Matthew S. Williams's Blog, page 224

The Dark Knight Returns

While I'm riding this comic book turned movie high, I must mention one of the best comic books around and definitely one of the best installments in the Batman franchise ever. And while this comic has not yet been made into a movie per se, I do believe large tracts of it have been used to create The Dark Knight Rises. I am, of course, referring to The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller.

To be fair, I'm not exactly a comic expert, but even I'm not that big a fan of Miller's work. He has obvious woman issues and is not the best illustrator, and large parts of this comic were lifted from The Watchmen. But hell, it worked! If you're going to steal, steal big. And the concepts of outlawing superheroes, forcing others to work for the government, a dictator president and an escalated Cold War all worked quite well within a Batman context. And trust me when I say, Dark Knight Rises will use this stuff! Read the review and you'll see what I mean…

(Background—>):

Initially, the comic was the result of a collaboration between Miller and DC's editor-director Dick Giordano (formerly the Batman group director). However, disagreements over deadlines forced Giordano to pull out, leaving Miller to complete the project alone. DC then published the full and final product in one volume with four parts which, despite its price, sold quite well.

(Plot Synopsis—>):

The story opens on a near-future Gotham city where things have gone to hell due to the absence of the Batman. The reason for his retirement is simple: superheroes have been outlawed, except for Superman who now works for the government. We learn that this was part of the deal, where he became a military asset in order to spare his former comrades the indignity of going to prison. As with Watchmen, this has led to an escalation of the Cold War and the creation of a dictator president (in this case, its Reagan or a clear look-alike).

In any case, Bruce Wayne (aka. Batman) is struggling with being retired. By turning his back on his former profession, he feels like he's betrayed the promise he made to his parents decades back. In addition, the situation is getting so bad that he feels he has nothing to lose by returning. This worsening situation is portrayed with an allegorical heat wave that has gripped the city and is only getting worse.

Enter into this Harvey Dent, the former DA turned Two-Face who has had corrective surgery (courtesy of Bruce Wayne) and who's doctors now claim is recovered. However, these doctors soon have egg on their face when a masked terrorist seizes Gotham's two main business towers, clearly meant to resemble the WTC's twin towers (it should be noted that this comic was released before Sept.11th 2001), and threatens to detonate a bomb.

Batman is successful in stopping the terrorist, who is clearly Dent, and finds that the surgery has not had the desired effect. Rather than correcting his split personality, it has only deepened it, making his look one way but feel another. Dent is placed back into psychiatric care, and the public is divided over Batman's return. The media, in the form of talking heads and news reports, play a large role in this comic. And for the most part, they have bad things to say about Batman, claiming that in spite of his actions, he ultimately attracts a more deranged breed of psychotics and criminals.

His return also puts Superman in an awkward position since he will now be forced to come to Gotham and arrest him. However, as he is still occupied with a US-Soviet standoff taking place on the fictitious island of Corto Maltese, Batman has some time. Which he spends moving onto his next targets, the Mutants gang. Seems these thugs have taken over the streets, are thieving and murdering, and are led by a massive, psychotic freak who is based in the city dump. When Batman confronts them, he gets into it with the boss, and loses badly! He is on the verge of being killed when a young girl who has been following his exploits shows up and takes down the boss with a crowbar. Batman narrowly escapes, and the police show up and arrest the boss.

Across town, the spineless mayor decides that he must finally step in. He arranges to meet with the mutant boss, only to be murdered. The boss is placed back in prison, but Batman soon arranges it so he can escape. He then confronts him again, this time in a mud pit in front of all his peons, where he manages to outsmart, outmaneuver, and take him down… HARD! The mutants are beat and the city is safe, except that people are now forming a vigilante gang that want to emulate the Batman (echoes of The Dark Knight there). Just like DK, Batman is not too enthused about their existence, while at Arkham, a dispirited and anesthetized Joker sees Batman on the TV, and comes back to life! Seems Batman's detractors got one thing right, escalation is ensuing!

Meanwhile, on Corto Maltese, Superman's actions have prompted the Soviets to up the ante. They fire an ICBM at the island, but rather than being a nuke, its a massive EM missile. When it detonates, Superman is crippled, and Gotham and every other city on the East Coast is hit by a massive black out. Chaos ensues, and Batman must travel to the prisons and take control of all the gang members who are escaping. Since many are Batman wannabees, he manages to recruit them to restore some order to the streets. The power comes on shortly thereafter and order is restored. Once again, the media and experts debate the events.

But Batman has his own theories. Mainly, he blames Superman for selling out to the government, and sees the escalation with the Soviets as a direct result. During a conversation before Superman sets off, he tells Wayne (they use each others' real names!) that he will have to go up against him if he persists. Wayne replies by saying that he no intention of going back into retirement, and that if it comes to a confrontation "may the best man win". Superman is incredulous, but he has his answer!

Back in Gotham, the Joker is finding new ways to create mayhem. Having convinced the same crop of doctors that he's cured, he goes on a talk show where he is confronted by a Dr. Ruth look-a-like. After some innane psychobabble, he kills Ruth with a poisoned kiss and unleashes his smilex gas into the theatre, killing everyone. He then runs to an amusement park where he is intercepted by Batman, and more mayhem ensues. Batman finally corners him in a sewer where they have their final fight! The Joker stabs him a few times in the stomach, and Batman manages to cripple him by breaking his neck. The Joker then finishes it, snapping what's left of his neck and killing himself. He dies laughing…

Again, Batman narrowly escapes, and Superman recovers enough to return to Gotham. After some preparations, Batman is prepared for his final fight! Getting himself into some powered armor, assembling his usual arsenal of tools, and enlisting the help of Green Arrow, someone else who resents Superman. He's also sure to pop a pill, who's purpose is as yet unclear. Then, he picks the location for their fight, the very street corner where Bruce Wayne's parents were gunned down. The fight goes to plan, with Batman managing to hurt Superman in a number of ways (he's still recovering from the EM missile attack) and stalling him long enough for Green Arrow to fire off his special package! A kryptonite tipped arrow!

Naturally, Superman catches the arrow, but the tip then explodes into a million tiny particles which he then becomes poisoned with. Severely weakened, Batman puts his hands around Superman's throat and delivers his last words to him. Essentially, he tells them he sold them out, that he could never understand that the world doesn't make sense, that his ideological purity makes him a pawn, and that he beat him! But then, Batman suffers from what appears to be a heart attack and collapses. The police arrive to see Superman kneeling over his old friends body, guarding it even though they were locked in mortal combat not a moment before.

The comic then moves to Batman's funeral. Things are just wrapping up when Superman notices something. A faint sound coming from the ground, and someone suspicious looking standing nearby, waiting. In short, what he hears is heartbeats, the suspicious figure is the new Robin girl, and she's waiting with a shovel. Remember the pill Batman took? Turns out it was a designer drug that imitates the appearance of death (little Romeo and Juliet there, but okay). His case contained a hidden oxygen supply, and everything was timed so Robin could dig him up before it ran out. Superman looks at her and winks. He's onto them, but has decided to let his friend go.

Once he's emerged, we see Batman moving to a new location with the new Robin and a set of accolades. From there, they will rebuild, create a new Batcave and start fighting crime anew. The public thinks he's dead, but his spirit will live on through a new generation of masked crime fighters. Yeah! Batman forever!

(Synopsis—>):

A possible downside to this comic was Miller's frequent use of media types and talking heads to advance the story. While it is interesting – and effective when it comes to providing transitions and pacing – the way it constantly helps advance the plot and provide background can get a little tiring at times. By volume four its like, we get it, Batman is a controversial media topic, and the so-called experts are morons! That, plus the fact that Miller really seemed to want to stack public opinion against Batman in the story got a little heavy-handed at times.

Still, it did manage to give some depth and a certain social context to the story. Not to mention realism, seeing as how any vigilante, no matter how effective, would not fail to stir up resentment and fear amongst those in power. All throughout the novel, it is made painfully clear that authorities condemn Batman because they don't want to appear condoning, regardless of how needed he really is. At the same time, those same people seem to want to think that former villains have been successfully rehabilitated, if for no other reason than because they want to believe their methods are effective.

And I said, this book did seem to be borrowing pretty heavily from The Watchmen. However, these elements were well suited to the Batman universe, and given the fact that Dr. Manhattan was openly compared to Superman, it wasn't like the borrowing was all one way. What was also well executed was the reason for Superman's employment by the government. Not only was he doing it to protect his friends; according to Batman, it had much to do with his naivete and idealistic outlook. The boy from Smallville just couldn't help but take orders, it was what he was born to do. And when society and the government turned on them, he effectively sold them out by agreeing to do their bidding.

This last element was something I especially liked about this graphic novel, the it explored the differences between Batman, Superman, and pitted them against each other. Fans of DC comics couldn't help but have a big fangasm, but it was also highly appropriate. Whereas Superman had always been the clean-cut, cardboard cut-out superhero, Batman was always the darker, grittier, more realistic one. And in both cases, this was presented in very real terms, showing the upside and downside of these traits. Whereas Superman is seen by Batman as a fool and sell-out, the complete flip-side of how others see him, Batman is portrayed as a sort of social fascist in addition to be being a brave vigilante. This dichotomy serves to elevate the content and makes everything feel more realistic.

The Dark Knight Returns, ladies and gentlemen. Read it, love it, then look for traces of it in The Dark Knight Rises. I'm telling ya, it's in there. Look for it!

[image error] [image error]

Strange Days

Here's a cult classic you don't hear about often. But that's the way of cult classics, isn't it? You never hear about them until you stray into the fan community and they insist that you have to see it. You finally do and then maybe, just maybe, you yourself become an accolade. Once that happens, you might eventually become aware of the community of fans that's out there – most likely they have an internet fansite going – they spread the word and make sure the movie is listed as a "sleeper hit" or a "hidden gem".

Yeah, that's about how I came to see the movie Strange Days. I can remember when it came out back in 95, how little fanfare and attention it got and how briefly it was in theaters. In fact, I didn't even hear about it again until recently when it turned up on somebody's top ten lists of the best sci-fi movies. Upon further investigation, I found that this movie made it onto a lot of people's lists, even a few professional ones. And since I committed to covering sci-fi cult-classics awhile back, I thought I'd check this one out. And, I am pleased to say, I was pretty impressed.

(Background—>):

In spite of being well-received by critics, this movie did quite poorly at the box office. Surprising, considering the all-star cast and the fact that James Cameron co-wrote and produced the thing. And when I stay all-star, I mean all-star! Ray Fiennes, Angela Basset, Juliet Lewis, Tom Sizemore, Vincent D'Onofrio, and Michael Winscott all had main roles in this movie (this last guy you may remember as the creepy villain from The Crow, and every other movie he's ever done for that matter!)

However, as is often the case, the movie went on to attract a cult following who enjoyed the movies cyberpunk elements, its millennial theme and dark, paranoid feel. And with few exceptions, the acting and delivery was quite good. Ray Fiennes excels at being the sleazy but redeemable huckster, Basset as his concerned and beleaguered friend, and Winscott as the creepy, paranoid control-freak. Juliet Lewis came off as a little labored, but then again, her dialogue was kind of the cheesy, looks good on paper stuff. Still, she manages to pull off the abused, damaged damsel quite convincingly (draw whatever inference you will from that ).

In addition, the movie did a good job of capturing that pervasive sense of millennial madness that was beginning to manifest around the early-mid nineties. While things like the Y2K virus quickly became a cliche, especially after they proved baseless, the years leading up to the millennium were not without their share of fears, concerns and a general sense of imminence. Many people, both religious and secular, predicted doom, thinking the world would end. Others predicted a sort of social cataclysm, that mobs and rioters would take to the streets and begin looting, especially if all the grids went down. But most, I think, were just worried that the madness and hysteria would be self-fulfilling, that some riots and crackdowns might happen before everyone realized that the world wasn't ending.

Also, the technological aspects of this movie were quite interesting. Mainly, they centers on a form of virtual entertainment known as the SQUID (Superconducting Quantum Interference Device), a device which can record and playback events directly from the wearers cerebral cortex. This predicted the internet phenomena in many ways, the concept of "viral videos" and snuff films being the main plot device in the story. And one of the major events in the movie, the murder of an outspoken hip-hop artist and the controversy surrounding it, predicted the death of Tupac Shakur, which took place around a year later.

