E.R. Torre's Blog, page 132

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition (2016) a (early!!!) review

The official release of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition (ie Zach Snyder’s “Director’s Cut” of the film) was supposed to happen digitally on June 28th and via BluRay/DVD on July 19th but, lo and behold, certain digital movie providers are already offering the film in standard definition if you have pre-purchased it.

As it so happens, I did pre-purchase the “Ultimate Edition” of the film via VUDU (you can order it here) shortly after it was released to theaters and have been eager to see the director’s cut since.  This morning I found you can now download and see the Ultimate Edition, albeit only in standard definition, since late yesterday/early this morning through either Flixster or Cinemanow.  Since my VUDU films appear on Flixster and I have an account through both services, I gave Flixster a look and found…nothing.

I could not download and/or watch the film through the service.  I double checked with VUDU but that service did not allow me to see the film either.

An hour or so later and at approximately 11 A.M. I gave Flixster another try and, wouldn’t you know it, I was granted the ability to download and see the film!  (Just to be very clear: What I am doing is NOT an illegal download…Flixster is a legitimate digital movie service and I have paid for the film and was granted the ability to see it a little ahead of its official release though not yet in High Definition).  UPDATE:  I understand WB has closed this accidental early release of the film so if you haven’t gotten it by now you’ll have to wait for the official release.

So, what did I think of the film?

Before I get into that, there was a mini-controversy a few days ago when the movie’s cinematographer, Larry Fong tweeted the following on June 2 regarding the “Ultimate Cut” of this film:

Those who are fans will dig it.  If you hated it, you’ll still hate it.

Then, on June 10th, he tweeted this:

Watched #Ultimate Edition again; now believe EVERYONE will LOVE it!

So, did the movie’s producers “get” to Mr. Fong and force him to hype this new release or was he being honest?

My opinion on that, as well as my feelings regarding the Ultimate Edition of the film, follows…

First, though, allow me state the following: I already liked the film.  I thought it was a solid piece of entertainment BUT was keenly aware that certain aspects of it were “off”.  I suspected the issue was the fact that some thirty minutes of the film had been cut from the “Ultimate Edition” before its theatrical release and this is what hurt the movie’s flow.

But I’ll emphasize: I already liked the film.

So it shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise when I say that I also liked the new, Ultimate Edition of the film.  In fact, I would say you can officially trash the theatrical cut and see the “Ultimate Edition” from this day on.

However…

I tend to agree with Mr. Fong’s original statement.  If you liked the film I suspect you’ll feel the same as I do and like this Ultimate Edition.  If you hated the film and are willing to give this new edition a legitimate chance to change your mind, I suspect you’ll come away feeling the Ultimate Cut is an improvement over the theatrical version.  The big question is, is it enough to change your mind?  Will you come away “liking” the film?

Truly, I feel there will be converts but not that many.

Why?  Because even though the film flows a lot better and the story “breathes” a hell of a lot easier and certain things that were unclear are much clearer and new, interesting subplots add to the overall story, the film retains its essential story.

For many, that was the film’s problem in the first place.

Again, this wasn’t the case for me and I came away delighted with this new version of the film.  Your mileage, as they say, might vary.

Now then, let’s get to what everyone wants to know: What’s new in this film?

I’ll get into that but, first…

SPOILERS FOLLOW!!!

You’ve been warned…!

….last chance to look away….!

……All right, here we go….

To begin, the film’s opening dual Batman origin stories (the one we’re familiar with and Bruce Wayne’s witnessing the fall of Metropolis) are essentially the same.  The only “new” scene I detected involved a school teacher/mother leading a line of kids through the dusty haze of fallen buildings.

From there we move on to the first major difference between Theatrical and Ultimate Cut: The African Desert sequence.  As presented in the theatrical version of the film, even a fan of the movie like me was confused by this part.  In the Ultimate Version the entire sequence makes far more sense, though there may be those who grimace at the fact that Jimmy Olsen is identified by name.

