This weekend I finally saw Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World. I’d been dying all week after hearing how amazing it was from all of my friends plus the entire internet, so I was glad to see for myself.

Everything you’ve heard is true.

Let’s take base level first – as a comic book movie. Comic to screen adaptation? Best I’ve ever seen. It really is the best translation that’s been made so far – hits all the perfect points a comic offers but in the medium of film, while simultaneously building upon the source material with the kinds of pop culture chords only moving pictures can hit (a small scene as an homage to Seinfeld, for example). If you’ve ever read a comic book and thought “this would be a great movie” and then seen the movie that followed and thought it didn’t quite get it, you need to see this because you will have faith again that someone will get it right one of these days. Because that day is today, with this flick.

Likewise, if you’ve ever seen a movie and thought “this would be a kickass comic” then you should see this. I haven’t read the comic, but I can only imagine it would be a seamless entertainment transition to go from enjoying one medium to the other. Be warned: this is not the case with almost everything else out there.

Flaming sword! Byaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Yes, Ang Lee is eating his heart out and sobbing in a corner somewhere, because he only wishes his underwhelming comic transitions in his underwhelming comic book movie could compare to how perfectly executed this film is.

Now let’s get to the geeky part. It’s so amazing, and honestly it’s so beyond me. I can only envy the people who get every single homage and nugget sprinkled throughout the entirety of the movie. Wait, no, sprinkles aren’t the right metaphor. This movie is like confetti cake for nerds – there is something beautiful happening either obviously or in the background every three seconds of this movie on average. I recognized some of the musical cues, even if I didn’t know the specific games they came from. And they were awesome.

And now the meat of it. Is there any? I think many people who dismissed the movie the minute they saw the first trailer would have you believe there’s nothing to this other than a nerdfest of video game noises and fights. Like a Matrix movie coated in Junior Mints. But tis not the case.

It’s a coming of age movie, and a pretty heavy one at that. It’s not just a fake little world where the guy has to fight a bunch of other guys to get a girl – no, there is meaning here. There’s a reason for it all. It’s how Scott approaches life – the only way he can relate himself to the world around him, and to the changes he’s going through growing up, is to imagine it’s all like a video game.

We can all relate to this at some level, even if it’s just as a toddler and playing with the latest Ninja Turtle figures or G. I. Joes. For some of us as we get older though, we keep thinking about our issues or problems in fantastical ways – very often it’s just a way to cure boredom while growing up – imagine you could stop in the middle of an unbearably boring car ride and run out into the world to catch a Pokemon!

We all have personal demons and inner struggles. It’s just that this flick takes a different approach to dealing with those issues and coming to terms with ourselves – Scott doesn’t just metaphorically fight off his personal demons in order to grow up and have a healthy relationship; he gives the metaphor context by placing it in a culture that he dives into so much every day that it really and truly is just as much a part of him as the personal demons. What makes this story so spectacular is that his personal angels manifest as well, and their voices are 8-bit cries from Heaven.

So…why exactly is it you haven’t seen the movie?

This weekend brought about a long awaited new take on the Predator series. Forget Predator 2, and definitely forget the AVP movies. They are of a different realm in this universe, in some weird place where Alien: Resurrection doesn’t seem so bad.

Predators is great. It’s amazing how good it is as a callback to the 80′s action film, Predator especially. The pace, the lighting, it’s there – one notable difference being that with Predator we were introduced to the creature in the first few acts without really knowing what the guys were up against. Here, we know about the Predator, so it’s more about learning why these humans are here and how many will die before they figure out the truth. Surprisingly, it’s not too many. And yet that doesn’t disappoint.

And the music, one could rave about the music endlessly. It takes cues from the first film, and just hits that 80′s music vibe dead on throughout the flick.

So I really enjoyed the movie, but there was one thing that was missing. The thing that should have been the heart and soul of it to be a true callback to those glorious 19 hundred and 80′s: one-liners.

Unfortunately, there were none.

Why do people love Predator so much? There are a few reasons, but the main thing people will say if you ask them about Predator is that Arnold is in it, there’s a really cool alien in it, then they start quoting it. Because it has fantastic one-liners. Good parallels? Well, there are quite a few, and the first that comes to my mind is Die Hard. But I digress.

