joss has since claimed that it was simply a time management thing, but that does nothing to explain or excuse his treatment.)

They didn’t allow for the notion that he was interested in trying a different angle on her. They didn’t allow for the fact of the actresses’ pregnancy perhaps requiring the curtailment of action sequences. Instead they resorted to snide comments and threats, as if he weren’t the creator of “Buffy” and “Dollhouse” and “Firefly,” all of which starred or featured strong women (remember River destroying the roomful of Reavers? How awesome was that?)

I can relate. It wasn’t all that long ago that I wrote a video game called “Shadow Complex” that was based on a book written by noted homophobe Orson Scott Card. My involvement resulted in angry fans denouncing me and declaring that all my work should be boycotted…at the exact same time that GLAAD was presenting me an award for my gay-friendly work on X-Factor.

Boycotts have more recently been suggested because I dared to point out that there is in fact a lot of merchandise out there for female fans. Two dozen Black Widow t-shirts on Amazon, action figures, all kinds of stuff. As much as for the heroes? No, definitely not. Should there be more? Of course, I said, but at least there’s * some *. That attitude got me tagged with the same epithets that were tossed at Whedon, although certainly not with the range and fury that he received. I couldn’t believe the comments thrown at someone by fans declaring that “Age of Ultron” had ruined everything from the Black Widow to their lives. How does a film ruin your life?

They say they come for discourse and to express ideas, but that’s only half true. They are interested in declaring their ideas. But they are not remotely interested in listening to any responses. They want to be heard but don’t want to hear anyone else beyond a reply of, “Gee, you’re right.” If you do dare to give an answer, however measured, they have various terms to be employed—“mansplaining,” “privilege” and the like—that gets wielded so that they can have an excuse to dismiss what you say out of hand. If you speak calmly, they attribute the nastiest voice to it possible. They will invent quotations for you and attack the quotations as if you said it. They speak in insulting and condescending manner and if you get fed up and respond in kind will then immediately condemn you for being insulting and condescending, never taking responsibility for the notion that they are the ones who instituted it.

Could a case be made that it was odd Natasha referred to herself as a monster because she had allowed them to sterilize her so she couldn’t have children? Yes, absolutely. It’s a decision that many women make and I’m sure they don’t see themselves as monstrous. But it’s certainly a point that could be made in calm, clinical manner rather than launching an all-out attack on the writer.

When the hell will these extremists realize that they are hurting themselves when they engage in this behavior? When will they understand that the way to get people to listen to them is with reasoned actions rather than name calling and declarations of boycotts? And when will more moderate voices—and there are some out there—understand that associating with these people is going to hurt their cause instead of helping them?

Hell, I know that posting this piece alone will result in more people declaring I should be boycotted. But sometimes you just have to say what’s on your mind and screw the consequences.

PAD

Today the Supreme Court Gets to End This Whole Thing

Or at the very least put down a major legal marker as they hear the lawyers argue the merits of state recognition of same sex marriage. Four states are insisting that it’s their right to refuse to recognize gay marriage because ostensibly it’s not protected by the Constitution.

Technically I suppose they’re right. Then again, neither is straight marriage. However the Fourteenth Amendment which states, in part, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” pretty much seems to cover it.

Is it possible the Supreme Court could stun everyone and make a dumb ass decision? Of course they can. But one hopes that they take this occasion to just state the obvious and make it illegal for states to decide that gays are effectively not American citizens deserving of the same rights as straight citizens.

To me, it’s amazing how within one generation this issue has gone from being an unspeakable, way-out-there concept to something so commonplace that it’s made it to the Supreme Court. Yes, there are still idiots out there declaring, “What next? Man marrying dogs?” Because two male adults making a conscious decision is exactly the same as deciding to fornicate with a dumb animal.

Let’s hope that next June brings good news.

PAD