The repercussions of the African Desert sequence involve the testimony of the character of Zahina Ziri, who makes claims of Superman’s cruel actions in Africa.  As it turns out, this character has an extended -and excised completely in the theatrical cut of the film- subplot that winds nicely throughout the film.

Lois Lane’s investigation into the mystery bullet she finds in Africa is also given more room and we’re shown Clark Kent’s reaction to her investigation and the fact that she withheld knowledge of the bullet from him.

While Lois Lane’s investigation is given more room, so too is Clark Kent’s investigation into the “Bat”.  In the Ultimate Edition, we understand far better why Superman is so stern the first time he meets Batman.

Later on, we’re shown Superman helping bring the bodies out of the Capitol building.  Later still, it is revealed why Superman didn’t notice the bomb (the wheelchair, Lois Lane finds, was lead lined!).

As for the movie’s climax, it remains mostly intact with a couple of bits and pieces here and there, including Doomsday taking out a helicopter.  After the movie’s climax there are a few added sequences as well, including the already revealed sequence depicting Lex Luthor meeting a New God.  Later, we have an extended conversation between Luthor and Batman in jail where it is made clear Luthor knows who Batman is and Batman reveals he intends to send Luthor to Arkham Asylum.

There are a few more clips presented in the Clark Kent funeral sequences, including more of the wake and Martha Kent finding the funeral expenses have been paid for by…somebody.

Obviously I haven’t given everything away but these are some of the more prominent pieces.

In conclusion, I’ll repeat what I said above: If you liked the movie, you’ll like this version even more.  If you were neutral about the film, this new version may win you over and make you a fan.  But if you really hated hated hated the film, you may find this Ultimate Edition a better overall presentation but it might still be not enough to change your opinion.

Regardless, it was fun to finally see the film as the director intended.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition (2016)

When going online this morning, I found the following on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/DC_Cinematic/comments/4ntwgz/the_ultimate_cut_is_available_right_now/

Basically, various people noted that if you pre-purchased a digital copy of the Ultimate Edition of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, it was as of today available for downloading and watching, albeit in SD format, via Flixster or Cinemanow.

I pre-purchased the Ultimate Edition via VUDU but many of the films I buy (not all) are watchable via the Flixster app so I took a look and…nothing.  Then, about ten minutes ago I tried again and, sure enough, I was able to download a SD copy of the Ultimate Edition of the film!

Unfortunately I don’t have the time to see it in its entirety right now but I did watch the first few minutes and can verify this screencap:

Is legitimate.  This is the way the movie’s title is presented.

I’ll offer my full review of the Ultimate Edition soon but, meanwhile, if you have pre-purchased your digital copy of the Ultimate Edition of the film, I can verify you can download it through Flixster.

UPDATE:  It appears WB has stopped this accidental early release of the movie and you can no longer get it as I did.

Controversy regarding…Curling?!

Yes, there is controversy regarding that winter sport that fascinates so many.  I’m not talking about Hockey or Ice Skating or Cross-Country Skiing…we’re talking about…Curling.

This article, by Jennifer Ouellette and found on Gizmodo.com, offers insight into…

The Physics Behind the “Broomgate” Controversy Rocking the sport of Curling

All right, so I started this entry with tongue in cheek but let me now do an about face and say: I like Curling.  Really, I do.

Whenever the Winter Olympics are on or when I’m surfing around oddball cable channels and find they feature Curling, I stop.  I stare.  I enjoy.

There’s something incredibly fascinating, to me, about watching the sport even as I’d readily admit it is hardly the most physically demanding of winter sports and can be performed by your average person versus, say, running a Marathon or playing professional Football.

That’s not to say Curling doesn’t require concentration and mental skills, and that’s where the whole “broomgate” issue comes in.  In the game, you slide a “rock” across ice (not unlike bowling) and try to position your rocks closest to the center target while denying your opponent from doing the same.  When sliding your rock, your teammates may (or may not depending on your rock’s trajectory) brush the ice ahead of your rock to improve its speed or make it “curl” in one direction or the other.

