I was caught completely off guard by tonight's episode of Mad Men, in which the following quote caused an eruption of laughter that I'm certain woke any of my slumbering neighbors:
"Well, Marilyn is really a Joan, not the other way around."
For those of you who watch the show, I think you'll agree: truer words...
For those of you who don't watch the show...get to it. You'll see what I mean.
I love how laughter can be knowing, yet still surprising.
We now resume our regularly scheduled programming.
Read: No Borders, No Limits: Nikkatsu Action Cinema, by Mark Schilling
Watch: Two Men in Town (dir. Jose Giovanni, 1973)
Listen to: Back to Me, by Kathleen Edwards
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
A Couple of Faves
My favorite working comic talks about my favorite movie of 2007. Thanks to Brandon for providing me with this most excellent clip.
If I say this is funny, you will agree.
If I say this is funny, you will agree.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
DC Now Means Darker Cinema
It is, of course, too early for these reports to count as gospel. Nevertheless, it looks like my earlier suspicions about a darker DC Universe on the silver screen are already justified:
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/080822g.php
Let me say first that I am all in favor of rebooting Superman. While I liked Superman Returns well enough upon initial viewing, it has aged very, very poorly. At the end of the day, while it's a solid bookend to the Donner films, it just was not the Superman film we needed. It was too much of a rehash of, well, everything that had come before. For an example of what I think a reboot should look like--or at least the tone it should take--look to my reading suggestion.
The film's problem was its darkness (and its ultimately yawn-inducing plainness relative to the other films). And now we want to make the reboot darker? So, is Superman forbidden from even cracking a smile now as he stands tall in a black and silver costume? Will Batman start introducing himself as "the goddamned Batman?" And how does one make the Flash darker without killing everything that makes him great, both in and of himself AND in relation to the other characters in the DC Universe?
Don't get me wrong. I'm glad DC's following Marvel's plan to introduce characters in their own movies first and then tie them together into the Justice League. It's what they should have done in the first place. And, it should be said that I've liked the Marvel films leading up to The Avengers (i.e. Iron Man & The Incredible Hulk).
I just find the irony ridiculously rich with respect to tone of these films. Excepting the last few years, these companies' film series are taking the polar opposite approaches to their respective comic universes. I generally consider Marvel's to be a darker comic universe...mostly because DC characters smile more often. (Okay, that's not the only reason, but still...) DC has always felt more fun and sweeping to me, as opposed to Marvel's more grounded approach.
Now Marvel is shooting to make us marvel again at their characters on the silver screen, while thanks to the brain donors over at Warner Bros., DC now means Darker Cinema.
I hate being right about crap like this.
Read: Superman: For All Seasons, by Jeph Loeb & Tim Sale
Watch: Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (dir. Eric Radomski & Bruce Timm, 1993)
Listen to: ME, you idiots who are going to make ruinous films with some of the greatest characters ever created! Don't do it! Do right by the characters!
http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/080822g.php
Let me say first that I am all in favor of rebooting Superman. While I liked Superman Returns well enough upon initial viewing, it has aged very, very poorly. At the end of the day, while it's a solid bookend to the Donner films, it just was not the Superman film we needed. It was too much of a rehash of, well, everything that had come before. For an example of what I think a reboot should look like--or at least the tone it should take--look to my reading suggestion.
The film's problem was its darkness (and its ultimately yawn-inducing plainness relative to the other films). And now we want to make the reboot darker? So, is Superman forbidden from even cracking a smile now as he stands tall in a black and silver costume? Will Batman start introducing himself as "the goddamned Batman?" And how does one make the Flash darker without killing everything that makes him great, both in and of himself AND in relation to the other characters in the DC Universe?
Don't get me wrong. I'm glad DC's following Marvel's plan to introduce characters in their own movies first and then tie them together into the Justice League. It's what they should have done in the first place. And, it should be said that I've liked the Marvel films leading up to The Avengers (i.e. Iron Man & The Incredible Hulk).
I just find the irony ridiculously rich with respect to tone of these films. Excepting the last few years, these companies' film series are taking the polar opposite approaches to their respective comic universes. I generally consider Marvel's to be a darker comic universe...mostly because DC characters smile more often. (Okay, that's not the only reason, but still...) DC has always felt more fun and sweeping to me, as opposed to Marvel's more grounded approach.
Now Marvel is shooting to make us marvel again at their characters on the silver screen, while thanks to the brain donors over at Warner Bros., DC now means Darker Cinema.
I hate being right about crap like this.
Read: Superman: For All Seasons, by Jeph Loeb & Tim Sale
Watch: Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (dir. Eric Radomski & Bruce Timm, 1993)
Listen to: ME, you idiots who are going to make ruinous films with some of the greatest characters ever created! Don't do it! Do right by the characters!
Thursday, August 21, 2008
A Taste Quickly Acquired
It's causing me physical pain not to open this bottle of scotch I bought 2 1/2 weeks ago.
You see, kids, I've had quite a day. To say nothing of what's come before this very moment, right now my hands are twitchy from being so tired I can't sleep. I've had one meal today, thanks to my insane 10-hour work day, standard for this week. I'm in dire need of a metaphor-proof vest for all the foolish verbosity I've had hurled my way. And I cannot, for the fucking life of me, get Howard Shore's score to The Departed to evacuate my brain.
