Strollerderby : comic book movies

Hulk want puny blogger to review Hulk movie

Brett Singer — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 14:00:00 GMT

Yesterday I received the following email:

To: Puny Blogger
From: Hulk
Subject: Hulk Movie

Hulk get right to point, Puny Blogger. Why Puny Blogger not review Hulk's movie? Puny Blogger wrote about Metal Man movie. Hulk hate Metal Man! Hulk smash!

Hulk know last movie had stupid plot and gamma-charged poodle. Hulk tell stupid producers about script problems at first table read, and Hulk not hire Ang Lee. (Hulk think Tiger/Dragon movie highly over-rated.) But Hulk feel good about latest big screen effort. New movie tell Hulk story in entertaining and emotionally satisfying way. Hulk see movie. Hulk happy with final cut.

Hulk angry that Puny Blogger not write about Hulk movie! Hulk just trying to get something going with career. Hulk father now, need to get ducks in row. Has Puny Blogger seen price of tuition? Hulk need start saving now. Hulk finally get big movie with big opening weekend gross, and Puny Blogger not care.

Write review of Hulk movie, Puny Blogger – or Hulk smash!

Cordially,

Hulk

Hulk, please accept our apologies for not reviewing your film sooner. I've just been busy with other projects, and of course, my family. As a new father, I'm sure you can understand. Please, do not smash me, my computer, or anything else for that matter. Here is my review of "The Incredible Hulk."

The last time Marvel brought ol' Greenskin to the big screen, it was a disaster. Too long, bad CGI effects, and a gamma irradiated poodle were only some of the problems. Bruce Banner becomes the Hulk because his father was mean to him, injecting him with some experimental serum, which is triggered by a blast of gamma radiation? Oookay. No disrespect to Ang Lee, but he was a bad choice.

For this latest effort, Marvel took over the producing reins and went back to basics. The story actually picks up where Lee's film leaves off; five years have passed, both in the film and in actual reality (Ang Lee's "Hulk" was released in 2003.) Ed Norton is a good Banner, although there are too many scenes that are clearly meant to "deepen" the character. When the Hulk shows up, it's great. The CGI isn't perfect, and it's not nearly as seamless as "Iron Man", which almost made you believe someone could build a shiny flying super-hero suit. But this new "Hulk" is 1000% better than the last one.

One interesting choice the director Louis Leterrier (the "Transporter" movies) and screenwriter Zak Penn (the last 2 "X-Men" flicks, as well as the upcoming "Captain America" and "Avengers" films) made was to go back to the much-beloved television series. They use a new version of the intro, the music shows up a couple of times, and some of the feeling of Banner wandering the globe looking for a cure is very much a part of this new "Hulk". (They did do away with the amazingly bad choice of renaming Hulk's alter ego "David Banner", although Bruce does use that name as an alias at one point.) I'm one of the millions of people who fondly recall the old "Hulk" series, which starred Bill Bixby and Lou Ferigno. (Lou has a cameo as a security guard and is still in body-builder shape.) That show, hokey and mopey though it was, had something that the first "Hulk" movie didn't, which was a sense of reality. Having a real person (Ferigno) play the Green Goliath made it feel more like it could actually happen. Part of what the new "Hulk" does better is to just have better CGI effects. But part of it is keeping things simple. Somehow going back to something that worked – the TV show – made this easier to pull off.

It's not a great movie. But it was so much better than I expected. Also, it sets up for future Marvel super-hero movies featuring multiple characters: Robert Downey Jr. shows up at the end to do his Tony Stark thing; this time you don't have to wait until after the credits. There's even a hint at a villain for a "Hulk" sequel. Part of the fun of watching our beloved funny books turned into movies is the recognition factor: "Hey! There's General Ross! Talking to Tony Stark! And they said something about a team!" Avengers! Yes!

"The Incredible Hulk" is still in theaters, so go check it out. It's a fun popcorn flick, and besides, Hulk needs the cash for Hulk Jr.'s college fund.

image: EOnline

Five Forgotten Fictional Fathers (Hulk mentioned here)

Stay out of my room or I'll pee on your tree (Hulk not mentioned here, but Hulk think story funny)

Here's to the laddies who lunch (Hulk not want have coffee with fellow dads)

Sexy Superhero Parents: The Top 10 (Why Hulk not mentioned? Hulk very attractive! Look at Hulk's abs!)

Hancock Tops U.S. Box Office for Holiday Weekend (Hulk knocked from top spot, but Hulk OK with that. Will Smith box office gold. Hulk relative newbie in movies)

An American Girl: Lisa Kudrow (Story mentions Hulk)

More Superhero Movies to Come

Brett Singer — Tue, 06 May 2008 15:30:00 GMT

In the wake of Iron Man's massive domination of all things box office this past weekend, Marvel has officially announced their next crop of comic book flicks. Here you go, true believers:

- Iron Man 2, April 30, 2010: I have to admit that despite my non-rave review, I don't want to wait this long. Yes, I'm a fanboy. Sue me.

- Thor, June 4, 2010: the last time a live action Thor was on screen was in a TV movie that also featured the Incredible Hulk and Daredevil. It wasn't very good. Here's a clip from YouTube. Dig those furry shoulder pads. Very godlike. Not.