The manner in which this brushing is achieved is by using a broom.

When I first saw Curling waaaaay back in the early 1970’s, this is what the brooms looked like:

Your eyes do not deceive you: The brooms used back then were actual, honest to goodness brooms.  This is what they use today:

These brooms are brooms in name only.  They’re high tech creations designed specifically for use in this sport.

The controversy, as outlined in the article above, is that new, even more high tech brooms have become so good it is feared they’re capable of turning all shots, even terrible ones, into good ones because they do such a great job in “fixing” the ice before the rock.

Anyway, I found the whole article fascinating to read but I suspect there plenty out there who wouldn’t.  To them I say, watch some great Curling shots and tell me even this sport can’t be exciting:

Gas stations, R.I.P.?

With the rise of the electric car and, hopefully soon enough, the self-driving vehicle, it appears to me the days of the gas station are numbered.

I’m not the only one who thinks that way.  Here’s an article by Daniel Gross and found on Slate magazine:

Why America’s gas stations are running out of time

Mr. Gross offers statistics showing there has been a noticeable decline in number of gas stations in the United states and enumerates reasons why this may be a permanent trend.

The rise of electric cars, of course, is but one of the bigger reasons.  With each sale Tesla or GM or BMW etc. have with their electric vehicles, it means there is one less vehicle on the road that requires stopping at a gas station to refuel.

But Gas Stations, IMHO, have even more to fear from the self-driving cars.  I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: When the day comes -and it will come- when self-driving cars are fully allowed on the roads of America, there will be a HUGE shift in our transportation perspective.

I believe at that time there will be a company -perhaps more than one- that offer rides by their army of self-driving vehicles.  You will pull out your smartphone, order a car, and it will come pick you up and take you to your destination.  From there, the self-driving vehicle will find its next passenger and so on through the day.

When the vehicle is low on fuel -whether it be an electric charge or gasoline- the vehicle will return to its home base where it will be refueled (or have its batteries swapped) and be off again.  There will be no need for this fleet of vehicles to use a gas station.

So, what will become of gas stations?  Will they simply convert into snack shops a la 7-11 and offer foods?  Or will many of them simply fade away and will one day we suddenly find there are no more gas stations at all?

We’ll see.

Again and again and again…

The news from Orlando this past weekend was heartbreaking and, as incredibly depressing as the mass murder of 49 patrons of the Pulse club by a man so consumed with hatred of gay people (and a possible link to ISIS), the news could have been even worse…

Police identify L.A. Pride weapons suspect as James Wesley Howell

Mr. Howell is 20 year old Indiana man who was stopped and found to be carrying rifles, ammunition, and explosives and who stated he was going to that gay pride event for reasons unknown…though given what he was carrying one can’t be blamed for assuming the very worst.

Reactions to the event vary of course.  And it didn’t take long for some to blame…Obama?!

Fox News Commentator Blames Orlando Shooting on Obama

Sigh.

It’s like we go from extreme tragedy to high comedy (or just plain lunacy) within a single day and before the victims’ bodies get cold.

I never understood the allure of weapons.  I never understood the need to hoard them and the paranoia bred by “protecting” the right to keep them in all forms, even when the weapon, in this case an AR-15, is nothing more than a killing machine.

Will we ever get a break?  Will common sense regulations ever take hold?

Will people ever get fed up enough to vote those who protect guns more rabidly than they do human beings out of office?

I really hope so.

Indiana Jones might want to take a look…

Fascinating (though too short!) article I found on CNN.com and written by Katia Hetter regarding…

“Massive” Monument Found in Ancient Petra

You should read the article but the jist of it is this: Thanks to aerial photography and drones, a very large monument has been found.  This is what it looks like:

Thanks to satellite imagery, drones, and aerial photography, it appears we’re more easily discovering things like this.

Makes one wonder just how much of our human history remains to be uncovered.

Fascinating, fascinating stuff.