And so here I am: a bottle of Macallan Cask Strength staring me in the face. Much as I ache for the warmth behind the eyes that this bottle of mahogany moonshine would provide, I made a two-part promise to myself:
1) I have to open it in celebration of something (besides resisting the urge to go on a crime spree)
2) I have to open it in the company of others who will partake (I find myself drinking alone more often lately. Boo-hoo.)
So rather than open it now, I'll twitch my fingers upon the keyboard for a short while and tell you about where I acquired that bottle: the Barriques Summer Single Malts Scotch Tasting.
Knowing that scotch is my thing, my friend Dave let me in on the fact that this wonderful event was happening August 2nd, and so we went and--for a paltry $14--sampled 9 different types of scotch. (Thanks also to those of you who let me know about it and I just didn't see your message until afterward.)
The guy who was running the event told us about this one guy who'd gone through all of the varieties in about 30 minutes flat the night before. Clearly, that idiot didn't want to enjoy himself, as we took about 2 1/2 to 3 hours to get the full experience (highly recommended).
I was a touch nervous at the start, since the first drink was not scotch but tequila--Maestro Dobel Reposado, to be exact. I've never had a taste for tequila, but the well aged agave fruit agreed quite nicely with my palate and made for an excellent primer. As I go through these, I'll end with the best comment associated with the drink--both in terms of accuracy as well as florid prose--as taken from the handout we were given. For the tequila: "intense viscous touch."
The first scotch on the table was a Glenmorangie 10-year. This is the only one with which I was already quite familiar, as it's what I normally keep at the house (either 10-year or 15). Hell, I'm savoring one as I type this. The immortal Sixteen Men of Tain gave us this godly start toward a heavenly brain wobble. Best comment associated with this drink: describing the aroma as "fruity with a hint of smoke."
Next up was the Bunnahabhain 12-year. Admittedly a pale preview of the last drink of the evening, this one had an even smokier scent than the Glenmorangie, but it was much nuttier to the palate. While I don't think it was as smooth as my normal Glenmorangie, I may have to start stocking this one at the house for variety's sake. Best comment: flat-out tie between "spectacular malty sweetness" and "a whisky alive with nautical folklore."
Then came the Deanston 12-year, which was the most surprising of the early selections. Equally pleasant to both nose and mouth, this had the most pleasantly smooth sting of the whole bunch. It's got a bit of fruit to it, but not as much as its predecessors. Additionally, it was the first to have a peaty element in the palate...again, surprisingly satisfying. Best comment: perhaps the most unintentionally dirty, the finish was described as "an elegantly subtle honeyed tail that is long and thought provoking."
And then the Ledaig 10-year swam from glass to gullet. According to the handout, "Liquorice and cloves combine into a medium length smoked pepper finale." Well, it was more like Robitussin-soaked gravel going down my throat. Of course, as bad as that sounds, I'd say it's like Lorca's poetry--his worst is better than most others' best. That being said, as long as I have other options, I'm apt to skip this one from now on. Best comment: on the subject of the scent, "Further intrigue develops from soft antiseptic hints and charred leather." Brother, he ain't lyin'.
Thankfully, the Dalmore 12-year came in to save us from all those antiseptic hints. Much smoother and much more citrus-y than I was expecting, Dalmore was a label I'd tried once either in a Boston pub or a Chicago restaurant. All that citrus was overwhelming in the best possible way. Best comment: opining upon the palate, "Good attack on the mouth, more elegance than muscle."
And then there was the Talisker 10-year. The guy running this thing warned us about the Talisker. He recommended it highly, but he told us it was peaty as all can get, which made us a little nervous. Using the word "peaty" to describe anything but soil gets me apoplectic, actually. That being said, I'd describe Talisker as the Jolt Cola of scotch; it'll knock you on your ass, but you'll be shocked as to how much you enjoy the taste on the way down. Best comment: finishes with "a lot of power and character with a dryish smoky quality."
The 1991 Glenrothes followed. With many of the brands before, I wasn't always able to taste all of the different flavors supposedly contained within these divinely fermented potions. Now I'm far from possessing the most sophisticated palate, but this frustrated me verily, since the flavor I often missed was the one I wanted most. There was no better example than the Glenrothes, which contained coconut, vanilla, and butterscotch. On the first taste, I did not get the one that I most wanted: the butterscotch. Drove me nuts, this did. Thankfully, unlike the previous drinks, I finally did get the flavor I wanted in the end. A blissful second of butterscotch is sometimes all you need. Best comment: "handpicked by the Malt Master," which is not all that descriptive. But come on...wouldn't you want to be called the Malt Master?
The penultimate drink of the evening was the one for which I'm now eagerly awaiting to open my own bottle: the Macallan Cask Strength. For the very few of you I've not mentioned this to, here we go. Scotch is usually between 40 and 45% alcohol. This stuff is 60%. No chill filtration. No water added. Cask. Strength. Specifically, Sherry oak casks from Spain. Add water. Release the flavor. From the mahogany color to the smoky taste, it's just about perfect. I was hunting for a bottle after we finished up the tasting, and I ended up taking their last one. It was 70 bucks and worth every penny. Or it would be, if I'd just open the damn thing. Best comment: "a hint of wood smoke," which is itself the smallest hint at how fantastic this stuff is.