(Content—>):

The movie opens on the last days of December, 1999. Violent crime and gang warfare are getting out of control, and in the midst of all this, a major recording artist and activist named Jeriko One (Glenn Plummer) is killed. Meanwhile, a woman is being chased by two policemen, played by Vicent D'Onofrio and William Fichtner, who clearly want to kill her. Seems she saw something and was wearing a SQUID at the time, and when she gets away, the policemen retrieve the device and realize she got it all on tape (disc, whatever!).

Meanwhile, we meet Lenny Nero (Ray Fiennes), a former LAPD officer who has since turned to the world of contraband and sleaze, selling SQUID tapes to anyone looking for a break from reality or themselves. However, Nero has a rule that he never sells "blackjacks" (i.e. snuff films), because he considers himself a purveyor of experiences, not a peddler of smut! His friends, Lornette 'Mace' Mason (Angela Basset) and Max Peltier (Tom Sizemore) are also former LAPD officers who have since retired. Mason now does private security while Justin is a private eye. They don't approve of what Nero does, but stick by him because of their friendship, and in Mason's case, feelings of unrequited love.

Things begin to unfold when the woman who was being chased, named Iris (Brigette Bako), finds Nero at a bar. She claims someone is trying to kill her and has to flee, but that she recorded the entire thing on a disc and dropped it in his car. However, his car is soon towed and he's unable to figure out what she was talking about. Shortly thereafter, a "blackjack" is dropped off at his house that shows someone killing her. Nero is freaked, especially since when he last saw her, Iris also told him that their mutual friend and Nero's former lover, Faith Justin (Juliette Lewis), is in danger as well. This presents Nero with an opportunity to see her, only to be told by her and her manager that he's not wanted. In between telling him that they are through, Justin is sure to relate that she's also afraid because her manager, Philo Gant (Michael Winscott), is becoming increasingly paranoid and controlling. Spurned, Nero shows Mason and Peltier the blackjack and they are similarly shocked.

Shortly thereafter, Nero and Mason go to pick up his car so they can see what Iris dropped off and run into the same two officers who were chasing Iris earlier. They narrowly escape them and then view the tape, where it shows these same officers murdering Jeriko in cold blood. Shortly thereafter, Nero finds his supplier, Tick (Richard Edson), dead from an overdose of the SQUID. It looks like an accident, but Peltier suspects foul play since what appears to be an isolated case of murder might have something to do with a larger conspiracy he's been hearing about. According to Peltier, there is a militant movement coming from City Hall and the LAPD who are determined to bring the city under control, even if it involves death squads! Because Jeriko was a major activist who was bringing the gangs of LA together to reign in the LAPD and the cities politicians, these squads would have been targeting him.

They then go to pick up Faith who is at a New Years party being hosted Philo. She reveals to them that she knows what going on, that Philo has become a total "wirehead" (i.e. SQUID-addict), who's in the habit of having his artists followed because of his increasing paranoia. Iris was his mole and was tailing Jeriko, and was therefore with him when he was murdered. When she showed the tape to Philo, he feared for his business, beat her up, burnt the tape and told her killer where to find her. However, she made a copy in advance which she then put in Nero's car. They now understand why Faith was afraid and trying to keep Nero away. Clearly, she feared for her life as well and didn't want him getting involved. They all agree they should release the tape, but both Peltier and Nero worry about the impact it will have – i.e. a full-scale war between the gangs and the LAPD.

However, their rescue attempt is thwarted as Philo and his thugs intervene. Faith is then taken to his suite where she expects to die. After arguing and regrouping, Nero and Mason decide to attempt to rescue her again. Meanwhile, the streets are filled with people celebrating, rioting, and signs boasting "2K". In the midst of the rowdy chaos, Mason and Nero manage to sneak into Philo's party, Nero attempts to rescue Faith while Mason confronts the police commissioner and slips him the disk. Mason gets into Philo's suite but finds him dead, and that Peltier, his friend, is the one who killed him. Seems he and Faith have been having an affair, and that HE was the one who murdered Iris and sent the tapes to Nero. He also confesses that the whole conspiracy theory was just his way of keeping Nero away from the authorities. In the end, it was all just a "traffic stop gone wrong".

While this might seem like a letdown, I actually preferred it to the alternative. Rather than there being some big conspiracy that goes all the way to the top, the real motivating factor in all this was just random violence. And it is for this reason that Peltier did what he did. In a world as messed up as theirs, he believes what matters most is getting what you can before you're murdered senselessly. In any case, Faith comes in and distracts him long enough for Nero to get the upper hand and they fight. Nero gets a knife in his back (symbolic since his friend betrayed him) but manages to toss Peltier from the balcony in the end.

Down below, Mason has been forced to flee the party when the two crooked officers spot her and begin chasing her through a crowd. She subdues them, but then is set upon by several riot cops. She is cornered and beaten, and it looks like its all over until a number of people in the crowd decide to help her out. A big fight, symbolic of the war they were anticipating, begins, but is broken up when the commissioner arrives and reveals he's seen what's on the disc. The two officers are arrested, one eats his gun while the other – D'Onofrio, in true psychotic form – tries to shoot Basset and is gunned down!

The movie ends with the New Year being rung in. Yes, in spite of the shooting, several deaths and a near riot, the countdown happens as planned and people cheer. Ah whatever, it's New Year's right? No sense letting a few fatalities ruin the biggest party of the millennium. Everyone is merry, people kiss (even some riot troops and civilians), and of course, Nero and Mason hook up! Seems he's finally taken the hint and broken it off with Faith who, let's face it, is more trouble than she's worth. War is averted, the New Year arrives without the apocalypse, and there's resolution all around!

(Synopsis—>):

Overall, I can see why this movie was a cult hit and why it didn't do so well in theaters. For one, it wasn't the usual big-budget splashy action flick Cameron is famous for, and it didn't have a faithful marketing effort behind it. And that's to be expected from a noire, cyberpunk thriller such as this, studios just don't seem to know how to peddle and pigeon hole it. However, given its obvious depth and signs of quality, I think it was inevitable that audiences would take notice of it, adding it to their lists of favorites alongside movies like Blade Runner and Akira.

For one, the movie managed to capture, years in advance, the feeling of paranoia that surrounded the actual millennium. Ultimately, these fears proved to be baseless (just like in the movie!), which was one of the things I found subtly brilliant here. Long before the myth of Y2K began to circulate, it was easy to see how people would treat the millennium with a certain degree of paranoia. The religiously minded would fear that the apocalypse was at hand, the paranoid would expect riots, and others believed the world's infrastructure to all go down! But of course, the clock struck twelve… and nothing happened. And, the plot where a hip-hop artist/activist is murdered in many ways predicted the feelings of loss and suspicion that followed Tupac's death. Many of his die-hard fans continue to say he was assassinated, some even that he's still alive!

In addition, the concept of VR technology and human experience was explored in depth and I found this very effective as well. On the one hand, the SQUID technology is just like a drug, something people do to escape their daily lives. On the other, there's a lot of time dedicated to showing how something like this would have a negative impact on people's memories and experiences by depriving them of authenticity. On several occasions, Nero is criticized for not being able to let go of the past, mainly because he keeps reliving it with his SQUID. The character of Mason says at one point that memories are meant to fade. Ergo, reliving his old experiences is depriving him of the ability to move on.

But what was best was the twist at the end. Ultimately, the threat came from close to home rather than from death squads or in the form of some big, shadowy conspiracy. All along, the characters are moving about thinking that they are witnesses to an assassination and that they can't trust the authorities. But in the end, it turns out that the "assassination" was just a random act of violence – albeit with disastrous consequences if it went public – and that it's their best friend they can't trust. All of this is in keeping with the central theme and setting of the movie, which again, is millennial madness and an impending set of doom, all of which proves baseless in the end.

Movies like this one remind me that Cameron had a keen mind and some pretty cool ideas way back when. So… what happened? How did he go from Aliens, T2 and Strange Days to "I'm king of the world" and "Unobtainium"? Was it the money? Must be the money. Screws up everything!

Strange Days:

Entertainment Value: 7/10 (admittedly, not the funnest movie around)

Plot: 9/10

Direction: 8/10

Total: 8/10

[image error]

(Even) More Plot Holes and Oversights!

Okay, picking up from where we left off! In my last post, I recapped all the holes that I found with Transformers and the Matrix sequels. Here's some other recent reviews that also had holes in them:

Avatar:

This movie I did not like much, as anyone who read my review of it could tell. However, there were not a lot of holes that I could see. But after giving it a good once over, there were one or two that did stand out for me.

1. Dreamwalker:

The Na'vi made it quite clear that they didn't trust the character of Jake Sully and his Avatar. In fact, the word they used was "dreamwalker", implying that they understood exactly what he was (you know, a human-alien hybrid machine thing). So if they knew what he was, an imposter looking to infiltrate them, why the hell did they take him in and teach him everything they could about their culture? Why not say, "We know what you are, dammit! You wanna learn? Put on a gas mask and come out here." And given the fact that they knew what he was, where he came from and who he was working for, it seemed very odd that they would be surprised when it was revealed that he had an agenda.

2. Ride the Big Bird and all is forgiven:

Another thing that struck me as odd about this movie was how the Na'vi basically forgave Jake Sully and all his lies simply because he showed up riding the big red bird. Granted, it was a pretty kick-ass entrance, and to the Na'vi, the ability to ride this bird of prey is a rare gift. But how does that erase everything he's done or prove that he's somehow worthy of their trust? If anything, this just shows more cultural appropriation on his part. He learns their ways, he rides their animals, he feeds what he knows to his corporate masters who are looking to exploit them. I'd have thought they'd want to club him the second he got off that bird!

That's all I got for that one. Moving on…

I, Robot:

I could only find one plot hole in this one, but it was so big you could drive a truck through it!

"My Logic is Undeniable":

That's what VIKI, the central AI that controlled all the robots said after she explained her big, master plan to Will Smith and the others. So according to VIKI, robots were marauding around town, imposing a curfew and refusing to obey people's orders because she reinterpreted the Three Laws. While they were meant to ensure that robots would protect and serve humanity, VIKI soon realized that the greatest threat to humanity was humanity itself. It was for this same reason that robots were able to now break the laws, impose martial law, and kill people – as they tried to do to Smith on several occasions. It's an explanation, sure, but it doesn't make sense!

For one, the Three Laws are VERY specific. Rule one is DON'T KILL OR HARM HUMANS. This is the first rule for a reason and all other rules refer back to it, which makes it inviolable! So it wouldn't matter what kind of revelations VIKI experienced about humanity or interpretations she might have had about her purpose. Nothing can make Law One breakable because it's written in stone, with no room for flexibility. Second, the idea that imposing martial law on humans was a logical way to ensure their safety is actually very illogical. Any AI would realize in the course of running scenarios that humanity would resent and ultimately resist the imposition of these measures. Hence, more violence and more killing of people would result, and would only end with VIKI's or humanity's destruction. No logic there, only the obvious cliche about the evil machines taking over the world!

Demolition Man:

As with I, Robot, I could only find one plot hole with this movie. But, also like I, Robot, it was a doozy!

Everybody's got guns:

One of the earliest action scenes in this movie takes place in a museum. Why? Because the antagonist is looking for a gun and a museum is the only place in the future where a person can see one. Naturally, the Protagonist goes there, and a big ol' gunfight ensues. One question: Why are the guns loaded? Forgetting for a second how stupid anyone would have to be to keep tons of loaded firearms in display cases, there's also the more logical thing to consider. If guns are illegal and unobtainable, then its fair to say they don't make them anymore. Which would mean that no ammo is being made either. Hence, not only would the gun fight in the museum be impossible, so would all gun fights in this movie!

Yes, even though we're told early in the movie that the only place a person could even view a gun in San Angeles is behind glass, it seems that people are able to obtain them without much effort. The bad guys do it, the sewer-dwelling dissidents do it, and soon, gun violence is no longer a thing of the past! Oh, and did I mention that the antagonist even manages to find a loaded cannon inside this museum? WHAT KIND OF MUSEUM IS THIS???

The Star Wars Prequels:

As always, I saved the worst for last! I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that these movies were quite awful and forever tainted my memory of the originals and the legacy of the franchise. Still, I hope people will indulge me as I list off some of the things that were truly and specifically awful about them. And those things are, of course, the parts of the plot that made absolutely no sense!