The Hateful Eight (2015) a (mildly) belated review

As far as I’m concerned, had director/writer retired after releasing the terrific one-two punch of Reservoir Dogs (1992) and Pulp Fiction (1994), he’d be assured a place in the pantheon of great movie makers.

Which is a nice way of saying that I feel his works after that point have been, in my humble opinion, hit and miss.  Understand, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Mr. Tarantino gives it his all with each new film and tries very hard to deliver something unique and new and as entertaining as it is thought provoking.

Following Pulp Fiction, Mr. Tarantino made Jackie Brown (1997), Kill Bill Vol 1 and 2 (2003, 2004), Death Proof (2007), Inglourious Basterds (2009), Django Unchained (2012), and, of course, the subject of this review, The Hateful Eight.

That makes eight films Mr. Tarantino has made and of those, the only one I have yet to see, despite owning the BluRay, is Inglourious Basterds.  Of the ones that remain on the list following Pulp Fiction, would it surprise you if I said that while each film has their good and bad, the one I like the most is the one that I only liked the last half of it?

I’m referring to the SECOND half of Death Proof, which I thought was balls-to-the-walls terrific.  Funny, action filled, suspenseful, and with an ending that had me cheering.  But that movie’s first half, up until Stuntman Mike makes his first killing, was awful and, even worse, completely unnecessary.  Cut that whole first half of the film out and watch the second half alone and you have Mr. Tarantino’s best work since those first two films, IMHO.

Still, though I don’t care completely for Jackie Brown (a movie many feel is Mr. Tarantino’s best work but one I found hard to enjoy because of a particularly big plot hole), Kill Bill (If I want to see a film that tries to mimic the thematic awe of The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly I’ll just go see The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly), and Django Unchained (for me the film was enjoyable until the point where a character had the choice to hold his nose and shake a villain’s hand to end things amicably…and chooses not to.  Just shake his freaking hand you idiot!!!!), I nonetheless will repeat what I said above: You cannot fault Mr. Tarantino for trying his best to create movies that are a step above your regular popcorn fare.

With The Hateful Eight, Mr. Tarantino returns to the western though this film is very different from his other western, Django Unchained.  Like many of his other films, Mr. Tarantino is playing with well established genres and story conventions.  In this case, the biggest one he appropriates is mystery writer Agatha Christie’s Ten Little Indians aka And Then There Were None.

In that famous novel, a group of (we soon find) despicable people with dark secrets buried in their individual closets are brought together on a remote island under false pretenses.  When the boat that takes them to that distant island departs, they are left stranded and suddenly, one by one, are murdered.  Who among them is a killer?

In The Hateful Eight, bounty hunter John “The Hangman” Ruth () is in the process of taking his latest fugitive capture, Daisy Domergue () to the town of Red Rock so he can get his reward and see her hang.  The stagecoach carrying him and his prisoner are trying to beat a fast approaching blizzard but nonetheless pick up two passengers along the way, Major Marquis Warren (), a fellow bounty hunter who doesn’t particularly care about bringing his prisoners back alive, and Chris Mannix (), a man who claims he’s heading to Red Rock to become its sheriff.

John Ruth is suspicious of the two and fears they may be in cahoots with his prisoner and/or might try to take her for themselves as she has a very high price on her head.  Ultimately Ruth allows the two to share his stagecoach but they are only able to make it to Minnie’s Haberdashery, a cabin in the middle of nowhere, before the blizzard hits.

Within the Haberdashery are four other curious characters and Ruth senses things are not what they seem.

Spoiler alert: They’re not.

I won’t get into much more spoilery material from here on in and focus on my feelings about this film.

Again, it was clear Mr. Tarantino was giving this movie his all and the first forty or so minutes of it, roughly to the point shortly after the group makes it to the Haberdashery, were intriguing, suspenseful, humorous, and odd…but in a very good way.

And then came “that” scene and, frankly, things went downhill from there.