And then...oh, then...was the Bunnahabhain 25-year. I've never tasted scotch to date, or any drink for that matter, this amazing. I can't give you just one comment; here's the write-up.
Color: A rich, nutty gold.
Nose: Sweet caramel dessert aromas beautifully entwine with subtle suggestions of oak and polished leather.
Palate: Indulgent hints of sweet berries and cream create a wonderful melange of tastes that progress into a roasted nut and malt feast sprinkled with only the most complementary of spices to balance the profile perfectly.
Finish: A soft dry finish leaves you with a lingering sense of sugar and spiced-oak flavors dispersing delicately on your tongue.
In retrospect, this must be what it was like to...I don't know...kiss Rita Hayworth, maybe.
After finishing the glass, I asked how much a bottle cost. Wearing a knowing smile, the guy said, "$310." While I could not afford it at the time, I find that kind of excessive extravagance does me good now and again. So, I'll save up for a bottle and order one next year. I'll then make it last at least a year, if not two. You're all welcome to join me for a drink (those of you who enjoy scotch anyway, of which I think there are two).
Alright, my Glenmorangie is long finished, and I think I can finally drift off now.
Before I go, thanks again to my friend Dave--for letting me know about this thing, coming with, and indulging my seemingly ceaseless need to talk about The Dark Knight. After the 25-year it was difficult (to say the least) to want to follow that taste up with anything. We had to, though, as a few hours of savory libation are liable to make a man hungry. King of Falafel did the trick.
Read: Winning Pocket Billiards, by Willie Mosconi
Watch: Mad Men (the only reason the AMC network exists)
Listen to: Bring Yo' Ass to the Table, by Left Lane Cruiser (What can I say? Sometimes I just want to listen to punkish bar blues.)
You see, kids, I've had quite a day. To say nothing of what's come before this very moment, right now my hands are twitchy from being so tired I can't sleep. I've had one meal today, thanks to my insane 10-hour work day, standard for this week. I'm in dire need of a metaphor-proof vest for all the foolish verbosity I've had hurled my way. And I cannot, for the fucking life of me, get Howard Shore's score to The Departed to evacuate my brain.
And so here I am: a bottle of Macallan Cask Strength staring me in the face. Much as I ache for the warmth behind the eyes that this bottle of mahogany moonshine would provide, I made a two-part promise to myself:
1) I have to open it in celebration of something (besides resisting the urge to go on a crime spree)
2) I have to open it in the company of others who will partake (I find myself drinking alone more often lately. Boo-hoo.)
So rather than open it now, I'll twitch my fingers upon the keyboard for a short while and tell you about where I acquired that bottle: the Barriques Summer Single Malts Scotch Tasting.
Knowing that scotch is my thing, my friend Dave let me in on the fact that this wonderful event was happening August 2nd, and so we went and--for a paltry $14--sampled 9 different types of scotch. (Thanks also to those of you who let me know about it and I just didn't see your message until afterward.)
The guy who was running the event told us about this one guy who'd gone through all of the varieties in about 30 minutes flat the night before. Clearly, that idiot didn't want to enjoy himself, as we took about 2 1/2 to 3 hours to get the full experience (highly recommended).
I was a touch nervous at the start, since the first drink was not scotch but tequila--Maestro Dobel Reposado, to be exact. I've never had a taste for tequila, but the well aged agave fruit agreed quite nicely with my palate and made for an excellent primer. As I go through these, I'll end with the best comment associated with the drink--both in terms of accuracy as well as florid prose--as taken from the handout we were given. For the tequila: "intense viscous touch."
The first scotch on the table was a Glenmorangie 10-year. This is the only one with which I was already quite familiar, as it's what I normally keep at the house (either 10-year or 15). Hell, I'm savoring one as I type this. The immortal Sixteen Men of Tain gave us this godly start toward a heavenly brain wobble. Best comment associated with this drink: describing the aroma as "fruity with a hint of smoke."
Next up was the Bunnahabhain 12-year. Admittedly a pale preview of the last drink of the evening, this one had an even smokier scent than the Glenmorangie, but it was much nuttier to the palate. While I don't think it was as smooth as my normal Glenmorangie, I may have to start stocking this one at the house for variety's sake. Best comment: flat-out tie between "spectacular malty sweetness" and "a whisky alive with nautical folklore."
Then came the Deanston 12-year, which was the most surprising of the early selections. Equally pleasant to both nose and mouth, this had the most pleasantly smooth sting of the whole bunch. It's got a bit of fruit to it, but not as much as its predecessors. Additionally, it was the first to have a peaty element in the palate...again, surprisingly satisfying. Best comment: perhaps the most unintentionally dirty, the finish was described as "an elegantly subtle honeyed tail that is long and thought provoking."
And then the Ledaig 10-year swam from glass to gullet. According to the handout, "Liquorice and cloves combine into a medium length smoked pepper finale." Well, it was more like Robitussin-soaked gravel going down my throat. Of course, as bad as that sounds, I'd say it's like Lorca's poetry--his worst is better than most others' best. That being said, as long as I have other options, I'm apt to skip this one from now on. Best comment: on the subject of the scent, "Further intrigue develops from soft antiseptic hints and charred leather." Brother, he ain't lyin'.