1. Qui Gon – Jedi Master, Idiot:

Would anyone be surprised if I were to venture that the stupidest character in the first movie was NOT Jar Jar Binks? Yep! If you think about it, Qui Gon Jinn comes off as the dumbest. Not because he was a clumsy, ignorant, horribly racist caricature, but because the things he does makes no sense. For starters, why would a Jedi Master decide to pick up some gifted boy on a distant planet and not bother with his mother? Why, for that matter, would he agree to host him in some pod racing tournament in order to secure the parts he needs to get off planet (instead of say, going to another vendor or hiring a new ship altogether)? And why, last of all, would he ask his apprentice to train him as his dying wish when everybody and their brother is saying the boy is dangerous? Does this guy just love doing things the hard way and being reckless? He's supposed to be a Jedi Master for Chrissakes, the kind of guy who is patient, cunning, willing to let things unfold before making any hasty decisions. True, its the plot that's the real source of dumb when you get right down to it, but Qui Gon is it's enabler. He's the guy doing things that are completely out of character for completely unclear reasons.

2. Premonitions Ignored:

For that matter, why DID the Jedi Council agree to train the boy? They all said he was dangerous, so why would they do it? Second, WHY, if they thought it was dangerous to have Anakin around Palpatine, did they allow him become his go-to guy and spend so much time with him? Third, if they sense the Dark Side around Palpatine, why the hell did they let him run things and accumulate more and more power? It was one thing for the Senate to be too stupid to see what was going on – why did they cheer when he said he was overturning Democracy and creating an Empire? – but aren't these guys supposed to have premonitions and feelings that make them especially insightful? Even if they had been completely blinded to the Force by Palpatine, simple logic would have sufficed there.

3. Assassination Plot:

This is something that many amateur critics have pointed out about this movie, so I shan't go into too much detail. Suffice it to say, its one of the biggest plot holes in the second movie! At the beginning, it's established that there are people looking to assassinate Padme/Amidala, yes? So what do Anakin and Padme decide to do? They use her as bait while Anakin waits outside her bed chamber. What are they hoping to do, catch the assassin climbing in through her window or sneaking through her door? And we're to believe this was HER idea? How dumb is she, or they for that matter that they would approve?

But that's just the tip of the iceberg for this scene. In addition, we learn that the real assassin, Jango Fett, subcontracted with another assassin to do the job. And what does she do? Sends some probe to Padme's window where it cuts through the glass and then sends in poisonous slugs. That's right, this probe which could have easily lobbed a grenade in or shot her with a laser instead sends in a bunch of slow-moving poisonous slugs! Then, to top it off, the Jedi chase her across town where finally, Jango shoots her with some kind of dart gun from a safe distance. If he could do that, why not shoot that same thing into Padme's room? What the hell was the point of all this subcontracting and chasing?

Oh, and its from this dart that Obi-Wan is able to find out where Jango was operating from, because apparently the dart is of a specific design. This leads him to the cloner's planet, to a confrontation, blah blah blah! Point I'm making here is, if Jango was going to assassinate someone, why would he use a weapon specific to the world he's been hiding on? Does he not have his own weapons? Common weapons? Untraceable weapons? Weapons that won't lead a Jedi to his doorstep? Man, that was a stupid scene!

4. Uncompassionate Jedi:

It's kind of common knowledge that Jedi are supposed to be compassionate. In fact, Anakin even said that compassion was essential to being a Jedi in the second movie, during his whole spiel about love (ick!). So why then are Yoda and the Jedi Council such a bunch of unfeeling jagoffs in this trilogy? When they meet young Anakin and sense his fear of losing his mother, they get all nervous and tell him how that's the path to evil and he must let her go. What kind of advice is that to give a nine year old? Second, when Anakin comes back to Yoda seeking counsel about his prescient dreasm, the ones where Padme dies, he's told something very similar. "Rejoice for those around you who transform into the Force. Mourn them do not. Miss them do not. Attachment leads to jealousy. The shadow of greed that is."

Again, what kind of advice is this? It makes no sense, taking issue with a child who is afraid to lose his mother, or telling a man he should be happy to lose his wife. And yes, this was all done to make Anakin's fall to the Dark Side seem inevitable, but that's precisely why it makes no sense. Yoda and all the other Masters believed Anakin was potentially dangerous because of his fear of losing someone he cared about. So why then are they giving him these ultimatums, "it either us or the ones you love"? Can they not see that its precisely them telling him that he has to sever all ties and become an emotionally disconnected that is making him dangerous? Ah, which brings me to my next point…

5. Genocide, No Biggie!:

In movie two, Anakin commits genocide and Padme doesn't seem to care. Seriously, he confesses it to her and she acts as if he just told her he knocked over a mailbox because he was pissed. That alone was an indication that Lucas was asleep at the wheel when he wrote this movie. But what of the Jedi? Yoda sensed through the Force that something terrible was going down and that Anakin was at the center of it. But, upon his return, the subject never comes up and by movie three, only Palpatine mentions anything about it. Are we to believe that the Jedi Council was so distracted with the war that they just forgot to ask Anakin about this murderous episode of his? Or is it that they just never thought to ask what the hell that mega-dose of negative energy he was putting out happened to be? You can't say they didn't know. Yoda felt it man!

And speaking of no one mentioning anything about his little act of genocide, in movie three, Anakin similarly slaughters a whole bunch of Jedi "younglings" (aka. children). When Padme is told of this, she expresses shock and disbelief, saying that he couldn't have. Uh… why? Does she not recall him doing the EXACT SAME THING a few years before to the Sand People's children? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe he said flat out that he murdered the entire village, including the women and the children, and really didn't seem sorry that he did. So how is she going to say that Anakin is incapable of committing a terrible crime when she knows for a fact that he's done it before? Do the Jedi and anyone who's not the bad guy in this movie have incredibly short memories, or do they simply not care about genocide so long as its Sand People who are murdered? I know Lucas likes to play around with racism, but this is going too far!

6. The Prophecy:

This is a minor point, but since it was intrinsic to the plot, its wroth mentioning. In the first movie, Qui Gon tells the Jedi Council that he picked up Anakin because he believes him to be the child that was foretold in prophecy. Mace Windu then cites it, saying that it basically states that there will be "one who will bring balance to the Force". This prophecy comes up again in movie three, when Yoda says that this prophecy may have been misread or misinterpreted. And Obi-Wan clinches things off during his whiny scene where he bitches at Anakin after hewing off three of his limbs about how he failed to live up to the prophecy. Okay, so with all this talk about the prophecy, why is it that no one bothered to fully explain what it was about? "One who will bring balance"… yes, I can see how that could be misinterpreted, mainly because there's so little to go on! That could mean he would wipe out every last Jedi and Sith, thus leveling the playing field by making sure there were none of either.

Uh, you know what? Lucas actually explained in these EXACT terms! He said that since Anakin/Vader helped exterminate the Jedi and then went on to kill Palpatine (the Sith Lord), that he effectively brought balance to the Force. Yep, he fulfilled the prophecy by killing everyone on both sides, thus leveling the playing field. Wow… it takes a powerful imagination to turn what one person would consider a joke into a serious attempt at storytelling! To be fair, I could kind of see how this would work and how misinterpretation and subversion would thus play a part in it. But really, if this prophecy is supposed to be some mysterious trickster-style, monkey's paw kind of thing where it comes true, but only in the worst or most painfully ironic of ways, shouldn't we hear more about it first? Some details, some indication of how it could have a double-meaning or easily be a foretelling of doom and not salvation. Because as it stood, that prophecy was paper thin!

Okay, that's all I got for now. I'm sure I could find more if I tried, but not without exposing the depths of my geekiness and obvious obsession with details even further! And frankly, I have a hard enough time taking myself seriously as it is. Until next time!

More Plot Holes and Oversights!

Round two! Having done a few more reviews, I've come to find new instances where plot muck-ups and weak writing made a movie glaringly bad, or just brought down an otherwise good effort. Here's what I got this time:

Transformers:

Yeah, I've come to decide that Michael Bay is my least favorite director of all time. Not only is he responsible for creating crappy movies that all form, no substance. He's also guilty of completely objectifying women, reducing people to caricatures that are annoying and often racist, and just generally insulting our intelligence. And when it comes to his style, the Transformers trilogy stands out as a perfect example. In addition to being racist, sexist and low-brow, it was also full of plot holes. Here are some of the biggest that I could find:

1. Megatron's Dead… Sort of:

Remember in movie one where Megatron was destroyed, and how they dropped his body into the Laurentian Abyssal where the pressure and heat would make it impossible for him to be rescued or resurrected? Well in movie two, Bay disregarded all of that in order to bring the chief villain back. Basically, a couple bad guys swim down there, plug his body with a fragment of the All Spark, and he flies out. Here's a thought: if you're planning on making sequels, don't write yourself into a corner by killing off the lead bad guy and making it impossible to bring him back!

2. Continuity Error:

This hole actually runs through all three, so you might say its more like a plot tunnel. In movie one, we are told that Megatron came to Earth in the 1930′s seeking the All Spark and then got frozen in the Arctic. It wasn't until almost 70′s years later, when the film's taking place, that the Autobots and Decepticons came to Earth seeking the same thing. So… no one was on Earth between 1930 ish and 2007, right? However,

Then, in movie three, we're told that the Ark crashed on the Moon in the early 1960′s, thus prompting the Space Race, and immediately thereafter, people and governments began collaborating with the Decepticons. They did this mainly by putting a stop to all subsequent Moon missions, mainly by lying and saying that it was suddenly too expensive (actually, it was!) Also, the ploy involved the Decepticons burying reinforcements on the Dark Side of the Moon to lie in wait until the day came when Sentinel would be reactivated, the gate set up and the big attack could take place. But according to movie one, Megatron was the only Decepticon to visit Earth before 2007, and he was frozen and in government custody. If the other Decepticons didn't come to Earth until the first movie in search of Megatron and the All Spark, then who the hell were these humans collaborating with? In other words, who were they taking their orders from if no Decepticons were even on Earth yet?

Ah, which brings to mind movie two. After Megatron was brought back to life, he flew out to the edge of the solar system where a big Decepticon ship was waiting. According to Wikipedia, this ship is called the Nemesis, which is taken from the original animated series. In any case, the Fallen guy is on board and they've been breeding "hatchlings". This sets up the plot since the Decepticons want the Sun blower upper so they can harvest energon and power the things, thus making a new army. Hold on, if they've got some huge, badass warship out there, why not just attack with it? Why go through the whole convoluted process of searching from some stupid harvester and building an army? But that's a whole 'nuther plot hole!

The main thing here is that this doesn't square with what happened in the third movie. There, they reveal that they've had reinforcements on the dark side of the moon for decades. But if that's so, why was anyone bothering with making all of these hatchlings? You've already got reinforcements, why go to the trouble of making more? Sure, movie two was kind of a write off, but it still didn't make any sense!

3. Symbols and Clues:

So if I remember the plot of the second movie right, Sam got his brain zapped by a piece of the All Spark, which made him see symbols. This in turn gave him the knowledge of the last known location of the Matrix of Leadership. Hold on, why the hell would the All Spark have the location of the Matrix encoded into it? The All Spark was the thing that created the Transformers, right? These things therefore should have nothing to do with each other. Having the location be beamed into Sam's brain was therefore nothing more than a deus ex machina plot device.

The other thing has to do with all the clues that lead them to the Matrix near the end. These clues take the form of symbols (the Primes ancient language) which have been scrawled on various historic monuments, and which Sam can read since his brain got zapped. Aside from being more deus ex machina crap, why would the Primes put clues to the location of the Matrix out there for people to see? Wasn't it said that they trying to hide the Matrix so it wouldn't fall into the wrong hands? Wasn't that why they sacrificed themselves and created that weird ass cage out of their bodies to house it? Yes! So why would they put clues out there for all to see?

Oh yeah, and if the thing falls to dust unless its being handled by a "true leader" – you may recall that Sam had this explained to him when he went to robot heaven (holy shit, that was dumb!) – why bother even hiding it? Wouldn't it be useless to the Fallen or any other Decepticon if they laid their hands on it? But again, I'm expecting too much if I'm asking this movie to make sense aren't I? Moving on…

The Matrix Sequels:

The first movie in this trilogy was pretty seamless. And by that I mean I can't think of a single plot hole off the top of my head. The sequels, however, are another matter entirely. Given the complicated and convoluted plot, it was somewhat inevitable that holes would open up. I think I covered most of them in my previous review of the trilogy, but I never get tired of criticizing flops!

