|
Post by ThirdMan on Sept 14, 2019 18:39:11 GMT -8
Oh, I was talking about bloggers/critics (such a fine line between the two these days) who HAVE seen JOKER (at the festivals), and who seem disingenuous in the final grade they give it. If a film is "well-made", under most circumstances, it should get at least a mildly positive notice, even if the script has shortcomings. I also hate when they use the "this film has nothing to say" gambit. as though a film should have one or two clear and overriding MESSAGES, rather than a number of themes/issues that don't spell out the director's position on them in BOLD LETTERS. 99.999% of the films and TV out there don't have anything especially unique or original to say: it's the MANNER in which they're expressed that typically separates the good from the bad. Just admit that a film can convey any number of things. deliberately and/or inadvertantly, and you just didn't respond to it.
Re: the Ledger thing, I'm not seeing much of that, but you probably travel in different online circles than me. I think most TDK supporters want JOKER to be good and a commercial success.
As for RETURN OF THE JOKER, I probably overemphasized the microchip thing. I've just never responded all that strongly to Batman Beyond as a premise, is all. Could never get into the TV show, or cranky old Bruce Wayne. The film bridges the gap between TAS and Beyond, though, and I liked it.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Sept 14, 2019 20:17:11 GMT -8
Ah, I hear. Yeah, I've seen some critics' reviews that don't seem thrilled with the film, even as the overall response seems to be positive. But I'm not sure "well-made" should automatically translate into a positive review. I've seen many well-made films that just left me cold, often because they rang emotionally hollow. It's more difficult to care about the technical aspects of a film if there isn't a compelling hook to latch onto, even if you're a professional critic.
I haven't heard too many Ledger complaints either, at least not for a while. But I did see some grumblings when the film and casting were first announced, of the "Why bother trying to top perfection?" variety. But whatever - I'm hoping and assuming that Phoenix will deliver the goods.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Sept 14, 2019 21:15:45 GMT -8
I think a lot of it is semantics, but if a film is totally hollow to you, perhaps "well-made" isn't the best way to describe it. Just say it has good cinematography or whatever and move on. Heh.
And given the number of NEGATIVE reviews that still praise Phoenix's performance, it's pretty clear that he's delivered the goods. That doesn't mean you're necessarily going to "like" his character in any way, shape or form, though. He's VERY unpleasant.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Sept 15, 2019 16:04:09 GMT -8
I can't speak for other critics, but I draw a distinguishing line between "hollow" and "unpleasant." Both of these factors detract from my general enjoyment of a film, but only the former really strikes me as a problem with the film itself. 12 Years a Slave, for example, is an unpleasant film, but it's obviously meant to be, and I can't fault the director for making it so. However, if a film strikes me as hollow - i.e. I'm supposed to care about the characters, but don't - then that's more likely a point against the film, even if the production has strong technical aspects.
I fully expect Phoenix's character in Joker to be unpleasant, and I won't hold it against the film if he is (provided the unpleasantness isn't contrived for the sake of it). My critique will rely chiefly on his performance and how well-told his story is.
(Incidentally, I remember that when The Dark Knight premiered, one reviewer panned the film, praising Ledger's performance but complaining the character was too sick and twisted to enjoy watching. Um... yeah?)
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Sept 15, 2019 18:12:04 GMT -8
That was probably Leonard Maltin, who's more of a mainstream film historian than critic. I don't know if his silly, facile movie guides are still being produced or not. Yeah, he doesn't like when Batman gets too dark and grotesque with the villains, and had the same reaction to Batman Returns. But he liked Begins, Rises, and even Forever (heh).
I've heard some critics say JOKER goes too far (with the violence/intensity/inadvertant (?) messaging), and some say it doesn't go far enough (in terms of who he kills). I doubt I'll be troubled by it, either way.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Sept 15, 2019 18:31:24 GMT -8
Yes, it was Maltin. He even liked Batman & Robin, or at least gave it a better rating than TDK. He no longer produces the guide, which is too bad - the reviews aren't deep, but it's a handy reference manual if I ever want to look up movies when Internet isn't available. (I still have a copy of the 2015 edition, the last one produced.)