Thankfully, the Dalmore 12-year came in to save us from all those antiseptic hints. Much smoother and much more citrus-y than I was expecting, Dalmore was a label I'd tried once either in a Boston pub or a Chicago restaurant. All that citrus was overwhelming in the best possible way. Best comment: opining upon the palate, "Good attack on the mouth, more elegance than muscle."
And then there was the Talisker 10-year. The guy running this thing warned us about the Talisker. He recommended it highly, but he told us it was peaty as all can get, which made us a little nervous. Using the word "peaty" to describe anything but soil gets me apoplectic, actually. That being said, I'd describe Talisker as the Jolt Cola of scotch; it'll knock you on your ass, but you'll be shocked as to how much you enjoy the taste on the way down. Best comment: finishes with "a lot of power and character with a dryish smoky quality."
The 1991 Glenrothes followed. With many of the brands before, I wasn't always able to taste all of the different flavors supposedly contained within these divinely fermented potions. Now I'm far from possessing the most sophisticated palate, but this frustrated me verily, since the flavor I often missed was the one I wanted most. There was no better example than the Glenrothes, which contained coconut, vanilla, and butterscotch. On the first taste, I did not get the one that I most wanted: the butterscotch. Drove me nuts, this did. Thankfully, unlike the previous drinks, I finally did get the flavor I wanted in the end. A blissful second of butterscotch is sometimes all you need. Best comment: "handpicked by the Malt Master," which is not all that descriptive. But come on...wouldn't you want to be called the Malt Master?
The penultimate drink of the evening was the one for which I'm now eagerly awaiting to open my own bottle: the Macallan Cask Strength. For the very few of you I've not mentioned this to, here we go. Scotch is usually between 40 and 45% alcohol. This stuff is 60%. No chill filtration. No water added. Cask. Strength. Specifically, Sherry oak casks from Spain. Add water. Release the flavor. From the mahogany color to the smoky taste, it's just about perfect. I was hunting for a bottle after we finished up the tasting, and I ended up taking their last one. It was 70 bucks and worth every penny. Or it would be, if I'd just open the damn thing. Best comment: "a hint of wood smoke," which is itself the smallest hint at how fantastic this stuff is.
And then...oh, then...was the Bunnahabhain 25-year. I've never tasted scotch to date, or any drink for that matter, this amazing. I can't give you just one comment; here's the write-up.
Color: A rich, nutty gold.
Nose: Sweet caramel dessert aromas beautifully entwine with subtle suggestions of oak and polished leather.
Palate: Indulgent hints of sweet berries and cream create a wonderful melange of tastes that progress into a roasted nut and malt feast sprinkled with only the most complementary of spices to balance the profile perfectly.
Finish: A soft dry finish leaves you with a lingering sense of sugar and spiced-oak flavors dispersing delicately on your tongue.
In retrospect, this must be what it was like to...I don't know...kiss Rita Hayworth, maybe.
After finishing the glass, I asked how much a bottle cost. Wearing a knowing smile, the guy said, "$310." While I could not afford it at the time, I find that kind of excessive extravagance does me good now and again. So, I'll save up for a bottle and order one next year. I'll then make it last at least a year, if not two. You're all welcome to join me for a drink (those of you who enjoy scotch anyway, of which I think there are two).
Alright, my Glenmorangie is long finished, and I think I can finally drift off now.
Before I go, thanks again to my friend Dave--for letting me know about this thing, coming with, and indulging my seemingly ceaseless need to talk about The Dark Knight. After the 25-year it was difficult (to say the least) to want to follow that taste up with anything. We had to, though, as a few hours of savory libation are liable to make a man hungry. King of Falafel did the trick.
Read: Winning Pocket Billiards, by Willie Mosconi
Watch: Mad Men (the only reason the AMC network exists)
Listen to: Bring Yo' Ass to the Table, by Left Lane Cruiser (What can I say? Sometimes I just want to listen to punkish bar blues.)
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Want Some Tunes?
While I'm getting my entry on a recent scotch tasting up to cask strength, I thought I'd get in a quick list.
I mentioned in my absurdly long last post that I would put together a list of the best scores of the past few years. Specifically, I've listed here my 20 favorite scores from 2000 on. The criteria for my choices are simple: 1) how well I think the music serves the film, and 2) how much I enjoy the music apart from the film.
It should go without saying that these highly reflect my biases, since I'm pretty well incapable of thinking about music that objectively.
In alphabetical order, here we go:
Amelie by Yann Tiersenn
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford by Nick Cave & Warren Ellis
Batman Begins by Hans Zimmer & James Newton Howard
Brother by Joe Hisaishi
Casino Royale by David Arnold
The Dark Knight by Hans Zimmer & James Newton Howard
The Fountain by Clint Mansell
A Good Year by Marc Streitenfeld
The Incredibles by Michael Giacchino
Inside Man by Terence Blanchard
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy by Howard Shore
Man on the Train by Pascal Esteve
Munich by John Williams
The Prestige by David Julyan
Road to Perdition by Thomas Newman
Shotgun Stories by Ben Nichols, Lucero, Pyramid
Sleuth by Patrick Doyle
There Will Be Blood by Jonny Greenwood
Oh, and my two favorite soundtracks? 8 Women and...of course...Once.
Read: The Encyclopedia of Fantastic Victoriana by Jess Nevins
Watch: Life on Mars (the British version; couldn't care less about the American series on the way)
Listen to: um, how about one of those scores above, yeah?
