July 7, 2005

Batman Begins and Sin City are the best comic book movies of all time. Can we stop making comic book movies now? Also, a lengthy rant on Hollywood's New Lows

If almost every movie nowadays is based on an existing property of some sort–and if this particular summer is any indication, Hollywood is trying to eliminate the “original screenplay” awards category by March–then it should come as no surprise to see even the good directors hopping on the gravy train. After all, filmmakers gotta eat too, and doing something that’s been done before is better than doing nothing at all, I suppose. A consequence of this new influx of talent, though, is that some of these remakes are actually turning out to be much better than they deserve to be. Key word: "some."

First let’s rehash this season’s rehashes. Summer of 2005 is, I believe, the least original summer of all time. With pitifully few exceptions, the majority of major releases this season are derived from existing properties, including comic books (Fantastic Four, Sin City, Batman Begins), old television shows (Dukes of Hazzard, Bewitched, Mr. and Mrs. Smith (sort of)), sequels (Star Wars 3, Land of the Dead, Deuce Bigelow: European Gigolo), regular old books without pictures in them (War of the Worlds, The Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants), and, finally, the least-justifiable of all, the remake (The Honeymooners, Herbie: Fully Loaded, The Longest Yard). We even have some multiple-award winners here: Batman Begins is both a sequel AND a comic book movie, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is both a book AND a remake, War of the Worlds has already been a book, a movie, AND a radio show, and Lords of Dogtown breaks new ground by being the dramatized version of a documentary. Does this last film open with the title “Based on a True Story,” or does it say, “Based on the Documentary You Saw on Cable, Like, Last Month”? In an ideal world–no, not even in an ideal world, just a slightly more proactive and intelligent one–it would have been the producer’s job to discover the story of the invention of skateboarding on his or her own, and recognize it as a compelling story worth telling in feature film form. Well in the case of Lords of Dogtown apparently the producer was proactive enough to GO SEE Dogtown and Z-Boys (maybe even in the theater!) and afterwards, on his or her own accord, thought, “gee, that would make a good movie.” Jackass, it ALREADY WAS.

Is this the downside of the newfound popularity of documentaries–that we have to be saddled with “The Hollywood Version”? Dogtown and Z-Boys came out in 2001 and Lords of Dogtown (note the subtle title change) was released in 2005. Spellbound came out in 2001, and now 2005 will see the release of Akeelah and the Bee (which narrows the focus of Spellbound down to only one of its characters: the inner-city slam-speller, who is of course more interesting than the oh-so-typical hardworking Indian prodigy). Apparently the timeframe for remaking a true movie into a fake one is 3-4 years; I figure this means we can expect the fictionalized version of Super Size Me to hit theaters in the summer of 2007, starring Johnny Knoxville. Actually, you know what? New Lows will be reached here–they won’t have someone “play” Morgan Spurlock, they’ll just get Morgan Spurlock–that is the kind of active imaginations we’re dealing with. Because Spurlock will be acting this time, he’ll eat veggie burgers disguised as Big Macs, and they’ll slap on progressively fatter fat suits as shooting progresses. But wouldn’t faking Super Size Me sort of defeat the whole point of…? Anyway, this new kind of meta-lowness has already been achieved in Lords of Dogtown. In another stunning example of thinking outside the box, the producers hired Dogtown and Z-Boys’ writer and director, skateboarding pioneer Stacy Peralta, as the screenwriter for Lords of Dogtown (but not as its director–note to Stacy: do not leave intentional mistakes in the final cut anymore, the suits don’t get it).

So what else is there to “draw inspiration” from? Hollywood has already turned to every other existing property for ideas, including its most recent gold mine (if you can call it that–“lead mine” would be more appropriate): the video game (Wing Commander, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, Super Mario Bros.). Walt Disney reversed the usual order and based 2003's Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl on its 1967 theme park ride. 2001 saw the release of the movie Me and Mrs. Jones, which was inspired by the 70’s infidelity anthem of the same name. In the same soul-sucking (hah, hah) vein, Martin Lawrence’s 1996 film A Thin Line Between Love and Hate stole its title from The Persuaders’ 1971 chart-topper–and the group H-town (of esteemed "Knockin’ Da Boots" fame) re-recorded it, quite sacrilegiously, for the soundtrack. So after you’ve based feature films on 4-minute songs, what’s next? Movies based on 30-second ad spots? How about Got Milk?, in which aliens invade earth (again), except this time for our dairy supply? Gatorade’s Is it in you, the movie? Actually that sounds like a porn. Well, why not remake existing porn flicks? Debbie Does Dallas, the PG-13 summer blockbuster starring Jessica Simpson? Market research is giving me a big thumbs-up on that one. How about blogs? Can we get No Film School, the feature film?