“That” scene, which I will describe without giving too much away, involves Samuel L. Jackson’s “conversation” with General Sandy Smithers ().  Unlike everything that happened before, that scene felt forced, silly, and, at least to me, not at all believable.  It, and indeed the character of Smithers, could and perhaps should -especially after all the revelations were made- been cut out of the film entirely.  He proved unnecessary to the story and, worse, made me grow to loathe Samuel L. Jackson’s character, something you may not want to do with the movie’s lead character.

Mind you, I understand what made him do what he did but ultimately we’re dealing with a young, nimble man and a very old man who clearly could barely move.  What followed was cowardly and I’ll say no more.

Sadly, from that point on the film lost it for me.  Suddenly bothersome little details became more prominent.  For instance, why have a great actress like Jennifer Jason Leigh in the film and then have her do essentially nothing for 4/5ths of the movie’s bloated 3 hour runtime except get beaten around mercilessly or have blood splattered on her a la Bruce Campbell in the Evil Dead movies?  Instead of wasting time on Bruce Dern’s unnecessary character, why not find more interesting things for her to do?

And when all was revealed toward the end (and again I’ll try to tiptoe around spoilers here), the fact of the matter is the bad guy(s) were an incredibly inept bunch.

I could go on and on but I truly don’t want to reveal more spoilers.

Despite a great start, a great cast of characters, incredible cinematography, I can’t recommend The Hateful Eight except to those who love the films of Quentin Tarantino.  You may find more in there to love than the average movie viewer but for me this was a film that could have used a little more script work.

The Hateful Eight is certainly not a disaster of a film, but one that could -and should- have been better.

About last night…

So yesterday came the last big block of state voting for the nominees to be President of the United States and the big winner was Hillary Clinton.  Not only does she now unquestionably have enough delegates to claim the mantle of Democratic Nominee, but she also took California, a very large, delegate-rich state which her rival Bernie Sanders was hoping to snatch from her.

You will find plenty of articles about yesterday in all major news media.  Here’s one by Stephen Collinson from CNN.com…

Primary Results: Hillary Clinton Celebrates Victory, wins California

While I am usually loathe to dive into politics, it is nonetheless worth noting the historic nature of yesterday’s events.

Like her or not, Hillary Clinton represents the very first female nominee for a major U.S. political party and it is amazing that we may follow the first African American nominee and eventual President, Barack Obama, with the first female nominee.

Based on the bad news trailing the presumptive Republican nominee these last few days, we might well have our first female President.

Of course, we’ve still got a very long way to go…

Fortune 500 Companies Liberals and Conservatives hate…

I enjoy lists.  Some say they’re a lazy way of filling up space or creating conversation (I guess they are guilty of that) but building lists has always fascinated me…so long as one realizes that it involves opinions and, like all opinions, there is no absolute “right” or “wrong”.

Having said that, this is one of the more fascinating lists I’ve run into in a while.  The headline above gives it away.  From Fortune magazine, we have…

Fortune 500 Companies Liberals and Conservatives Hate the Most

Going into the article and while trying not to give everything away (you should read it!), I could guess certain companies which might be on liberal hate lists.  Primarily, Walmart (due to their minimum wage/anti-union policies) and probably several oil companies (there were), and probably Wall Street/Banking related companies.  As for companies on conservative “hate” lists, Target was on it (perhaps due to their bathroom policies?!) as well as Freddie Mac and Fannie May (both of which have been derided plenty of times by conservative talking heads).

But forget about all that.

The main reason I pointed out this article is because of this:

Conservatives listed a dislike for Pepsi-Cola while Liberals expressed a hatred for Coca-Cola.

Really?!

While their dislike for either company isn’t “high” on their lists, it was most curious to see what conservatives and liberals felt regarding soda companies.  The big question is: Why would that be?  The article concludes with this:

Perhaps (the respective dislike for soda companies) has to do with their corporate colors. (Coke is red. Pepsi is blue.) Or maybe it has to do with the general political leanings of where the companies have been based. Coke is in the South. And Pepsi’s headquarters is in the Northeast. But for whatever reason, the Coke-Pepsi political divide is just another sign that when it comes to politics, commerce is less immune than ever.

Very weird.