I mentioned in my absurdly long last post that I would put together a list of the best scores of the past few years. Specifically, I've listed here my 20 favorite scores from 2000 on. The criteria for my choices are simple: 1) how well I think the music serves the film, and 2) how much I enjoy the music apart from the film.
It should go without saying that these highly reflect my biases, since I'm pretty well incapable of thinking about music that objectively.
In alphabetical order, here we go:
Amelie by Yann Tiersenn
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford by Nick Cave & Warren Ellis
Batman Begins by Hans Zimmer & James Newton Howard
Brother by Joe Hisaishi
Casino Royale by David Arnold
The Dark Knight by Hans Zimmer & James Newton Howard
The Fountain by Clint Mansell
A Good Year by Marc Streitenfeld
The Incredibles by Michael Giacchino
Inside Man by Terence Blanchard
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy by Howard Shore
Man on the Train by Pascal Esteve
Munich by John Williams
The Prestige by David Julyan
Road to Perdition by Thomas Newman
Shotgun Stories by Ben Nichols, Lucero, Pyramid
Sleuth by Patrick Doyle
There Will Be Blood by Jonny Greenwood
Oh, and my two favorite soundtracks? 8 Women and...of course...Once.
Read: The Encyclopedia of Fantastic Victoriana by Jess Nevins
Watch: Life on Mars (the British version; couldn't care less about the American series on the way)
Listen to: um, how about one of those scores above, yeah?
Thursday, August 7, 2008
The Movie We Deserve, and the Movie We Need Right Now
I had much grander plans in mind for this entry. I wanted to write a review of The Dark Knight that was as polished as the script was tight. Actually, that's not even it. I was well on my way to writing an interminably long, grand unifying theory of Batman. Particularly for my humble ol' blog, that's a touch too much. It's just taken entirely too long.
And then two things happened to make me--as the man says--mad as assholes. First, in the midst of the backlash against the movie, people are reaching for the most inane reasons not to like the film--like questioning Christian Bale's voice as Batman. (When, again, was it so bad to sound like Clint Eastwood?) Second was this article, entitled "The Dark Knight Regurgitates," from Comic Book Resources, http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=17578
And so, here I am, my wry smile holding back vomitous contempt.
Now, most of you reading this...you're a group of kindred spirits and like minds, and what I'm about to write in these next two sentences is not for your discerning eyes. For those of you random strangers who will stumble upon this blog (and, bizarrely, I know you're out there), take heed:
If you didn't like The Dark Knight, I'm sorry to say that one of two things is the cause:
1) You're engaging in exceptional self-delusion, or
2) While the film was running, your eyes were shut.
After all, I can't think of a movie in recent memory that has garnered such a universally positive reaction as The Dark Knight. Oh, but no...we can't have that. Not a superhero movie. It can't be that great. Not a chance.
But you know what? Yes it can. I went in with the highest expectations possible. I came out with those expectations surpassed. As I said before, this is the Batman film I've always dreamed of seeing. Instead of posting some elaborate treatise, just lemme give ya the reasons why.
CAUTION: for those of you who haven't seen the film, SPOILERS AHEAD!!!! Come back when you've seen it, or keep going if you don't mind spoilers...but you DO mind spoilers, don't you?
(HINT: You bloody do.)
Here we go, in no particular order...
1. Let's get this out of the way: Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker is one of the greatest in cinema history. Bar none. I'd speak of it in the same breath that I would Renee Falconetti as Joan of Arc or George C. Scott as Patton. He gets "all those little emotions," hilariously terrifying though they may be, so perfectly right that it's heartbreaking. Ledger flawlessly strikes the balance in the script between the chaotic clown and the scheming psychopath. Even taking into account that final, epic fight in Spider-Man 3 or the final scene of Batman Begins, the hospital scene between the Joker and Two-Face captured the spirit of a comic book scene more than any other film. Near the end, when the Joker says to Batman that they're destined to battle each other forever, it should make us all sad--as my good friend Brandon put it--because he's absolutely right...and they tragically can't.
2. The movie captures both the hope and the tragedy of the Gotham trinity's war against crime (i.e. Batman, Jim Gordon, & Harvey Dent) better even than most of the books, including Batman: The Long Halloween, which provides much of the spirit of these characters' relationships. You need only look at the final showdown when Two-Face holds a gun on Jim's son to see that come together. I don't think there's been a more tension-filled scene in recent movie history, particularly with that crushing declaration from Harvey: "You thought we could be decent men...in an indecent time!"
3. Batman goes to Hong Kong. Seriously, what's not to love there? Particularly in IMAX. And aside from the automatic cool factor, it worked quite well narratively. With a few exceptions, it always seemed strange for Batman to leave Gotham in the comics. It works here. And the fact that the skyhook that's used to lift him out of that building was seen before in a little film called Thunderball...well...that just warms the heart.
4. The action sequences were fantastically shot. Forgive my harsh, rhyming tongue here, but I don't give two bits and a bucket of shit for the opinions of those who claim the fight scenes are woefully incomprehensible (you same, ahem, critics who just splooge over the Bourne films being the pinnacle of action cinema). TDK's staging was just plain great. The cutting was admittedly quick, but you know what? So are real fights, kids, or real fights between people who know how to fight, anyway. Besides, the quick cutting was never to the point of "confuse-o-vision" (TM pending). At no time did I lose myself in the space, and the planar staging had the added bonus of allowing me to watch Batman dispatch--one by one--anybody in his path with just the sort of elegantly brutal hand-to-hand combat I expect from the world's greatest martial artist.