Anyway despite pulling out all the stops, running up the flagpole, trumpeting their loudest fanfare, and using other clichéd phrases, box-office receipts are down for Hollywood. Or maybe it’s all the clichés IN THE MOVIES that have the theaters selling less tickets, despite reports of stronger-than-average air-conditioning. Could Hollywood’s “reduce, reuse, recycle” approach be behind the box office decline?

Nope–that would be giving the public too much credit, because we all know that these days, no one appreciates origininality. It's so rare that I can’t even spell the word. Even if the art form were being reinvented this summer–the Taxi Driver of this generation could come out next week–I don’t think it would do anything to stop the bleeding, box-office wise.

While I can work my ass off and stay up late at night trying to figure out what that film will be, I’m not sure what the execs can do besides putting digital projectors in the multiplexes: it costs like $37.50 to see a movie at the theater with a beverage, whereas you can rent it for $4 and watch it with 8 friends, Netflix it and copy it before sending it back, TiVo it off satellite or cable, download it off of Kazaa, or even just get the bootleg down the street for less. As a kid I didn’t know of a single way to watch a movie for free because we only had network TV, there was no internet, and DVDs didn’t exist yet. But now people with money who have Hi-def at home can watch their movies on a screen that’s nicer than the one at the sticky-floored theater a drive away. This is where digital comes in–but even with a fancy new projector in the theater, you can’t pause the movie, make some popcorn, and have sex in the middle of it.

What’s that, you’ve done it? Oh, really? You made popcorn right there in the theater?

Well, in the title of this much-longer-than-anticipated post, I made the claim that Batman Begins and Sin City are the best comic book movies of all time, and yet I have barely mentioned either. Well, don’t expect any backing-up to that claim, except for me to say–albeit in the annoying manner in which reviewers claim one movie/album/book to be “superior” to another, as if there is some objective way of measuring these things–that I do think Batman Begins is “better” than all the other Batmans, which is basically saying that it’s better than the first one since the others don’t even qualify. But this could also be because it was very psychological and grounded in reality (so much so that some of the comic book parts of it were jarring–his first appearance in the batsuit, for instance), and my tastes tend towards the explainable rather than the supernatural. I have less to say about Sin City because it’s been longer since I saw it and need to watch it again (if you can “need” to watch a film), and my expectations were rock-bottom after seeing Once Upon a Time in Mexico (having no expectations going in to a movie is often the easiest way to enjoy it… and to not trust your initial impressions). I will say this about Sin City–while there were times I thought the acting was very stiff, there were others when I felt that the full potential of virtual sets was finally being realized, with some subjective reality and German expressionism taking advantage of the technology.

Walking out of Batman Begins the other day (when it was over, I mean), I was left with a feeling that the film was as good as it could have been, and better than it should have. I can’t remember thinking that in a long time. Maybe that’s because what’s going on is that a very, very intelligent director did the best he could with what he had to work with, and it was pretty damn good. But until “what he had to work” with gets better, film is not growing as an art form–and what he had to work with was an existing franchise.

Your Comment

5 Comments

But Fantastic Four took the Box office out of it's Record setting slump. (than agin it's the top 12 movies it could have been Rebonds (9) 3 million second week performance)

AS for those ""Land Mines""
Tomb Raider
Total US Gross $131,144,183
Production Budget $94,000,000
Prints and Advertising Budget $22,000,000
Worldwide Gross $274,500,000
MPAA Rating PG-13 for action violence and some sensuality
Pre-sales of pay-TV rights (Showtime): Approx. $7,000,000

Pre-sales of international rights:
Resident Evil
Released in US March 15, 2002
Total US Gross $39,532,308
Production Budget $35,000,000
Worldwide Gross $103,200,000

$65,000,000

I'll Give you wing comander it drops faster than bucky balls (carbon 60)

July 11, 2005 at 10:29PM, Edited September 4, 10:12AM

3
Reply
mark

The C in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory should be in the Not actual movies section for the horrible CGI in the opening.