I’m a liberal but I have to admit to finding it hard to build up any “hate” toward a soda company.

Then again, that’s just me.

Is Star Wars: Rogue One in trouble?

I’ll say this up front: I’m not a big Star Wars fan.  I’ve written many times before of how, as an 11 year old boy, I watched the original film in a full-to-the-brim theater in 1977 and perhaps a week or so after it was originally released…and while everyone around me went nuts while I just couldn’t get into the film (you can read more about that here).

I mention this only because I want to quickly add the following: Presenting this below information is in no ways meant to be me “gloating” regarding potentially bad news regarding Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (ROSW from now on).  As I’ve tried to make it painfully clear many times before, I have no problems with people having diverse opinions about works of art, be they books, movies, TV shows, etc. etc. etc.  Just because I like/don’t like something doesn’t mean I expect the entire world to follow my opinion and vice versa.

Having said that, let’s dive into the “controversy” surrounding ROSW.

Page 6 published the following article regarding ROSW on the May 30th:

Disney Execs In A Panic Over Upcoming Star Wars Film

The upshot of the article, written by Emily Smith, was that Disney Executives were “not fully satisfied with the first cut (of ROSW) from director Gareth Edwards” and that the film would have to “go back (for) four weeks of expensive reshoots in July“.

After a few days of rumors, Germain Lussier over at io9 provided an interesting summary of the information regarding the film and its potential reshoots up to that point:

More Details Have Been Revealed About Those Rogue One Reshoots

Then came this article which presented even worse news regarding ROSW.  Found on makingstarwars.com and written by Jason Ward, the article stated the ROSW reshoots might add up to as much as a whopping 40% of the film…

How Extensive Will the Rogue One Reshoots Be?

Amid rumors of new writers coming in to help work over the material (even that J. J. Abrams was going to have a more active role in overseeing the “fixing up”), there came this article from The Hollywood Reporter and written by Alex Ritman and Borys Kit which noted…

Star Wars: Rogue One enlists renowned stunt coordinator Simon Crane for reshoots

So, what are we to make of all this?

Again, I don’t for a second wish to be snarky or put down Star Wars fans.  While the franchise didn’t do much for me, I’m always curious about movie news such as this and I find the conclusions one can make regarding these bits of news fascinating.

This first conclusions one can make regarding these stories are the easiest: After Gareth Edwards finished his principle photography for ROSW and presented a rough cut of the same to Disney studio executives, they were clearly not happy with what he did.  Whether the executives are right or not, and I suspect Mr. Edward’s “cut” of the film will eventually make its way to home video, is irrelevant: The executives are paying the bills and if they feel the product is not “up to snuff” they have every right in the world to demand re-shoots, whether they involve 10% of the film or 40% or even 100%.  It’s their money and time and if they have each, they can do with it what they will.

There is, however, one other interesting conclusion one can draw from this and, I would hasten to say, it is my own conclusion and could very well be wrong: It appears there are several “loose lips” in this particular production and they’re not bothered at all with throwing Gareth Edwards under the bus.

The fact of the matter is that all these bits of information can’t help but make him, and his initial cut of the film, look bad.  With each new name floated out there being brought in to “fix” the movie, we’re left to think executives at Disney have lost faith in Mr. Edwards based on that original cut and, further, feel the need to not only bring in others but announce to the world they’ve brought in others to make things right.

The ultimate conclusions regarding ROSW will be made after it is released to theaters, of course, but think about this: If the film is a HUGE success and winds up beloved, those studio executives get to pat themselves on the back and say they saved a flawed/bad Gareth Edwards film from failure by bringing in all these others to help make the film “good”.  On the other hand, if the film “fails” both critically and commercially, these same executives, thanks to the rash of news released to this point, can point their fingers at Mr. Edwards and say “Well, we tried our best to save the film but there was just no way to save Gareth Edwards’ flawed work.”

Either way, it appears people out there are setting themselves up to create a win-win scenario for Disney and her executives and a lose-lose scenario for Mr. Edwards.