Additionally, Nolan has stated in an interview that he's thought about doing the next film entirely in IMAX. This thrills me no end with the possibilities for future fight scenes. After all, in a 1.44 ratio, it'd be pretty fantastic to see fights taking place on, say, the ground floor of a room, and then a second floor scaffolding...all in the same frame.
Two floors of kick-assery. In IMAX. Yes.
5. One of the changes to this Bat-universe that I love is cemented once and for all in this film. Namely, Lucius Fox (as portrayed by Morgan Freeman, in a performance every bit as reliable as his character) knows that Bruce is Batman. This is a correction the comics have required for years. Admittedly, it may have come and I might have missed it, but I don't think I have. It's heartening to see the film treat Lucius as the brilliant man he would have to be to run Wayne Enterprises for Bruce. More than that, it gives Bruce an extra member of his extended family, which as a whole is much more grounded and compelling in these films (Alfred, Rachel, Lucius, Jim, Harvey) than in the comics (Robin, Nightwing, Batgirl, Oracle, etc.).
Oh, let's see...what else...
6. Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard top their already superb score for the first film. It's easily one of the best 5 or 10 scores of the past 8 years (hmmm, I see that entry in my future).
7. Gary Oldman is Jim Gordon. Rolling Stone offered the best comment I've seen about this film, and it regards his performance: "Oldman is so skilled he makes virtue look exciting."
8. On the subject of performances, the rest were outstanding too. I remember Christian Bale said something that caught my ear at the 2007 TDK panel in Chicago: "Once I put on the suit, there's only one way to play it." In much the same way that Daniel Craig has brought my vision of Bond to life, so too has Bale done for Bruce and for Batman. I could rave about everybody else, but I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Maggie Gyllenhaal, who imbues Rachel Dawes with greater beauty, intelligence, and screen presence than Katie Holmes ever could.
9. At the film's end, when Batman chooses to shoulder the blame for the cops Harvey's killed, he says something to Gordon that moves me every single time I hear it:
"I'm whatever Gotham needs me to be."
That's the other focus of this Bat-universe that sets it above its source material: Bruce's love for Gotham, and his resolute belief that it is a city both worth saving and within his power to save. The comics have moved away from this in favor of...oh, how best to put this...other aspects of the character's mythos (read "continuity porn," a new favorite phrase of mine). There's that line in Rachel's note where she tells Bruce not to lose his faith in people. It seems very much like a throwaway line, but remember that this is a Batman that's out not only to terrify evil but also to inspire good. He believes in Gotham's people.
That's the truly great thing about the ferry scene: some of us may not think it's realistic, but it taps into that part of us that believes that humanity could actually be that noble. (Reminds me of the unmasking scene in Spider-Man 2...except better.) Gordon says of Batman that, "He's the hero we deserve, but not the one we need right now." He was, heh, half right.
10. I like the fact that the movie leaves Two-Face's fate ambiguous. I've talked with people who are convinced he's dead as can be, and I've talked with others who are convinced that his funeral was a sham and that Gordon secreted him off to Arkham Asylum. While there's more evidence in the film to support the first viewpoint, I tend toward the second for two reasons: 1) Two-Face is my favorite villain next to the Joker, and I really would like to see him in another film (though perhaps not the next one), and 2) it seems to me that if Two-Face is dead, then Batman would have to concede that the Joker did indeed win. After all, Batman would have broken his one rule: not to kill. This was a problem I had the first time I saw Batman Begins, when Batman says to Ra's al Ghul, "I won't kill you...but I don't have to save you."
Then again, whether with killing Harvey to save Gordon's son, or using the cell-phone sonar device, there now comes an interesting possibility for the plot of the third film. With Bruce having now "finally learned to do what is necessary," and running from Gotham's finest (time to introduce Montoya and Allen and the rest of Gotham Central), I'd like to see the return of Liam Neeson as Ra's al Ghul to try to reclaim Bruce as his greatest student. For those who don't know, Ra's al Ghul is able to return from the dead through Lazarus Pits, which are...argh, just go here for more info on how he's definitely not dead.
As further enticement for Bruce to go over to his former teacher's side, his daughter Talia could be introduced. I like Eva Green for this, but then what don't I like her for?
This approach makes so much more sense to me than to introduce a new villain, such as the Riddler or the Penguin, who couldn't possibly top the Joker. We might as well have the next film bring us back to the beginning, which provides some really interesting character opportunities for our Dark Knight.
However, the next installment would need a new, bona fide love interest, and Talia won't do--particularly if the series continues after a third film. Ms. Selina Kyle? You're up.
Regardless of the storyline, though it will have nothing to do with the book of the same name, there's really only one title for the third film.
The Dark Knight Returns
I could talk more about how amazingly tight the script is, how excellent the dialogue is, or even how the film really ISN'T an endorsement of the Bush administration's wiretapping tactics (after all, that technology nearly costs Batman his life in his fight with the Joker).
Instead, I'll leave you with this...