And sure, I fully expect Joker to be dark and violent, because... it's the Joker. The comics did a super-dark storyline a few years ago where Joker cuts off his own face and staples it on inside-out (don't ask) and then proceeds to graphically murder dozens of people to torment Batman and his allies. The Cesar Romero version is long gone.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Sept 15, 2019 20:20:12 GMT -8
Heh. They did something similar with Jerome (basically Joker) on GOTHAM. He was dead, and one of his followers cut off his face, and wore it, to try to influence the other followers. But they were just weirded out by it, mostly. Then Jerome was somehow brought back to life, and stapled his face back on (LOL).
Cameron Monaghan played about five different versions of Joker during that series, referencing everyone from Hamill, to Nicholson, to Ledger, and also putting his own spin on it. It was a pretty fun series of performances, but I don't think they were ever allowed to officially refer to him as Joker. Which is strange, with just about every other first- and second-tier member of the Batman rogues' gallery making an appearance, in name.
They had a pretty good version of Mad Hatter as well: very sing-songy. Once that series stopped trying to dance around the fact that it was a Batman show, it was a lot more fun. Very silly, of course, but the entire cast was on the same page. They even had Paul Reubens play Penguin's dad again.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Sept 16, 2019 9:50:39 GMT -8
My understanding of Gotham is that it adapts a lot of stories and events from the comics, but cranks things up to a theretofore-unseen level of madness. I do need to give it another shot someday.
For my money, the best Joker comic book in recent years is Endgame (no connection to that other Endgame), which is not only inventively plotted, but features one of the best climaxes ever put in a Batman story. It would have worked perfectly well as a finale for Joker, but of course, it's not like DC is ever going to "get rid" of that character. No matter how many people the guy kills, Batman is just going to tap him on the chin and drag him back to Arkham.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Oct 31, 2019 16:01:44 GMT -8
Been a busy month, but I'm back... just in time to do a Halloween-related piece about horror films. Hopefully we can return to a weekly posting schedule in November.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Nov 22, 2019 12:38:32 GMT -8
Charlie's Angels is a film about hashtag girl power! It... was not well-received by audiences. Allow me to mansp- em, to explain why.
|
|
|
Post by otherscott on Nov 22, 2019 13:08:06 GMT -8
I guess the question you always have to ask is "Is anyone asking for this to be remade?" Charlie's Angels is still less than 20 years from the first movie that itself was based on a TV show that is only 40 years old. It's not surprise that it's bombing at the box office, because it's not a thing that anyone particularly cared about seeing.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Nov 23, 2019 16:49:42 GMT -8
In fairness, Tomb Raider (which is also an adaptation of a series that was previously an early 2000s film franchise) did okay at the box office, enough to greenlight a sequel. (Even though it was still beaten in its opening weekend by Black Panther - which was over a month old at that point!)
The Charlie's Angels franchise has been running on fumes for a while. It's sad that the only iteration (TV or film) that's actually worth recommending is the first movie, which is fun in a turn-your-brain-off sense. In fact, the first season of She Spies is more entertaining than the show it ripped off.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Nov 28, 2019 9:25:13 GMT -8
Happy Thanksgiving! I'm thankful for Disney, although I do have some issues with Frozen 2. Enjoy my review before you begin this year's yell-a-thon with your loved ones.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Nov 29, 2019 12:18:48 GMT -8
In honor of the holiday, let's have a second serving of movie reviews! Here's my take on Rian Johnson's excellent Knives Out.
|
|
Quiara
Grade School
Posts: 775
|
Post by Quiara on Nov 29, 2019 14:59:26 GMT -8
In honor of the holiday, let's have a second serving of movie reviews! Here's my take on Rian Johnson's excellent Knives Out.Do you think this film is going to end up like that other movie with racial subtext-that-becomes-text and a second act twist with "Out" in the title, where the internet will spoil it for me before I can get it on DVD?
|
|