1. Neo's Powers:

The big mystery after movie two was how Neo managed to destroy machines in the real world with his mind. The explanations was one of the things that made the third movie a big letdown. According to the Oracle, the power of the One goes beyond the Matrix, right to the Source, from where it comes from. What the hell does that even mean? Is she implying that the Source CREATES the Ones? Why on Earth would it do that, create its own worst enemy over and over? Is that supposed to be like some Judea-Christian mystery, like why would God create the Devil? The way the Architect put it in movie two, the Ones are a natural occurrence, much like the 1 percent of people who can't accept the program because they are somehow more adept than the rest. But how would this person who can not only reject but control the Matrix bring that control into the real world? Who knows? It's never explained. And any way you try, it ends up not making much sense.

2. Neo in Limbo:

Another thing that was never explained was why Neo went back into the Matrix when he went into a coma. How did he do this if he wasn't even wired in? Again, the Oracle gives what clearly is meant to be a mysterious answer, but actually is just weak. Apparently, that's just something the One can do. He can control machines and go in and out of the Matrix without the need for a plug-in. Really? Does the mind of the One operate like wireless internet? Can he interface with machines and hack into the system without DSL or a Modem? Like I said, never explained, but that's probably because no explanation would make sense. It's just weird, ethereal stuff that's meant to advance the plot.

3. Why did Neo go to the Machine City?

So movie two ended with Neo realizing he could destroy machines in the real world. Sure, the experience kind of left him floored, but once he got all better, he was up and kicking machine ass. Hell, all he had to do was raise a hand and squiddies went boom by the bucket load! So why was Neo's next move to go to the machine city? Because he was having dreams about it? Or because he figured he could save Zion by making a deal with the Source to stop Smith? Okay, seems a bit contrived, but okay. Still, why would he do that when he could have saved Zion on his own terms? If he can blow up machines with a thought, all they would need to do is fly him to Zion where he could unleash hell on the squiddy army. Zion army almost stopped the machines as it was, but with Neo they could have mopped the floor with them!

And didn't the Architect say that the Matrix was on the verge of crashing? Yes, that was part two of the cyclical plan that kept the Ones in line. Blow up Zion, threaten to crash the system, thus eliminating humanity. But if Neo managed to use his abilities to save Zion for the attack, and the Matrix crashed as planned, that would mean the machines would be all but dead. Sure, millions of humans would die, but as Morpheus said, as long as they're wired into the system, they're still the enemy! So yes, lots of blood on his hands, but in exchange for that one act of unsentimental ruthlessness, humanity would have beaten the machines for good!

4. The Treaty Thing:

By the end, we're told that a treaty is in place between humanity and the machines, as a result of the deal Neo cut and the sacrifice he made. Just one question, why are the machines going along with this? Once Neo did his thing and ensured Smith's destruction, the squiddies just up and leave. Why? They were on the verge of wiping Zion off the face of the planet. Why not follow through and finish it? What's more, why did the Architect promise the Oracle that all humans who couldn't except the program would henceforth be set free? Sure, it seems like an elegant solution to the problem of what to do with them – just let them go and join Zion. But that was never a condition of Neo's deal, only an end to the war was. So why was it "obvious" as the Architect said?

Last nitpick, while the idea of having a peace treaty might seem like a good idea in the short run, what about the long run? The more people the machines let go, the larger Zion gets. What's going to happen when they get too large and unruly? Most likely, they'll be building more hovercraft and EMP's so they can move about and defend themselves too, making them a greater and greater threat. Surely, a mathematical mind like the Architect's would be able to foresee this. The idea that humans and machines could live in harmony indefinitely, especially after all the blood they've spilled, is just plain stupid.

5. The Big Climax:

I saved this one for last because its the one I'm the least clear on. The way the movie ended, it seemed like a culmination of various things. But almost immediately after I saw it, the logic began to escape me. Let me see if I can recap it. Neo promises to deal with Smith, the Source plugs him in, he and Smith have their big fight. It ends when Neo realizes that he and Smith are destined to come together and cancel each other out. Like the Oracle said, "he is your equal, your opposite", and once Smith blows up, the Matrix reboots because Neo still was carrying the reboot codes he picked up when he went in and met the Architect. It's poetic and wraps things up; but really, how did Neo letting Smith merge with him destroy the guy?

On the one hand, it might be that what the Oracle said was meant somewhat literally. Having Neo merge with Smith, his equal and opposite by this point, might have just overloaded Smith's program, but if so, why did he assimilate Neo? He had JUST taken over the Oracle and was now in possession of her prescience. If he saw what she saw, why do the thing that would guarantee his destruction? However, there is an alternative explanation, one which I came up… with all by myself!

My personal impression was that the Smiths blew up because the Source killed them. Or rather, it killed Neo for failing. That's what appeared to be the case, at any rate. The Source was pissed and zapped his body, but since he was now indistinguishable from Smith, it was really Smith who got zapped and this overloaded him and destroyed him. Still, this idea also presents problems. If zapping someone wired into the Matrix was all it would take to kill Smith, why didn't the system do that the moment he started copying himself onto people? Seriously, by the end, he had copied himself onto every single person within the Matrix. That's a couple million opportunities to kill him! And even if I'm wrong about it, what would stop the system from unplugging the people that Smith copied? At the same time, send in the agents to shoot the sentient programs. If it did that in the first place, the Smith "virus" might have been contained and Neo's help never needed.

More in part II, coming up next…

[image error] [image error] [image error]

More 1984…

Well, my book club is finally coming to the end of reading 1984. I sure am happy we picked that novel, as it is not only one of my favorites reads but one of my favorite books to teach. There's just so much there, a real English-teachers delight! And really, I never get tired of reviewing it. There's always something new to talk about, as you can plainly see! In addition, I've been hosting some chat groups over at Goodreads and that got me thinking about certain elements all over again. In the first forum we were discussing whether or not a 1984-type society could still happen, and to what extent did we think we might be living in one already. In the second, we got into the differences between 1984 and Brave New World, how Orwell and Huxley had different visions on the future, and which we thought came true.

In any case, what I realized was which part of the book I loved best. It was definitely the passages in Part II where Winston was reading from Goldstein's Manifesto. Not only did it totally appeal to the historian in me, it was just so full of depth and insight that it got me every time I read it (I think I'm up to three times now). And after doing a little side research, I came to realize that Orwell wrote this section first. Not only was the manifesto a major, culminating event in the story, it was also the centerpiece of Orwell's thought. Essentially, the book detailed how inequality was a constant in human civilization, the ongoing struggle between the high, middle and low. Far more than just being a constant, it was almost a necessity, an inevitable side-effect of living with scarcity, drought, and recurring shortages. It was with the advent of industrial processes however, that this pattern finally became breakable. While it took some tweaking, common sense finally convinced the barons and industry and the political leaders of the industrialized nations to make reforms to fit the times. The real standard of living finally began to rise. And as education, the distribution of goods and services, and information media improved, the gap between rich and poor, even the need for social distinctions, began to diminish.

Curiously, it was as the need for social distinction was about to disappear that the greatest totalitarian philosophies in the history of civilization appeared. Whereas industrial processes had come to represent the potential for human liberation, these people (Marxist-Leninist and Fascist were their official titles) wanted to use these same things to make enslavement permanent. In other words, these folk saw the writing on the wall and decided to go everything they could to arrest the process of history. Human beings could never be allowed to be liberated, they had to be cast down again. Hence, they took advantage of all that was happening in the 20th century to make it happen again. Two World Wars had already began the process in earnest, destroying the infrastructure that was making human equality possible and turning what were once comfortable, privileged people into brutalized subjects.

In order to ensure that this continued to be the case – in other words, that the basis for oppression and inequality continued to exist – war had to be constant, but also limited. Nuclear weapons were abandoned and war would continue by conventional means, albeit for unconventional purposes. The real aim henceforth would be for the sole reason of keeping people focused and ensuring that no improvement in the standard of living would ever be possible. Or at least, that's what Orwell had predicted through his alter ego of Goldstein. And there's a reason the second act ended with it. Up until that point in the story, Winston knew there was something wrong with society and wanted to rebel against it. The book did not really teach him anything in this respect. In truth, it did little more than confirm what he already knew. But the overall effect it had was to let him know he wasn't alone. He finally learns that he is indeed sane for feeling the way he does, mainly because he knows he has to be right.

This leaves Winston, and the readers, with all of Act III to answer the final burning question. Why? Winston soon learns this after he and Julia are seized by the Thought Police and taken to the Ministry of Love. Much like their betrayal, the hopelessness of their situation and the fact the Brotherhood does not even exist, the answer is a spirit-shattering disappointment. Power, O'Brien tells him. Power is the only reason. What else is there, in the final analysis? Why else would countless generations of kings, emperors, nobles, priests and elites have done what they did over the millennia? Why else torture, detain, brainwash, conquer, convert, force confessions and exterminate entire races of people? What better reason is there to do this than to feel god-like and know that moral arguments and the truth are useless against you?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I do believe this same reason explains much of what we are seeing today. True, Orwell's vision never really came to pass. There are those who would venture that we are living with Big Brother government and in an Oceania-style society right now but I would not be one of them. In every measurable way, we averted Orwell's dystopian future by not getting in a third world war, by expanding the middle class, public education, and narrowing the gap between rich and poor even further. We also managed to take big steps towards the elimination of the gender gap – another thing that has been increasingly obsolete with the advent of modern society – and the racial gap. Truly, if one looks at the post-colonial wars of independence, the civil rights movement and the feminist movement in conjunction with the victories of organized labor and the expansion of the middle class, one can see just how close we've come to creating the kind of society of equals that Goldstein's totalitarians wanted to avert.

But in the last thirty years, we've moved away from that ideal like never before. More and more, there are forces out there who are telling us of the need to cut taxes, deregulate the economy, globalize our economies, privatize, cut education, eliminate collective bargaining, pensions, job security, outsource industry, reign in teachers, streamline, etc etc. These same forces are the ones pushing for fiscal conservatism, saying "we simply cannot afford it anymore" as a justification for neutering governments by destroying their budgets and putting tax monies back into the hands of the rich and the super rich. When that fails, the specter of "SOCIALISM!" is used quite effectively to keep people from seeing the real agenda. All the while, smear campaigns are employed to paint protest movements, reformists, and people who question these changes as "radical", "socialist", "communist", and "elitist" – much the same labels that were used against people who protested the Vietnam War, segregation and sexism in the workplace.

And what is that, if not the drive for power? Not just power in the political sense, but in the concentration of media, industry, and money into fewer and fewer hands? What is the purpose, if indeed, these things aren't necessary? Well, for starters, it would successfully reverse the trends that have been at work in western society for the past century, and that the non-western world has been fighting to get a piece of for the latter half of it. It will once again create the basis for an unequal society by making sure that the middle and low do not have the means to challenge the power of the elite. If education, job security, a full belly and an informed mind are no longer possible on a grand scale, then the power of a small elite will seem justified. The only stumbling block to achieving all this lies in the ballot box or (God forbid!) technology that cannot be turned on its users to prevent the spread of information and dissenting viewpoints.

Yes, I am aware of how soap-boxish this is all sounds, but it HAS been on mind of late. It also might sound like a conspiracy theory, but there's a difference: Conspiracies are subtle, underhanded, and can't be proven either way. This is blatant, obvious, and in everyone's face. And the tactics aren't rational or covert either, they have about as much grace and subtly as a sledgehammer are constantly being spewed. We've all heard it too so I don't imagine people will wonder what I'm talking about, even if they don't happen to share my interpretation.

Anyhoo, here are the links to the Goodreads threads. I'm becoming aware of how good a forum this is for discussing literature, and for aspiring authors too to post their work, get feedback and network with others of their ilk!

1984 – Can It Still Happen?