There are good lines in this movie, but there are none like Predator. I can’t remember any cool lines except the last one, and I only remember that because it was last and though it had perfect delivery, it was really disappointing. Because it wasn’t a one-liner. It was just sort of like, yeah, understandable sentiment. This is a movie though, be at least a little more poetic about it.

Now if you’re a fan of the Predator series, don’t let this deter you; there’s still plenty to enjoy in this flick, and it is certainly a worthy sequel.

It’s just that when I see a bunch of tough guys (and girl) go up against a big alien hunter, I like it to involve some great lines.

Excuse me, do you have the time? … TO BLEED?!

So I say see it, just don’t expect to walk out quoting it.

Everything you’ve heard is true.

It really is an amazing film, an instant classic, and one for all ages. Pixar really nailed it this time. A lot of people love all of their movies; I for one haven’t connected with them all, but the ones that I have, I really do love. This being one of them.

As it began I kept imagining I’d at some point start to think about how much storytelling has changed in the last ten years and how different the film is from the other two. But that never happened. It’s just so engrossing that it fits right in. When you’re watching it feels like the trilogy started just yesterday.

Kids love it because it’s animated and there are plenty of visual gags and excited bits of dialogue to keep them entertained. And adults love it because it explores seriously heavy issues. From the vantage point of toys, but nonetheless, the ideas this film deals with are the kind that stir you emotionally. It’s one of those movies that you walk out of, and it’s affected you, and you will be surprised at how much you have been shaken when you leave the theater.

I don’t know why it affects us so much, particularly men this go around. Maybe it’s something to do with how emotionally attached we were to our toys or collectibles growing up, and how much it pained us (though we maybe didn’t show it) when they were lost or given away or thrown away when we got older and moved out. (To be honest, I still have the majority of my favorites in a storage bin somewhere back home).

Maybe it’s because these toys are losing their innocence, and we know what that’s like all too well. It’s a huge emotional transition for people to go from school to working, whether from high school or college. And for a lot of people it’s a huge enough emotional transition just going from one educational setting to another. There are even some people who go to grad school for no reason other than that they aren’t ready to move on, and I for one have toyed with the idea of continuing my education more than once and likely for the same base emotional reasons.

I’m rambling though. Toy Story 3 doesn’t have anything to do with that, except that it completely does. The Toys belong to Andy, and he’s going off to college. And they have to move on, whatever that entails for them and by them, life is going to change. And this movie is about their descent into and through that change, and it is one of the most emotionally wrenching and satisfying journeys you will take at the movies. So if you haven’t seen it already, I have absolutely no idea what you are waiting for.

For the last time, quit calling me Robocop!

And I didn’t even see it in 3D.

I watched this flick last Saturday afternoon, and though it’s a very well done film, it didn’t click for me personally. As you probably know, it’s about a pair of scientists that successfully create a new hybrid life form, part of which is human. And of course, this doesn’t work out all that well.

It’s the Frankenstein idea of “if you are going to play God you need to have God-like wisdom,” but it takes a different approach from Frankenstein (the novel at least) in that it really only explores the moral issues from the perspective of the creators. They’re kind of likeable to begin with, but it quickly deteriorates and we switch sides as an audience more than once throughout the film (which is a credit to how well it was written, in my opinion). But the creation, we never identify with or really care too much about. She’s just there as the monster, to provide the catalyst for all of the moral ideas pondered and abused by the main characters.

It didn’t click with me because I don’t like the idea of taking that theme, and then not exploring it fully. And to only approach it from the creator side is to not fully see it through. The beauty of Frankenstein’s creation was that while it recognized it was not shown compassion or love by its creator (or most anyone else), it was its choice to behave the way it did following such treatment. Rather than taking the “turn the other cheek” approach, the creature became vengeful and violent. It embraced the darker side of its nature, and knowingly. I love that so much, and it’s one of the reasons Frankenstein is one of my favorite stories. (Though the Universal films don’t take the same approach as the novel, I still dig them. I guess because of the atmosphere and tone of those films, but I’ll try to write up my thoughts on here on all of those classic series over time).

While Dren (the creature) did become violent at times and act out in this story, it wasn’t intelligent action, it was just an emotional response. She was a child who didn’t know what to do with her emotions or know how to express herself, so it all came out as bottled up frustration and rage. But the creature in Frankenstein knows exactly what he is doing when he is violent and vengeful, it’s both an emotional response and completely thought out and planned behavior.