Grant Morrison, in his very aptly titled blog, "HEAD," compared The Dark Knight with the comic epic Watchmen, in that he believes that The Dark Knight's impact on superhero filmmaking will be as comparably enormous as Watchmen's on superhero comics (Watchmen itself to come to the silver screen in '09). I agree, but there's a modicum of dread that stems from that notion. In Watchmen's wake followed a slew of "dark" and "edgy" comics that pushed that medium's mainstream storytelling into the intellectual red. I don't want that to happen with the films yet to come, for making films like The Dark Knight or Casino Royale--it's not about making them dark or edgy. It's not even about making them serious.
It's about making them right. It's about giving us, as intelligent moviegoers, the movies we deserve, and the movies we need right now.
And every bit as much as Batman is the hero Gotham deserves, The Dark Knight is exactly the movie we deserve.
Read: Screw reading tonight, kids. Go see The Dark Knight.
Watch: Um...I believe we've covered this.
Listen to: A certain soundtrack. I'll give you two guesses, but you'll get it in one.
And then two things happened to make me--as the man says--mad as assholes. First, in the midst of the backlash against the movie, people are reaching for the most inane reasons not to like the film--like questioning Christian Bale's voice as Batman. (When, again, was it so bad to sound like Clint Eastwood?) Second was this article, entitled "The Dark Knight Regurgitates," from Comic Book Resources, http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=17578
And so, here I am, my wry smile holding back vomitous contempt.
Now, most of you reading this...you're a group of kindred spirits and like minds, and what I'm about to write in these next two sentences is not for your discerning eyes. For those of you random strangers who will stumble upon this blog (and, bizarrely, I know you're out there), take heed:
If you didn't like The Dark Knight, I'm sorry to say that one of two things is the cause:
1) You're engaging in exceptional self-delusion, or
2) While the film was running, your eyes were shut.
After all, I can't think of a movie in recent memory that has garnered such a universally positive reaction as The Dark Knight. Oh, but no...we can't have that. Not a superhero movie. It can't be that great. Not a chance.
But you know what? Yes it can. I went in with the highest expectations possible. I came out with those expectations surpassed. As I said before, this is the Batman film I've always dreamed of seeing. Instead of posting some elaborate treatise, just lemme give ya the reasons why.
CAUTION: for those of you who haven't seen the film, SPOILERS AHEAD!!!! Come back when you've seen it, or keep going if you don't mind spoilers...but you DO mind spoilers, don't you?
(HINT: You bloody do.)
Here we go, in no particular order...
1. Let's get this out of the way: Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker is one of the greatest in cinema history. Bar none. I'd speak of it in the same breath that I would Renee Falconetti as Joan of Arc or George C. Scott as Patton. He gets "all those little emotions," hilariously terrifying though they may be, so perfectly right that it's heartbreaking. Ledger flawlessly strikes the balance in the script between the chaotic clown and the scheming psychopath. Even taking into account that final, epic fight in Spider-Man 3 or the final scene of Batman Begins, the hospital scene between the Joker and Two-Face captured the spirit of a comic book scene more than any other film. Near the end, when the Joker says to Batman that they're destined to battle each other forever, it should make us all sad--as my good friend Brandon put it--because he's absolutely right...and they tragically can't.
2. The movie captures both the hope and the tragedy of the Gotham trinity's war against crime (i.e. Batman, Jim Gordon, & Harvey Dent) better even than most of the books, including Batman: The Long Halloween, which provides much of the spirit of these characters' relationships. You need only look at the final showdown when Two-Face holds a gun on Jim's son to see that come together. I don't think there's been a more tension-filled scene in recent movie history, particularly with that crushing declaration from Harvey: "You thought we could be decent men...in an indecent time!"
3. Batman goes to Hong Kong. Seriously, what's not to love there? Particularly in IMAX. And aside from the automatic cool factor, it worked quite well narratively. With a few exceptions, it always seemed strange for Batman to leave Gotham in the comics. It works here. And the fact that the skyhook that's used to lift him out of that building was seen before in a little film called Thunderball...well...that just warms the heart.
4. The action sequences were fantastically shot. Forgive my harsh, rhyming tongue here, but I don't give two bits and a bucket of shit for the opinions of those who claim the fight scenes are woefully incomprehensible (you same, ahem, critics who just splooge over the Bourne films being the pinnacle of action cinema). TDK's staging was just plain great. The cutting was admittedly quick, but you know what? So are real fights, kids, or real fights between people who know how to fight, anyway. Besides, the quick cutting was never to the point of "confuse-o-vision" (TM pending). At no time did I lose myself in the space, and the planar staging had the added bonus of allowing me to watch Batman dispatch--one by one--anybody in his path with just the sort of elegantly brutal hand-to-hand combat I expect from the world's greatest martial artist.
Additionally, Nolan has stated in an interview that he's thought about doing the next film entirely in IMAX. This thrills me no end with the possibilities for future fight scenes. After all, in a 1.44 ratio, it'd be pretty fantastic to see fights taking place on, say, the ground floor of a room, and then a second floor scaffolding...all in the same frame.
Two floors of kick-assery. In IMAX. Yes.