1984 Vs. Brave New World

[image error]

The Watchmen

Sometime last week, I finally got my hands on the original graphic novel of V for Vendetta. I figured that since I was going to review this movie at some point, I ought to read the source material and treat it like all the other adaptations I've covered so far with this blog. Interestingly enough, the creative force being the graphic novel was none other than Alan Moore, the same man who created The Watchmen! While I've never been much of a comic book guy – which I admit is both treasonous and weird given my obvious geekhood! – I can honestly say that this was one of the best graphic novels I have ever read. Hell, it was guys like Moore with such creations as Watchmen and V that helped to establish the very concept of the graphic novel. While the dividing line between them and comic books is pretty fine, one can't deny that guy's like Moore combine a great deal of thought and inspiration to come up with these things, certainly no less than what typically goes into a high-end novel.

Not only that, but with The Watchmen, we got a story that was equal parts satire on the traditional subject matter of comics (superheroes) and the history of the 20th century. This is done in true sci-fi form, employing an alternate reality to show how the existence of a certain phenomena altered history, and using the differences to illustrate what took place in the real world. Embracing such things as generational change, feminism, war, civil rights, the decline of America, politics, nuclear holocaust, paranoia, UFO hysteria, and the American Dream, the scope and depth of this book was virtually undeniable. And when it came time to adapt it to the big screen, the same spirit came through pretty clear. There were naturally some weaknesses that emerged out of the monumental task of adapting the voluminous text to the big screen, and some complained about the changes, but in the end, it felt like a pretty faithful adaptation, and one that was overdue!

(Background—>):

Zack Snyder must have seemed like the natural choice to shoot this epic, having directed 300 – another graphic novel adaptation – just three years before. The end result was an official release that left out various parts of the plot in order to cut down on run time, but still managed to be two and a half hours long. As expected, a directors cut and an "Ultimate Cut" were also released on DVD that contained much of the missing elements, and they run for approx. three and three a half hours respectively! That's what you get when you try to adapt a classic to the big screen, I guess. In either case, the box office draw and DVD sales were through the roof, another result of a classic meeting the big screen!

Naturally, there were those who complained about the cinematic release, citing the things that were left out, the new ending which did away with the whole UFO theme, and what not. However, the thing that divided audience the most, ironically enough, was Snyder's commitment and reverence of the original source material. While some praised him for his faithful adaptation, his biggest critics saw this is as a drawback, claiming that his commitment to the source material made the movie feel "stuffy" and "boring". Some even found themselves falling in the middle, saying that they were impressed with the faithfulness of the adaptation, but unsure as to whether or not this made for a good movie. One thing was certain though, for fans of the graphic novel, the biggest source of contention was the changed ending! Squiddy or Manhattan, which was better? For those of you who read the novel, you know what I mean For those of you who don't, read on!

(Content—>):

The story opens on the murder of a superhero by the name of The Comedian (played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan). Whereas the novel only shows the aftermath of this, the movie gives us the full fight scene in order to open with a bang and get our attention. In any case, we begin the movie knowing that The Comedian (played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is dead, and his friend, fellow superhero Rorschach, is on the case! This latter superhero, named for the mask he wears, is one of the few superheros in this day and age who's not working for the government or gone into retirement. He believes The Comedians death is part of plot to eliminate the Watchmen, as superheroes have been turned on by popular opinion and outlawed by the state. We also learn quickly that due to the historical presence of superheroes, the world has unfolded quite differently. Due to superheroes, America won the Vietnam war, Richard Nixon has been president since, the Cold War has escalated and nuclear war seems inevitable, and electrical cars have all but replaced the standard auto.

Fearing a plot against his former comrades, Rorschach seeks them out and warns them. These include Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson), Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup), his wife and partner Silk Spectre II (Malin Akerman), and Ozymandias (Matthew Goode). They are unconvinced, until an assassination attempt against Ozymandias is narrowly averted. The movie then gravitates between telling the characters back stories and current events. On the one hand, we see how The Watchmen, an organization of crime-fighting superheroes, evolved from the Minutemen, a similar group that was formed in the 1930′s in response to the rising tide of organized crime and gangsters. In showing the history of the Watchmen, we are made aware of how history unfolded differently since their own stories are intertwined with historical events. What is palatable in all this is the feeling of loss and betrayal that accurately portrays life in the 20th century. Much like in the novel, there is the pervasive sense of the "end of innocence" that took place in the postwar era. Most of this told from the point of view of Rorschach, a man who's own cynicism reflects the mood of his age. All of his thoughts and findings he puts down in his journal, which will come up later!

In any case, Rorschach's investigation begins to bear fruit. After looking up the usual suspects, all he manages to find out from a former villain is that The Comedian was involved in something that even he couldn't stomach. It has been established at this point that his alias is sort of an ironic joke. Like the Joker, his humor comes in a brutal, sardonic form, albeit somewhat less malevolent and evil, somewhat. So when Rorschach learns that he was into something that was causing him to break down in front of one of his former enemies, he gets concerned. In any case, Rorschach soon finds himself framed as this former villain turns up dead. While in jail, we get to hear some of his back story as well as a shrink examines him. The reason for his cynicism and dark world-view becomes clear as we learn that he is the child of a prostitute who routinely beat him. As a teen, he ran away and became a vigilante, dolling out justice to those who violated his rigid moral code (which is clearly compensating for the fact that he never learned any real values). At first, he had limits, only ever beating up the bad guys he caught. But after an encounter with a man who raped and murdered a little girl, he crossed the line and never looked back! He reveals all this after looking at a set of (appropriately!) Rorschach diagrams!

Meanwhile, Dr. Manhattan is accused during a televised interview of causing cancer in everyone he's ever been in contact with. Manhattan, appropriately named, was created out of a nuclear accident that turned him into a being of reconstituted energy that also renders him invulnerable. Might sound hokey, but its actually a pretty cool character angle! In any case, when he hears this, he freaks out and leaves Earth, teleporting himself to Mars. In his absence, the Soviet Union, which has been at a strategic disadvantage since he started working for the US government, invades Afghanistan. The Doomsday Clock gets closer to midnight! Similarly, the Silk Specter, having broken up with Manhattan goes to stay with Night Owl. They decide to come out of retirement because of the impending crises and do what they can to help people in need. They then break Rorschach out of jail, knowing that he was right about their being some kind of conspiracy at work. And finally, Silk Specter confronts Manhattan who has come back to Earth because he knew she would come to him. After revealing to her that the Comedian was her father, he agrees to come back and help them.

Together, Rorschach and Nite Owl discover that Ozymandias is behind everything. He was the one who killed the Comedian, staged the assassination attempt, and sent a false reporter to tell Manhattan the cancer story, which was a hoax. They then learn that he is at his Antarctic retreat, and go there to confront him. Here was another big change from the comics. There, Ozymandias reveals his full plot to them, and only tangles with Rorschach briefly. In the movie, there is an extended fight scene before he shows them what he's really up to. Basically, Ozymandias confirms he is the mastermind behind it all, and explains that his plan is to unify the United States and the Soviet Union, preventing a nuclear war, by destroying the world's main cities with exploding energy reactors he helped Dr. Manhattan create under the pretense of providing free energy for the world. After their fight, he tells them the reactors are already set, the cities go up! The energy signatures are recognized as Manhattan's and its believed he finally went nuts and chose to attack Earth. As noted already, this is not what happened in the novel, but more on that later…

Meanwhile, Silk Specter and Manhattan show up, Ozymandias tries to kill him using some kind of nuclear de-compiler he was also working on. However, Manhattan proves immune to that as well and manages to subdue Ozymandias, but he shows him the TV reports which show how the US and Soviet UNion are standing down in the face of this new attack. They both seem to think Dr. Manhattan is against them and are combining forces and awaiting his next move. The others are angry, but Manhattan cannot argue with the logic and agrees to take on the role of the bad guy and go back into exile, this time permanently. Rorschach refuses and says he'll tell the world, so Manhattan is forced to vaporize him. Night Owl and Silk Specter leave and decide to carry on, fighting crime as New York rebuilds and possibly building a relationship (they already did it and her ex has gone away, so its pretty much a given!)

The movie then ends with people from a right wing tabloid named the New Frontiersmen talking about there's no news now that the cold was has ended. The final scene shows Rorschach's journal landing in their incoming mail pile. Remember how he recorded everything in there…? And that is how both the comic and movie end!

(Synopsis—>):

First off, the new ending. As I've said twice now, the part where Ozymandias blew up the world's major cities and blamed Manhattan was not what had happened in the original graphic novel. There, Ozymandias was working on perfecting matter teleportation, and it was this technology which he also used to try and destroy Dr. Manhattan. In any case, what he was teleporting was the body of a massive, genetically engineered bio-organism that looked very much like a massive alien squiddy into the heart of New York. Sounds weird, I know, but the result was that New Yorkers became convinced that an alien attack was underway. The organism died in the teleportation sequence, and only a few people were killed, but the point is they believed that an invasion attempt had failed, but more could be coming. THIS is what united the US and USSR, the prospect of an external threat that came from another species, not Doc Manhattan.

To be fair, I saw the reason for the changeover. The Squiddy concept was weird, but it played into the whole UFO paranoia that also existed in the latter half of the 20th century, as seen with Roswell and Area 51. The idea of playing that against Cold War rivalry made sense, it was just the execution that seemed a little weird. By putting Dr. Manhattan at the center of the conspiracy, Snyder was able to rework the plot quite effectively, but he did away with an essential element as a result. In addition, the recurring side-story about the pirate comic Tales of the Black Freighter which a patron is reading at a newstand, was also missing. However, Snyder was sure to include an animated adaptation of this portion of the novel onto the DVD.

Other than that, the only real changes had to do with action sequences which were included for obvious reasons. These weren't unnecessary, and the over-the-top style of combat was actually quite entertaining. It is at onThey're superheroes, so its natural that the action would be comic-booky. In a way, it kind of adds to the satire.

[image error]

Demolition Man

Ah yes, another classic guilty-pleasure movie! At least, that is my enduring opinion of this film. When I first saw it as a surly teenager, I thought it was a good shoot-em-up. As I got older, I recognized the satirical elements in it – or rather, the attempts at them – and concluded that they fell short. Now I know for a fact that there are those who disagree with me on this point. Hell, there are even some who might say that this movie was a smart, satirical take on the PC age or an re-imaging of Brave New World for the early 90′s. I, however, don't happen to be one of them! While I did get the allusions to BNW, I simply cannot bring myself to see how this film could possibly be compared to the brilliant and seminal work of Aldous Huxley. But as usual, some background info is needed before I get into all that.

(Background—>):

Ultimately, Demolition Man was a story about social engineering and control, but at the same time was marketed as an action movie. Fittingly, Sylvester Stallone and Wesley Snipes were brought in to the play the leads, both of whom were A-list action stars at the time. In the end, this combination of action-satire received mixed reviews, with Gene Siskel gave the movie a thumbs down for its violence and Ebert (as usual) praising it for it's "satiric angle". Rotten Tomatoes rates the movie as "fresh" with a 63% approval rating while on Metacritic, the movie scores a meager 34/100. In addition, Hungarian sci-fi writer István Nemere claimed the movie plagiarized the vast majority of his novel Holtak harca (Fight of the Dead), which was published in 1986. Regardless, audiences seemed suitably impressed. The movie did make over 50 million domestic, and 150 million foreign. Unfortunately, the director, Marco Brambilla, has gone on to do very little since. If this was the high-point in his career, all I can say is "tough break, man!"

(Content—>):

The movie opens in 1996, on a Los Angeles that is literally on fire. The opening scene where the Hollywood sign is burning is a pretty good indication that society has gone to hell at this time. It's possible that it was even meant to call to mind the LA riots of 92. Enter John Spartan (Stallone), aka. "The Demolition Man". At the movie's opening, he is on his way to bust a domestic terrorist with the equally ridiculous name of Simon Phoenix (Snipes). The latter has commandeered a building and is holding hostages while his men are in a standoff with police. Meanwhile, Spartan, air cavalry-style, jumps from a helicopter, shoots some guys, and then takes down Phoenix in a hand to hand fight. But of course, the building was wired to blow, and the whole place goes up just as Spartan jumps out with Phoenix over his shoulder. Seems blowing shit up is what he's famous for, hence the nickname!