July 23, 2005 at 8:58AM, Edited September 4, 10:12AM

0
Reply
mark

Batman Begins was better than I thought it would be too, but I disagree that it was, a) better than Tim Burton's original (Jack Nicholson was the Joker, dude, come on.) and b) that it was "grounded in reality," as you say. Don't get me wrong here, I agree with you 90%, but I'm just a bigger fan of what Burton did. He turned the whole way Batman had been viewed up to that point around and gave it that darker, sleeker look. You have to give him and Sam Hamm credit for that when they were working on the script. They wanted to stay away from the Adam West campiness that haunted not only the TV show, but even the comic book itself up through the 60s and 70s (not the "60's" and "70's" right?) Plus, this might be hard to swallow, but Keaton was a MUCH better Bruce Wayne than Christian Bale. There's something about Bale that makes me cringe...
And of course, don't forget the whole "ninja cult at the top of the mountain in central Asia" thing. Reality? Ummm.... ok. Liam Neason is their leader? Ummm.... sure. Use the Force, Kwai Gon. (I'm just breaking your balls, man. Psychologically, Begins was more grounded in reality than Burton's version simply because it showed us Batman's origins.... a far better story that the touch-and-go flashbacks of Burton's film, I'll give you that much.) Didn't like Cillian Murphy as the Scarecrow either.... he bothers me. He looked like he was trying too hard to be creepy.
To sum up: Tim Burton's Batman had 1) a better Bruce Wayne, 2) a better villan, 3) a better score (Danny Elfman's music is practically the same for every film he's ever done, but his Batman score has got to be the best of his work.) 4) a better leading lady. I'll take Kim Basinger over Katie-fucking-Holmes anyday (not the rated G version, I know, sorry).

January 3, 2006 at 6:44AM, Edited September 4, 10:12AM

3
Reply
J

I think there definitely sluhod have been more Christian Bale in the movie, but at the same time, the story didn't need it. Everything about that storyline was amazing. I think it actually makes it better to focus on the Joker's points and Dent's fall from grace, and that whole thing was just SO. INCREDIBLY. POETIC. But I'm still sad at less Batman/Wayne. =(The disappearing pencil trick was my favorite scene. I have a pretty sick sense of humor, but I thought it went into his eye socket and my friend thought the Joker used the guy's head to hammer it into the table. Either way, OUCH. I like the fact that Batman has a different voice, for storyline reasons, but I think it bordered on too much in this film. It didn't bother me in the first one, though, so, I dunno. I just know that I can't do that without sounding like an idiot. The catwoman thing--someone pointed it out to me, and I think it's a perfect setup. I'd love to see how the Nolans wrote it, if they do, and also I think the more hard-core fans deserve better than Halle Barry's (even though I myself had no problems with it). I think it's also going to be interesting to see if the "villains" might hint that the Joker is still working in the background. I think they are going to get some Batgirl- or Catwoman-type thing going on in the next film, not necessarily because they killed off the Love Interest but because they killed off the female lead. But poor Bruce, I wanted to hug him when Rachel died. =( And Dent, too, when he was screaming "NO, NO, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SAVE MEEEE" =C oh sadfaces.I think, possibly because I just reread American Gods this summer, but I think that my favorite bit of poetry in the film is Dent's coin. As the White Knight he's cheating, he's making his own luck, but he's doing good. Then--I'm still kind of lost as to what happens to him with the Joker in the hospital, because every time the Joker walked on I was just toally entranced by how silly he was--he gives in to chaos because its fair, and though his coin is still double-headed, there's the light side, and the dark side. And the dark side, he shoots Batman. The light side, he doesn't shoot himself. And the coin lands light side up for Gordon's son, though whether that's supposed to mean "he would have lived" or "Batman just saved his ass", I'm not sure. But I still think it's absolutely brilliantly beautiful.

March 18, 2014 at 4:31PM, Edited September 4, 11:56AM

0
Reply