- The First Avenger: Captain America, May 6, 2011: If you haven't seen the never released in theaters version of Captain America, get very drunk and do so. It's astonishingly bad. There were actually posters announcing the release; then somebody saw it and it went straight to video immediately.

- The Avengers, July 2011: EW.com says that this film will include "Iron Man, the Incredible Hulk, Captain America, and Thor". Stay for the end of the credits for a teeny sneak preview of this (or just read this: SPOILER ALERT). That's four of the original Avengers, but they left out Ant-Man and the Wasp. But wait…

- Ant-Man, in development: I'm surprised that they would make a separate Ant-Man movie. The part of the character that's interesting is Henry Pym, who's a genius but also kind of jerk. Depending on which version of the character he's either an egomaniac or an egomaniac, alcoholic and wife-beater. The whole story is much too long and complicated for a feature film, and as a straight-up superhero, he's not exactly first-tier. I predict this will never actually get made.

Those who can't wait (like me) will have to settle for the new Hulk movie, coming on June 13. From the DC side of the comics world, we also have the new Batman, coming on July 13. Trailers for both are below. Indie-comics fans can make do with Hellboy II and Wanted. Yes, it's a great time to be nerdy.

image: FirstShowing.net

Quickie movie review: IRON MAN

Brett Singer — Fri, 02 May 2008 03:51:00 GMT

"Iron Man" opens officially on Friday May 2^nd, but my local theater had an 8pm showing on Thursday (tonight). I kinda had to go, even if I couldn't convince anyone to join me in summer blockbuster bliss. Here is my quickie review, along with my thoughts on whether or not you should take the kids.

I wanted to like it. I really did. And I liked some of it. Kenneth Turan in the L.A. Times says in his review that there were two scripts that were kind of mushed together, and the movie definitely feels like it was done in pieces. For the record, most of the reviews are very positive.

One of the biggest mistakes that makers of superhero films make is not giving us enough time with the hero. Sure, Tony Stark is the main character. But we need to see a lot of Iron Man. When we do, it looks great. A lot of effort was clearly put into making the mechanics of the Iron Man suits look as realistic as possible. I say "suits" because there are four of them – the first, which looks appropriately clunky, the second (all gold), and the third, which has the red and gold that is most recognizable. The fourth belongs to the super villain. I won't give it away, but it isn't that much of a surprise. Apparently there is a much cooler surprise scene after the credits, which I didn't see, I only read about it (don't read this if you don't want to "spoil" the moment.)

Jen pointed out some of the main concerns a parent might have. I'm going to add another, which is that a lot of the film feels very real. The scenes in Afghanistan are well done and pretty effective – it's not "Full Metal Jacket", but you do see war. In one scene a father is almost shot in the head in front of his family. There is almost no bloody violence shown, however. Like so many things, it really depends on your kid. Some little ones are more bothered by graphic violence, others get more upset at psychological realism. The other potential knock against kid-friendliness is the pacing, which was sometimes slower than molasses. For me, the most important thing about a superhero movie is pacing, and "Iron Man" occasionally slows to a crawl. I could definitely see a younger kid getting really bored.

Marvel is clearly trying to create a complete Marvel Universe on screen (the bit after the credits is definitely an attempt at this), which will be fun if it works. "Iron Man" will probably make at least $85 million this weekend (not sure why that number popped into my head), which would mean a sequel. Hopefully next time around they'll make it a little tighter.

Bottom line: a little slow, not always consistent in tone, and not nearly enough Iron Man. The good parts are good, the bad parts aren't exactly "bad", they're just not that great. Worth seeing? Sure. A "must-see"? Nah.

image: FirstShowing.net

Summer Movie Traffic Cop: 'Iron Man'

Jen Chaney — Thu, 01 May 2008 17:33:00 GMT

With the summer movie season officially starting this weekend, I bring you this new occasional feature: Summer Movie Traffic Cop, which will provide some guidance about whether certain blockbusters make appropriate fare for your kids.

Our first "offender" is "Iron Man," a good, old-fashioned, smashy-crashy blockbuster featuring a tremendous star turn by Robert Downey Jr. It arrives in theaters tomorrow and is worth seeing, but can you bring your kids? After catching a preview screening earlier this week, I offer the following traffic cop breakdown:

'Iron Man's' Summer Movie Traffic Violations:

--Lots of people catching on fire.

--Numerous explosions, several in a wartime environment.

--More than a few casualties.

--The presence of Muslim terrorists who, albeit not overly gratuitously, torture our hero and others.

--A Vanity Fair reporter, played by Leslie Bibb, with little sense of journalistic ethics and a slight tendency toward the slutty. (Most of the love scenes are kept off screen, though).

Reasons to Let 'Iron Man' Off With a Warning:

--There is no nudity and little sexually explicit material. While Downey's Tony Stark is a player, the romance in the movie is pretty chaste.

--The language is relatively clean. While many actual bombs are dropped, I don't recall hearing any f-bombs.

--The movie's overall message -- that weapons manufacturing and war are dirty businesses -- is a positive one, but may fly over most kids' heads.

Final Ruling:

The biggest issue with the movie is the overall violence, which isn't overly bloody or gory but is definitely intense. And that means:

A Red Light for Kids 7 and Under

A Yellow Light -- Proceed With Caution -- for Kids in the 8 to 9 Range

A Green Light for Most Viewers 10 and Older

Image: Paramount Pictures