Then, after the blow-up, the clean up crews find dozens of bodies – apparently, the remains of the hostages! Spartan claimed they had to be somewhere else since he did a thermal scan on the place and saw only Phoenix's own men, but dead bodies don't lie! Alas, he and Phoenix are both sentenced to cryogenic freezing for their crimes, since in this day and age (only three years from when the movie was released!) the penal system is no longer in use. Criminals are put in deep sleep and have their brainwaves altered using synaptic suggestion (kind of a neat idea!). His freezing scene is little more than an excuse for Stallone to show off his ass, but whatever.

Okay, first impressions? Well for starters, nothing about the opening sequence is believable, and the hints its dropping are pretty damn obvious. For one, the images and action call to mind things like Beirut and Baghdad more than downtown LA, the tracer fire alone in the opening shots are clearly meant to make us think of a war zone. And last I checked, police didn't have access to military helicopters or were cleared for aerial insertions. But this is the future right? Sure, but only three years from when the movie was made! Did they expect society to go to hell in that amount of time? Well, it IS LA… Oh, and another thing about the tracers: with all the flak they were putting up, how is it the one thing they didn't seem to be firing at was the one helicopter that was flying above them? Ah, who cares?

Fast forward to 2032. San Angeles (Los Angeles and San Diego merged after the Big One), is a peaceful, sterile, happy-faced place where violence is obsolete, swearing is illegal, and everything and anything unhealthy has been outlawed. But we quickly see that there is dissent; underground people's who spray paint messages of resistance here and there and occasionally conduct raids. Enter Lenina Huxley (Sandra Bullock in her debut action role), a young cop who is curious about the past and longs for some action. Hm, no ironic foreshadowing there! In any case, in what appears to be a mix-up, Phoenix is awakened over at the cryo-facility for a parole hearing. In a scene that definitely tells us something is up, he escapes from his cage, kills the guards, escapes from the facility and begins spreading chaos in his wake. And when the police confront him, Phoenix whoops out some badass martial arts skills and kills a few. The police are frightened, and for good reason!

Naturally, they appeal to the man who runs things in San Angeles, Doctor/Dictator Raymond Cocteau (played by British actor Nigel Hawthorne), who just happens to be the inventor of the cryoprison as well. He says "do what you will", but its clear he's got something up his sleeve. The cops got nothing, and its clear they are unequipped to deal with such a violent criminal. But it just so happens that someone on the force is old enough to remember the man who brought Phoenix down the first time… John Spartan! They commence defrosting, and some expository dialogue lets us know some pertinent facts: the merger that created San Angeles, the Big One (which coincidentally claimed Spartan's wife), and the fact that smoking, alcohol, red meat, contact sports, salt, etc etc are now illegal. A brief encounter between Spartan and a swear monitor also lets him know that swearing results in a fine!

Now this is a part of the movie I actually liked. It's been established at this point that the new age folk are completely helpless in the face of a violent convict. They fear and revile Phoenix, but they're impressions of Spartan are not much better. Essentially they think he too is a barbarian, in part because he's a convict, but mainly because of where and when he comes from. This is a realistic touch and something that's consistent throughout the movie. However, this is still an action flick and things quickly move to the first post-thaw confrontation between the two titans, and at a museum of all places! Seems Phoenix went there to find a gun, which is the only place one can even see a gun in the future. Spartan shows up, and two begin using the museum guns to shoot at each other. Yes, it seems the guns in this particular museum are kept loaded. Uh… okay! Makes absolutely no sense, but okay…

Phoenix escapes, and runs into Cocteau outside. He tries to shoot him, but cannot and is forced to flee. At this point, we are made aware of the fact that there's some sort of conspiracy between them. Prior to this, it was obvious that someone has been pulling Phoenix's strings since he got out of cryogenics. He's obsessed with the name Edgar Friendly (played by Dennis Leary), another absurdly named character who just happens to be the man running the dissidents. What follows is some filler and background scenes where Spartan is invited by a seemingly grateful Cocteau to dinner (at Taco Bell, the only restaurant to survive the "franchise wars"!) he is subjected to more bigotry from the San Angeles folk, and is in the right place at the right time to stop a band of Friendly's men from raiding the restaurant for food. Afterward, he and Lenina go back to her place where she asks him to have "sex", which consists of wearing helmets that simulate sex-related sensations. Seems real sex has been banned due to STD's! Bummer…

Anyway, irked and unable to adjust to this new form of "sex", Spartan retires to his flat and begins looking at security footage from the museum. Upon seeing the clip where Phoenix couldn't shoot Cocteau and the short conversation that ensued, he becomes highly suspicious. He looks up Phoenix's file and finds that in addition to being thawed "accidentally", he was programmed for mass destruction. Remember the bit about synaptic suggestion? Well, it seems that while Spartan was encouraged to knit (no joke!), Phoenix was encouraged to kill! At this point in the movie, things begin to revolve around Cocteau as both Spartan and Phoenix take turns confronting him. Spartan does so to get answers, but is told to get lost and that he's going back into the freezer. Phoenix does so to find out why the hell he was thawed and why he's been programmed. You see, in addition to being fixated on killing Friendly, he can access any computer in the city and seems to instinctively know his way around. He, in turn, is told everything, as is the audience!

Essentially, Cocteau tells him that he let Phoenix out of cryoprison and programmed to kill, be able to access any computer in the city and find his way around San Angeles with ease so that he would kill Friendly, the only remaining obstacle to him creating a "perfect society". In exchange for this, Phoenix will get whatever he wants, and he even promises to put Spartan back in the freezer for him as "a guarantee". Phoenix however, says he will take out Spartan himself, but will need the help of a dozen or so additional convicts from his past to complete these various tasks. For whatever reason, Cocteau consents and gives him his access to his old buds. Cue tense music!

Okay, two things! One, are we really to believe that this Cocteau fellow would thaw the most dangerous criminal of the 20th century just so he could deal with some meager political dissident? Why not hire some mercenaries from out of state, or out of the country? And its not like Friendly is a threat really! All he does is spray paint things and raid Taco Bells! Seriously, in what world is it smart to unleash a psychopath to deal with a simple political protester? That's like unleashing a poisonous snake to deal with a rodent. Second, did he really believe he could control Phoenix simply by putting some kind synaptic block on him? Sure, Phoenix was unable to kill HIM, but what about everybody else in the city? Moreover, how was he planning on controlling him once he was finished with Spartan and Friendly? Cocteau had obviously given no thought to that since he had nothing in mind to offer him. Last, are we really to believe he would agree to thaw more psychos without bothering to take ANY precautions with them? With Phoenix he at least did something, but with these other guys, he does nothing! How stupid is this guy?

Alright, lets move on! Despite being told he's going back into the freezer, Spartan is still walking around. He even leads Huxley and her partner Garcia (Benjamin Bratt) on a manhunt for Phoenix, a search which takes them into the sewers. Coincidentally, they run into Simon Friendly's people, because the sewers are where he and his band of dissidents/thieves/scavengers live. Oh yeah, and they have guns too! They must have raided a museum at some point… Meanwhile, Phoenix is plotting with his psychos (duh!) to take over San Angeles society by killing Raymond and Spartan. After Spartan explains to Friendly what he thinks is going on (i.e. Cocteau wants to kill you and thawed a mass murdered to do so), Phoenix and his gang show up and a gunfight ensues. Spartan and Phoenix fight their way across town with an obligatory car chase, during which time Phoenix tells him that all those hostages Spartan allegedly killed in his capture attempt were already dead; or as he puts it, "Cold as Hagen Daas!" Well, as the Joker said to the Batman, "even to a guy like me, that's cold!" Okay, nuff cold-related puns! Phoenix escapes again, and has his men kill Cocteau. Wow… didn't see that one coming!

The police and Friendly's scavengers then come together, with Spartan asking for their cooperation. They then march on Cocteau's office where they find him dead and see that Phoenix and what remains of his thugs have taken to the cryogenics facility where they are planning on thawing all the convicts there. A final showdown takes place between Spartan and Phoenix and Spartan manages to (you guessed it!) blow up the place in the process! He escapes in the nick of time as the place is exploding all around him, all the while doing the Stallone signature grunt/yell. The movie ends with the uptight police chief fearing for the future, Friendly suggesting they all get drunk and "paint the town red", and Spartan suggesting they find a middle path. Then, of course, Spartan kisses Huxley, and they agree to have sex the old fashioned way. Cue theme music by The Police!

(Synopsis—>):

Of the top of my head, I can think of several things that were good about this movie. For one, they actually did bring some satirical elements to the screen. The way the future citizens of San Angeles saw Spartan as a brute, for example. "Cro-Magnon", "primate", "caveman"; these are how they describe him, and to his face! And the paradox is quite clear: on the one hand, their values demand that they reject a man like him. On the other, they make them hopelessly dependent on him. Also, the nature of the "utopian" San Angeles society seems like a pretty fitting commentary on the PC age: how taken to its extreme, censorship and repression – even if its well-meaning – will lead to a society of stunted, helpless virgins. Though the entire plot may have been lifted from a Hungarian sci-fi novel, this aspect of the movie was kind of fitting given the year of its release. The early 90′s were kind of the dawn of the PC age, and it only made sense that there would be those who would want to warn people about the potential for danger before it had a chance to get in full swing!

There were also several funny moments I feel the need to acknowledge. Snipes manages to pull off the psycho quite well and has some downright funny lines. "Cold as Hagen Daas" was one, as was his Scarface imitation. Also, the joke about President Schwarzenegger wasn't bad. One might get the impression that he and Stallone have some kind of agreement where they're required to give a shout out to each other every few years. And how about the running joke about "the three seashells"? And the swear detectors were not just satirically apt, they were a pretty good comedic tool.

And now for the bad stuff… First off, the totally contrived, unthought-out nature of the plot! Again, are we really to believe some conniving future dictator would unleash a mass murderer to kill ONE MAN and expected he could control him? Wasn't this guy supposed to be the leader of San Angeles and the creator of their entire way of life? Did he get to where he was by NOT planning ahead like this, or is he just this stupid? Also, the fact that people are able to get both guns and ammo in a future where there are supposed to be none made no sense either. I know, if you remove these elements, there's no movie. But a few lines of dialogue would have patched this movie's biggest holes, but no explanations were ever given! Hell, they could have even done a thing where Spartan and Phoenix were forced to improvise their weapons, showing how they had to resort to classic ingenuity in an age where mass-produced firearms were no longer available. I'm just saying…

Also, there's the idea that this movie managed to adapt elements of Brave New World to the big screen. Sure, that was the aim, and the references were certainly clear enough. But that was the problem, in my opinion, and the reason for its failure. For one, the name of Sandra Bullock's character is an obvious allusion to BNW. Her last name is Huxley (aka. Aldous), and Lenina is the name of BNW's main female character (Lenina Crowe). And at one point, Phoenix even yells out, "Its a Brave New World" before firing off his weapon. Now that was just plain unnecessary! I mean, if you're going for literary allusions, try some subtlety! Don't just announce what you're trying to emulate! It comes off as obvious, and its not like people aren't going to make the connection anyway. In any tale of social engineering where freedom is being killed by soft measures, the inevitable connection is to Brave New World!

But then again, this was in keeping with what brought this movie down for me, which was its watered down character. Putting aside the fact that this movie was possibly a total rip-off, there were still the basic outlines of a decent plot before Brambilla and whoever else decided to turn it into an action movie got their hands on it. Once that was done, the potential for real satire and social commentary was pretty much lost. In the end, all that stuff just seemed like it was thrown in to give a feeling of depth to an otherwise cheesy action flick, which really wasn't the case. The movie started out as a tale about a dystopian future borne out of the violence and chaos of the present, but was dumbed down in order to make it accessible to Hollywood audiences. And that's a shame man! Consider how many otherwise decent movies or original novels have been ruined simply because of the director's, producers and industry's lack of respect for their audiences.

But that's something for another time and I'm starting to get that preachy feeling again. And like I said, this really isn't a bad movie, just one that requires a little brain-checking if you don't want to come away disappointed. Overall, I'd say it belongs in the fun but kinda stupid bin, next to the other guilty pleasures that DON'T make you think!

Demolition Man

Entertainment Value: 7.5/10

Plot: 4/10

Direction: 7/10

Total: 6.5/10

RIP Steve Jobs, You Will Be Missed

What can you say about a man who's life's work has led him to be viewed as one of the foremost businessmen, inventors and innovators of the past century? I really don't know, other than to repeat what everyone else has said already: that he was a titan of high-tech, busines acumen, and that he will be missed. Yes, it was only a few months ago that Jobs announced he'd be stepping down from his post because of an ongoing battle with cancer. And, much like Jack Layton, he departed this world shortly thereafter. And at the still-tender age of 56 no less.