5. One of the changes to this Bat-universe that I love is cemented once and for all in this film. Namely, Lucius Fox (as portrayed by Morgan Freeman, in a performance every bit as reliable as his character) knows that Bruce is Batman. This is a correction the comics have required for years. Admittedly, it may have come and I might have missed it, but I don't think I have. It's heartening to see the film treat Lucius as the brilliant man he would have to be to run Wayne Enterprises for Bruce. More than that, it gives Bruce an extra member of his extended family, which as a whole is much more grounded and compelling in these films (Alfred, Rachel, Lucius, Jim, Harvey) than in the comics (Robin, Nightwing, Batgirl, Oracle, etc.).
Oh, let's see...what else...
6. Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard top their already superb score for the first film. It's easily one of the best 5 or 10 scores of the past 8 years (hmmm, I see that entry in my future).
7. Gary Oldman is Jim Gordon. Rolling Stone offered the best comment I've seen about this film, and it regards his performance: "Oldman is so skilled he makes virtue look exciting."
8. On the subject of performances, the rest were outstanding too. I remember Christian Bale said something that caught my ear at the 2007 TDK panel in Chicago: "Once I put on the suit, there's only one way to play it." In much the same way that Daniel Craig has brought my vision of Bond to life, so too has Bale done for Bruce and for Batman. I could rave about everybody else, but I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Maggie Gyllenhaal, who imbues Rachel Dawes with greater beauty, intelligence, and screen presence than Katie Holmes ever could.
9. At the film's end, when Batman chooses to shoulder the blame for the cops Harvey's killed, he says something to Gordon that moves me every single time I hear it:
"I'm whatever Gotham needs me to be."
That's the other focus of this Bat-universe that sets it above its source material: Bruce's love for Gotham, and his resolute belief that it is a city both worth saving and within his power to save. The comics have moved away from this in favor of...oh, how best to put this...other aspects of the character's mythos (read "continuity porn," a new favorite phrase of mine). There's that line in Rachel's note where she tells Bruce not to lose his faith in people. It seems very much like a throwaway line, but remember that this is a Batman that's out not only to terrify evil but also to inspire good. He believes in Gotham's people.
That's the truly great thing about the ferry scene: some of us may not think it's realistic, but it taps into that part of us that believes that humanity could actually be that noble. (Reminds me of the unmasking scene in Spider-Man 2...except better.) Gordon says of Batman that, "He's the hero we deserve, but not the one we need right now." He was, heh, half right.
10. I like the fact that the movie leaves Two-Face's fate ambiguous. I've talked with people who are convinced he's dead as can be, and I've talked with others who are convinced that his funeral was a sham and that Gordon secreted him off to Arkham Asylum. While there's more evidence in the film to support the first viewpoint, I tend toward the second for two reasons: 1) Two-Face is my favorite villain next to the Joker, and I really would like to see him in another film (though perhaps not the next one), and 2) it seems to me that if Two-Face is dead, then Batman would have to concede that the Joker did indeed win. After all, Batman would have broken his one rule: not to kill. This was a problem I had the first time I saw Batman Begins, when Batman says to Ra's al Ghul, "I won't kill you...but I don't have to save you."
Then again, whether with killing Harvey to save Gordon's son, or using the cell-phone sonar device, there now comes an interesting possibility for the plot of the third film. With Bruce having now "finally learned to do what is necessary," and running from Gotham's finest (time to introduce Montoya and Allen and the rest of Gotham Central), I'd like to see the return of Liam Neeson as Ra's al Ghul to try to reclaim Bruce as his greatest student. For those who don't know, Ra's al Ghul is able to return from the dead through Lazarus Pits, which are...argh, just go here for more info on how he's definitely not dead.
As further enticement for Bruce to go over to his former teacher's side, his daughter Talia could be introduced. I like Eva Green for this, but then what don't I like her for?
This approach makes so much more sense to me than to introduce a new villain, such as the Riddler or the Penguin, who couldn't possibly top the Joker. We might as well have the next film bring us back to the beginning, which provides some really interesting character opportunities for our Dark Knight.
However, the next installment would need a new, bona fide love interest, and Talia won't do--particularly if the series continues after a third film. Ms. Selina Kyle? You're up.
Regardless of the storyline, though it will have nothing to do with the book of the same name, there's really only one title for the third film.
The Dark Knight Returns
I could talk more about how amazingly tight the script is, how excellent the dialogue is, or even how the film really ISN'T an endorsement of the Bush administration's wiretapping tactics (after all, that technology nearly costs Batman his life in his fight with the Joker).
Instead, I'll leave you with this...
Grant Morrison, in his very aptly titled blog, "HEAD," compared The Dark Knight with the comic epic Watchmen, in that he believes that The Dark Knight's impact on superhero filmmaking will be as comparably enormous as Watchmen's on superhero comics (Watchmen itself to come to the silver screen in '09). I agree, but there's a modicum of dread that stems from that notion. In Watchmen's wake followed a slew of "dark" and "edgy" comics that pushed that medium's mainstream storytelling into the intellectual red. I don't want that to happen with the films yet to come, for making films like The Dark Knight or Casino Royale--it's not about making them dark or edgy. It's not even about making them serious.
It's about making them right. It's about giving us, as intelligent moviegoers, the movies we deserve, and the movies we need right now.
And every bit as much as Batman is the hero Gotham deserves, The Dark Knight is exactly the movie we deserve.
Read: Screw reading tonight, kids. Go see The Dark Knight.
Watch: Um...I believe we've covered this.
Listen to: A certain soundtrack. I'll give you two guesses, but you'll get it in one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