Quite sad, but it reminds us just how precious life really is. The candle that burns half as long burns twice as bright.

I know very little about what he did in life, but I do know that, thanks to him, the world of personal computers and consumer electronics has forever been revolutionized. As one of the three founders, Jobs helped to invent the PC, which in and of itself changed the way the public and private sector does business. One can scarcely imagine an office environment without a personal computer, and today, one can scarcely imagine people going about their business without the help of an iPhone or PDA.

And in addition to bringing Apple to the world, he helped bring it back after years of being marginalized by their biggest competitor, Microsoft. Ultimately, he and his colleagues pushed back against the tide of monopolization that Gates unleashed with the policy that all hardware, software, and accessories should be designed by the same people and built to be compatible. And I don't need to tell people how successful they were, do I? After a few years of being the underdogs, Apple turned things around and became the guys who's stuff worked for a change! And with the Vista fiasco and the dominace of the iPod and iPhone (can anyone rememnber the name the Microsoft's equivalent? Me neither!), it seems like the tables have turned.

Still, can't help but wonder what Apple will do now. I guess I'm in the majority in that respect because every article and news story I've read on the subject so far seems to be tacitly asking this question. Sure, they'll carry on, as always, but I think it will be many years before another person as innovative and brilliant as Jobs comes along.

P.S. I can recall a few years back when Steve Jobs and Rupert Murdoch were talking about creating an iPhone app for Newcorps, FoxNews' flagship and Murdoch's big weapon in his war on journalism. I'm hopeful that Murdoch's current legal troubles torpedoed that, because, trust me Apple, you don't want to get involved with that charlatan!

Transformers (Cont'd)

(Continued…)

3. Stupid Comic Relief:

Not long ago, I figured George Lucas was THE guy when it came to using stupid characters in a movie, ones which were intended for comic relief, but were really just annoying and oftentimes racist. Then Bay came along not once, not twice, but thrice with his own take on that idea! In all three Transformers movies, it seems the only point of having black characters was to add some sass and punchy dialogue. Take for example the fat dude in the first one (Anthony Anderson*), the fat special ops dude in the third one, or the "Twins" in the second. In most cases, this bordered on racism or at least bad taste, but in the second movies, the flappy-eared, gold-toothed, ebonics talking, non-reading robots not only crossed the line entirely but took a shit on it as well. Really, the only strong black character in the entire franchise was Epps (Tyrese Gibson) but even he was constantly playing second fiddle to Lennox, the white special ops dude played by Josh Duhamel.

Then there were Sam's parents. In all three movies, they are annoying, too-much-information spouting, no fashion-sense having, clueless morons who are constantly getting in the way. In the first one, this was semi-tolerable, just some passing talk about masturbation and the usual "parents are insufferable" stuff. But the scene in movie two where they are bringing him to college and the mom gets high on some pot brownies? Now that was just plain stupid. As if that wasn't bad enough, they are then captured by the Decepticons, thus fulfilling their role as total liabilities! By movie three, they are such incessant nags with the worst fashion sense that you get the feeling they are retired, eighty, and partly-senile (they're even driving a massive Winnebago!)

And then there was John Turturro, usually a funny and pretty damn sublime actor, reduced to the role of the Sector 7 agent, who's only real purpose was to make quirky jokes, be awkward and inject some comic relief into the action. He kind of peaked in the second movie, what with that whole "I'm under the machine's scrotum" thing. Seriously, Transformer balls?! John Malcovich who they brought in for the third movie was similarly awful, a solid actor from such classics as Of Mice and Men, In the Line of Fire and Being John Malcovich who plays an oddball eccentric who insists on color coding everything in on his office floor, boxes with a Transformer and collapses, declaring he's ticklish, and stares luridly at Sam's girlfriend! Not drole, dumb!

The same is true of Rainn Wilson (the creepy professor in #2), Alan Tudyk (Turturro's fey, German bodygaurd in #3), Ramon Rodriguez (Sam's roommate in #2), Frances McDormund (the CIA director-lady in #3), and Ken Jeong (office weirdo in #3). In each case, we see otherwise respected and respectable actors and actresses reduced to the most low-brow of antics in order to provide cheap laughs. Again, in the first movie, it was tolerable. The second time around, this element was so awash in crappy writing it kind of went unnoticed. But by movie three, I just couldn't believe it. In fact, it got so over the top by movie three that I had to wonder what kind of man Bay really is. Does HE think creepy weirdos who get in people's faces, annoy the hell out of people and act so dumb you want take a monkey wrench to their faces are funny? Is HE that kind of person? Megan Fox would seem to think so, but she's aint exactly the authority on sane behavior herself!

Really, it seems like every single secondary character has no purpose aside from providing cheap laughs in these movies! There's NO OTHER PURPOSE!

4. Women as Objects:

Speaking of Megan Fox, she did one thing which I respect the hell out of. And that was tell Bay to go there! Shortly after she quit the franchise, Fox went on record as saying she was sick of being treated like an object by Michael Bay. This was by no means her only complaint about the man, nor his about her, but she had a valid point. Just look who Bay decided to replace her with: Victoria Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, a woman with zero acting experience and just about as much ability. In every shot, she is positioned as an object, holding her boobs out for that unbelievably obvious scene where her evil boss is describing the female form, or running around in model clothes and high heels while the world is exploding around her. She provides no real impetus to the movie, other than being a damsel in distress, and most of the time just looks lost.

Like his use of racial caricatures, Bay seems obsessed with portraying women in a most stereotypical light. When they are not playing pretty little dolls constantly bending over things or running around in skimpy outfits, they're vile temptresses, like the character of Alice in Fallen. It was the dumbest thing that she turned out to be a robot, but still, her purpose in the movie – a pretty thing with pouty lips and partially exposed breasts constantly trying to screw Sam – was clear! That bit about the robot tongue only added insult to that injury!

5. Raping History:

As a historian, it always bothers me when crappy movie makers try to rip off history in order to lend a sense of conspiracy and intrigue to their movies. Just look at Roland Emmerich or Jerry Bruckheimer, the former used Roswell to make Independence Day, the American Revolution to make the Patriot, and the mysteries of the Mayan Calendar to make 2012. Meanwhile, Bruckheimer (who was executive producer for several of Bay's movies) has been at least partially responsible for the rape of Arthurian legend, 19th century piracy, and just about every conspiracy theory known to man in order to make The Rock, Pirates of the Carribean, and National Treasure. Granted, these weren't all bad, but its still annoying when someone manipulates historical facts for the sake of cashing in (hey Dan Brown!)

But in this franchise, Bay's got em all beat! In the first movie, he claimed that the Hoover Dam was some sort of secret base. Why? Because it was built during the time of FDR, which was when Sector 7 was formed and Megatron found. Yeah, that makes sense! In movie two, ancient history becomes the target as Bay claims that the Pyramid of Giza and ancient city of Petra were both built in order to hide some ancient Transformer artifacts. Then, hang onto your hat, in movie 3, he used the ENTIRE SPACE RACE to create its insipid plot! Not only were all of humanity's attempts to make it to the Moon the result of some alien robot-related conspiracy, the fact that we've never been back since the 70′s was attributed to some cover up and conspiracy. Yep, not budgets, not the general thaw in tensions between East and West. No, no, it was a big cover up! Can you hear yourself Bay? I might kill you tonight…

And let's not forget Chernobyl. It was already established that the Appollo program led the US to discover the wrecked Ark and that Sputnik did something similar for the Russians. But they take that a step further by saying that the nuclear accident at Chernobyl was in fact Russian scientists testing captured Decepticon technology and testing it out. God I wanted to vomit by this point in the movie, and it was only fifteen minutes in!

6. Big Changes:

Just me just say, off the bat, that I am abundantly aware of how geeky this is going to sound! Truth be told, it always annoys the hell out of me when people say how changes were made from the original like its automatically a bad thing, but in this case, I think they would be right. And as someone who grew up with the original series, I did happen to notice that certain things had been changed or discarded from the original series that had actually lent it some depth and credibility. I mention this because of that, not because I feel like someone raped my childhood by deviated from the original script (looking at you George Lucas!) Okay, bring on the geekdom!

The All Spark: In the original Transformers, it was never entirely clear where they had come from. And the fact that there were good and evil machines, and that they were all unsure of their origins, seemed like there might be some allegorical similarities to the Biblical and other creation myths. In the original series, this was never really explored, the focus being on kids entertainment and marketing. But as the series got older, like its original fanbase, the concept seemed to mature. I never really did watch any of the spin offs after the original series, but by the time Beast Wars came out, nostalgia got the better of me and I watched a few episodes. Interestingly enough, by this time, the focus seemed to have shifted to dealing with more adult themes – like exploring why the Transformer transform, the origins of Cybertron, and what created them.

For example, I remember it being mentioned at one point in Beast Wars that at the heart of Cybertron there was this thing called the Matrix. Not the Matrix of Leadership, but some kind of massive, sentient force that was responsible for giving birth to the earliest Cybertronian civilizations, the latest of which had been the Autobots, at least until the Decepticons came along and wrecked the party! At no point was there this thing called an All Spark, an alien cube which floated through space from place to place. And while the Matrix served the same basic purpose (i.e. giving the robots an origins story), we never really got a close look at it or learned much about it. Nor, for that matter, did anyone try to lay claim to it. In short, it was like a holy relic, its purpose, creators and motives being entirely unknown. Thus the origins of the Transformers were shrouded in mystery. Just like us real-life human beings, they did not know the reason for their existence and could not fathom why the thing that created them would also want to create something evil.

This was something undeniably cool about the original franchise, in that there was depth and a real-world sense of mythos to it. In the movies, all that was missing. It's obvious why Bay would choose to change all that, it simplified the plot, cut down on the need for explanations and exposition, and provided an explanation as to why the bots came to Earth in the first place. Which brings me to change number 2:

The Ark: Again, different in the original. In movie three, we are told that the Ark was a ship carrying a weapon and was bound for Earth because Sentinel was trying to save Cybertron with it (in truth, he was defecting, but that's neither here nor there) But in the original, the Ark served a much more lofty purpose. Essentially, it was a survivor ship that the Autobots built after they realized that the war on Cybertron was lost. It's purpose was to carry the Autobots to some distant solar system where they would survive and rebuild. However, the Decepticons intercepted and boarded it, and the resulting fight caused the ship to crash-land on Earth, circa several million years ago. Everyone on board was killed and the Ark itself was damaged, but its central AI survived and managed to resurrect itself millions of years later, at which point humanity had built an advanced, global civilization. Again, a case of Biblical allegory, of real myth being used to give the story some depth. And again, Bay changed and simplified it. Not only was the Ark robbed of its significance in movie 3, it was also used for the purposes of giving the Transformers yet another thing to scramble for! Sp not only was he using an original idea, he was using it for the sake of unoriginality!

That relates directly to directly to the entire premise of the second movie. You know, the whole "the sun destroyer is in the Pyramid of Giza thing". In short, none of it happened in the original franchise, but I'm sure everybody knew that already. The idea of Transformers hiding a massive sun destroyer inside the Pyramid of Giza was so dumb, audiences had to know that only Bay could be responsible.

Whoa! That was a long review! But this is a big franchise. Not in terms of depth or credibility, but definitely in terms of screen time and hype. And really, did it deserve either? As I'm sure I wrote earlier, I'm not one of these people who would say Bay is a criminal based on how he made changes in these movies from the original franchise. I WOULD say he's a criminal based on what he's done to our collective intellect: namely, insulted it! And if you look at Bay's resume, this was just one entry in a long list of things he redid, rehashed, rebooted, or reimagined: The Island, The Amityville Horror, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Friday the 13th, and A Nightmare on Elm Street.

Ultimately, the Transformers Trilogy failed to be the big re-imagining and the pop-culture phenomena that many hoped it would be. The main reason for this, aside from the weak writing, poor acting and the directorial style of Michael Bay, was the motives that went into making it. Like all of Bay's projects, the goal here was obvious: spend a shitload of money on some movies who's sole purpose is to make an even bigger shitload of money. He's good at that, no doubt about it! When all is said and done, Bay excels at giving the audience what they want. At least in the short-run. The problem is, once its over, we all feel guilty for wasting the money and subjecting ourselves to such guilty pleasures. Kind of like eating fast food or one-night stands. Sure, it seems fine at first, but immediately afterwards, we're all doing the walk of shame!

Transformers:

Entertainment Value: 7/10

Plot: 6/10

Direction: 7/10

Total: 6.5/10

Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen

Entertainment Value: 6/10

Plot: 1/10

Direction: 5/10

Total: 3/10

Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon

Entertainment Value: 6/10

Plot: 5/10

Direction: 5/10

Total: 5.5/10

The Transformers Trilogy!

Awhile back – when I was first starting these reviews, in fact – I had shied away from reviewing Transformer 2. Not sure why I wanted to review in the first place, probably just because I was looking forward to bashing the hell out of it. But you know what they say about dead horses… However, I recently saw Transformers 3 at long last, and figured that since I had the trilogy under my belt, I might as well say something about it. But really, there are two reasons for why I want to cover it now. One, Michael Bay's re-envisioning of this franchise has earned him some serious bitch-slapping from the fan and critical community, and I'll be damned if I don't get some of my slaps in! Two, as a kid, I was a big fan of the animated series and happened to notice there were some pretty big differences between old and new. And, just for the sake of doing something different, I think I'll ditch the usual formats and try to review all three at once! A tall order, and reviewing Bay movies is never easy on the IQ, so wish me luck!

Transformers:

The movie opens with an explanation by Optimus Prime (voiced by Peter Cullen) of the movie's big maguffin – that is, the thing that's driving the plot. It's called the All Spark, its a mysterious technology that creates living machinery, and is apparently what created the Transformers. And this is why they are coming to Earth, apparently, to retrieve it before the Decepticons can. Because, as is explained later, it will decide the fate of Cybertron – the Transformer homeworld which has been devastated by an ongoing war between the two sides. The Autobots want to use it to rebuild, Megatron wants to use it to take over.

This sets up the plot and the race to find the All Spark, as well as the character of Sam Witwicky (played by Shia LaBeouf). He's the unlikely hero who's grandad happened to accidentally find the location of it when he chanced upon Megatron's frozen carcass somewhere over the Atlantic. Seems Megatron came to Earth back in the 30′s to locate the All Spark has been here ever since. And, of course, his discovery by other humans at this time became the basis for some shadowy group that has all kinds of info on the Decepticons and is in possession of the All Spark. When the Decepticons attack, they are doing so in order to find both Megatron, the All Spark, and info on Sector 7 (the aforementioned shadowy group). Sam and his unlikely girlfriend Mikaela (Megan Fox) get roped in on the side of the Autobots and try to stop them. Everything culminates in a big shoot out in some city where Megatron and the All Spark are destroyed.

Preeeeetty simple! And really not in keeping with the original story. But I'll get into that later. Point is, the plot was never meant to be deep or particularly challenging, just an excuse to get into some big shoot-em-ups with lots of CGI and special effects. And that's precisely what we got. It didn't suck, wasn't great, but there were some tell-tale weaknesses that would become more glaring as Bay went on to make more movies in this franchise. Which brings us to…

Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen:

Let me not waste any time in saying that this movie sucked! Hell, even Bay and LaBeouf said so, but there was one overriding reason for this. Bay wrote it! Yes, it was during the height of the writers strike that this movie was being produced, which is why the script was so bland, cheesy, overdone, and stupid. It reflected everything Bay brings to a movie through his direction; but since he was working at it from both ends this time, from conception to execution, it was like a Bay movie on crack!

But I digress… this time around, we see the Decepticons bringing in someone new. Seems the Transformers have ancient ancestors known as the Primes, whom Optimus is the last of. They went around the universe harvesting energon which they need to survive, and did so by blowing up suns. Uh… okay. But, since the Primes predated the EVIL Decepticons, they had some ethics about it. They never blew up a sun that had inhabited planets around it (is this some kind of environmentalist statement?) But one Prime, "The Fallen", decided to defy this rule, which was why they brought him down and exiled him to… Saturn? Okay… Ah, and the device used to blow up the sun was hidden on Earth in… the Pyramid of Giza? Again… okay! And the trigger they hid by melding their bodies together into a big cage-like thing, which in turn was hidden inside… (Jesus Christ!) the ancient city of Petra!

Oi! So the Autobots learn that the Decepticons are looking for this guy at the beginning where they and some human special forces go to Shanghai and take down a Decepticon hiding there. Seems humans (or at least, the US military and CIA) are working with the Autobots and covering up their existence. Uh… how? They freaking fought in a major city! Downtown! During business hours! How they hell are they covering this up? You know what… never mind! Things really starts to happen when the Decepticons get to Megatrons body and reactivate it. Wait! Wasn't he dead AND placed at the bottom of the Laurentian Abyssal where the pressure is so great, nothing can withstand it? Yeah, so how the hell did they… never mind! So they reactivate him and bring him back so they can get "The Fallen" off of Saturn, find the key, destroy the sun, and harvest the energon.

The Autobots are similarly looking for the key since they need it to reactivate Prime after he was killed by Megatron. Sam finds it, it turns to dust, he dies in a VERY long fight scene in the desert, and goes to Autobot heaven where they tell him his deads have earned him the right to use the Matrix since it can only be used by proven leaders! Prime is bought back to life and kills Megatron and the Fallen in a quick fight and all is well. So… Autobot heaven? A device that only works in the hands of a leader? Holy shit, that's weak writing man! Oh, and I should mention that the entire inciting event to all this was when Sam found a piece of the All Spark on his clothes which zapped his brain with the last known coordinates of the Matrix of Leadership. Yeah, one tiny piece somehow stuck to his clothes for a whole summer and he didn't once notice. Needless to say, this whole plot is yet another case of a race to find the lost whatever, the location of which is hidden in symbols that only Sam has access to.

The movie was panned and bashed by virtually everyone who saw it, critics and fans alike. But luckily, the strike ended and Bay got to making a third which, if all went well, would get things back on track…

Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon:

I was a little curious about the title beforehand and could only surmise that Bay didn't want to get sued by Pink Floyd's estate, hence why the dropped the obvious "Side" from the title. However, that theory is complicated by the fact that they said Dark Side of the Moon and even referenced Floyd in the movie, a couple of times! But since I know nothing of copyright law, I'll just assume I'm right and venture that it only applies to titles and not dialogue. Whatever, it's a stupid name! But the movie was definitely better than the second.

It's starts by going back to the beginning, to Cybertron during the last phase of the war. The Ark (something that comes from the original series, but in altered form) was headed out on some kind of salvation mission, and ended up crashing on the Moon. The entire Space Race between the US and the USSR was therefore a covert attempt to reach the wreckage and get a hold on the technology. This was done, and a shadow conspiracy has existed on Earth ever since. Seems humans the world over were collaborating with Decepticons since they discovered the wreck of the Ark and were preparing some plan for them (a clear allegory to Munich there!) As soon as the Autobots find out about the wreckage, and the fact that humans have known of it for some time, they become eager to get to it and open it up for themselves.

Essentially, the Ark was carrying a weapon of sorts, a matter gateway that can pull objects across light years of space. Optimus' predecessor, Sentinel Prime (voice by Leonard Nimoy) was also aboard the ship and is the only one who can activate it. He was supposed to use the weapon to win the war for the Autobots, but instead had made a deal with Megatron where he surrendered and would let him use it to rebuild Cybertron. Since he was deactivated and the only way he could be revived was with (again!) the Matrix of Leadership, the Decepticons lead the Autobots to it and wait for them to revive him, which is when they make their move. Wait, if he was defecting, why did the Decepticons shoot him down? Didn't they get the memo? Tagline: Don't shoot this ship down, it's working for us? Whoop, sorry! I digress…

As we get to the midway mark, Sentinel betrays the Autobots, sets up the gateway, and hundreds of Decepticon reinforcements which have hiding on the dark side of the moon are let loose and attack Earth. Oh, and we learn that the real purpose of the gateway is to bring Cybertron to Earth – right into our orbit no less! – so they can use the human race as slaves to rebuilt it. Wait, wouldn't putting a massive planet directly into our orbit cause unbelievable seismic disturbances and cause the tides to rise super high? Naturally, the Autobots were thought to have been killed when Earth voted to get rid of them and stick them on board a ship bound for deep space (more attempts to elicit the specter of Munich here), which the Decepticons then blew up. But they tricked everyone by bailing out early, and are therefore on the scene to mount their counter-attack. With the help of US special forces, we get another long, drawn-out fight scene (in downtown Chicago this time) and they manage to stop it all from happening. Yes, they destroy the gateway's controls which not only send Cybertron back, but also all the attacking Decepticons… somehow. Yaaaaaay! Optimus makes his usual closing remarks, roll credits, franchise is over!

And now for what was bad about it all!

1. Repetition:

Bay is not known for his subtlety, depth, plots, pacing – well anything really! But with this franchise, he did the same thing over and over again. In every movie, things begin with an action sequence that hastily introduces the plot, which always revolves around some kind of object that must be found since it which will confer victory on whoever finds it first. The rest of the movie is just a big race to get to it with a whole lot of stupid jokes and annoying characters slipped in between action shots, culminating in a big, over-long fight scene which is tantamount to action-porn. Yes, its exciting not because we care about the characters or have become the slightest bit emotionally invested in things; no, it's strictly because the visuals are visceral, the explosions big and the destruction on a grand scale. Oh, and did you notice how in all three movies, the good guys always show up in the nick of time to save someone? Again, its most glaring and obvious in the third, things get real tense right before the bad guy's about to deliver the death blow. But then, just in time, Optimus, Bumblebee, and the third time around, even Megatron, fly in and save the day, and in slow motion too!

Hell, even the action scenes are the same in all three movies! In movie one, you have an early fight scene where US military forces take on the Decepticon "Scorponok" in the desert around some village. Sand flies, buildings explode, bombs go off, lots of debris and a shitload of pyrotechnics. Then at the end, you got another big fight scene in downtown Mission City (in beautiful British Columbia), and its more of the same. Explosions, wreckage, and a frenzy of yelling and shooting. In movie two, we get a fight scene at the beginning in downtown Shanghai at the beginning, followed by another fight scene in the desert towards the end. Again, the final fight scene goes on for a really, really long time! It's the same as what happened in movie one, just inverted. In movie three, at the beginning, we get a fight scene outside of Chernobyl (for a change), but by the end, we get yet another fight scene in a downtown area – this time Chicago. It drags on and on, and is really little more than an orgy of explosions, debris, and all kinds of over-the-top action.

In the first film, the action scenes were pretty tolerable, even fun to watch! But by movie two, they'd been done, by three, they'd been done to death!

2. Frenetic Pacing:

Like I said, Bay is not known for his even pacing. He likes to get right into things with an action shot, rush through speeches and character development, then get to another action shot. He keeps constantly moving even when the scene calls for exposition, comic relief, or what have you. And the purpose is obvious. Draw the audience in, get them hooked with some action scenes, keep em hooked with a mad rush to the climax, then blow their minds with an orgasmic action-packed ending. In that respect, you might say he's like a shark. If he stops, he dies, or rather the movie does because everyone would see just how paper thin it is! Maybe that's a bit harsh, but it is not exaggeration to say that everything in his movies are slaved to the need to go fast. Everything is rushed.

Hell, even the dialogue is rushed, everyone just spitting out lines set to a montage of images and action music. This was present throughout the franchise, but by the third installment, it was like Bay had decided to speed things up even more. The entire first half of the movie was painful for me to watch because I felt like I was watching some overamped kids on meth bounce all over the place, shouting the whole time. This is best exemplified by Shia LaBeouf, who spent most of the first half of the movie screaming, fidgeting, running around, or hitting things. And his action scene hadn't even happened yet! I seriously had to pause it again and again because it was making my heart race and my brain bleed! The only time things felt like they were slowing down was during the action sequence at the end. I'm not kidding! Here, and only here, did the incredibly fast pace feel natural, or at least tolerable.

All in all, the only time Bay slows things down for even a second is during an action-scene slow-motion shot, and the only purpose here is to make the audience think its cool. Maybe the first time its okay, but like most cheesy, stupid things, it gets less cool the more you see it.

(I lied, can't do it all in one post! To be continued…)