Dren seems to reach the intelligence of a young teenager (without the ability to speak) but never further. And rather than actively doing anything, it’s a pretty passive and reactive creation until the final few scenes. So for me, I think the combination of examining the themes from only the perspective of the “parents” and the lack of active behavior on the part of the creation led to the disconnect. It was really well done and I’m sure others would really enjoy it! Just didn’t click for me personally.

Ketchup om noms

Did you see it? If so, what did you think? What are some movies that you considered well-done but didn’t connect with you?

Universal’s remake of the classic horror film The Wolf Man is out now on DVD and Blu-Ray.

Note: SPOILERS AHEAD!

The unrated extended cut is miles above the theatrical cut. It’s amazing how much this extended cut changes the character of Lawrence Talbot; whereas theatrically he was plain, stupid, and boring, here he is more complex. He’s more of a real person, someone the audience can identify with and care about; his traumatic childhood and the extent to which his father distances himself emotionally makes his success with acting and his decision to return home to help find his brother all the more admirable. In this version of the movie he’s not just a dude who responds to letters, he has to consider himself before deciding to return home, and his willingness to set aside his life to find his brother makes what happens to him all the more tragic. As you can imagine, filling out his character like that makes the movie way better.

One problem that comes from this extended cut, however, is of continuity. Gwen goes to the theater to see Lawrence in person in the very beginning, rather than sending the letter that’s read in the theatrical cut. But when he goes home he tells his father she wrote him a letter, and she mentions having written a letter as well, and that doesn’t make sense. It’s just stupid, actually, and it’s a real turnoff when more fully developed characters say things that blatantly contradict the story that’s playing out in front of us. And wasn’t the unrated cut done or at least in mind before the theatrical cut was released? You can’t tell me they didn’t do ADR for the flick, you can clearly hear it in the asylum scene in his father’s dialogue when he tells Lawrence the story of how he was bitten. And plus, you’d think with years of pushing the film back Universal could have dropped a few hours worth of money to get a tiny bit of ADR in there and patch it up with editing. But no, apparently not.

Another thing that doesn’t make sense at all to me, in either version of the film, is that Lawrence found his mother dead in the arms of his werewolf father, but the monster didn’t kill him too. Wtf? He was right there, standing next to him! It’s not like he was watching from a window or something! I don’t buy it, unless you start saying “well maybe he recognized it was his son and spared him” and whimper to yourself as you try to defend the story. Well, okay, you have a point, except that he had just killed his wife, and he’s a werewolf. There’s not a lot of thought process going on in that head. Or maybe there is. The movie never really takes a firm stance on that, which is another issue that bothers me.

Throughout the film The Wolfman displays uninhibited rage coupled with moments of clearly calculated action. The latter moments include when he goes straight for the doctor who tortures him in the asylum but doesn’t bother killing more than a few of the other hundreds of men trapped in the room. And at the end of the flick he doesn’t instantly kill Gwen, he stares at her and growls and apparently, thinks. Or he struggles to think. It isn’t quite clear, and before you can figure it out or we’re given another clue as to what the hell is going on he’s woooo-ing at a bunch of hunters and dogs approaching in the dark. Either way, she’s not dead right off the bat, so obviously they intended to suggest that the monster in this film isn’t just a monster, it’s still somewhat human.

Another suggestion of this occurs in the showdown in the mansion. His father refers to the curse as being glorious, and Lawrence says it’s hell. So I guess he knows what’s going on when he’s the monster? He just can’t stop it though. Sometimes. I guess.

That goes with their bland recurring dialogue referencing where a man ends and a beast begins. Cool, but have some consistency. Maybe he kills when he’s startled or threatened and otherwise can think a bit. Or maybe he is just a raging beast. But you can’t mix those and then say “but there’s more to him than just the monster! He’s still a man in there, oooooohhhh we gotcha!” This could probably be fixed with editing. It will affect the emotional impact of the story, but it’s like having your main character be a child rapist who says inbetween each rape “it’s hell!” Doesn’t matter if he whines about not wanting to do it, he does it. And he doesn’t stop himself. Try to find an audience member who doesn’t still hate that guy for being the monster he is.

If it’s such hell for Lawrence, why doesn’t he kill himself? Because he has to kill his dad and move the plot along to the climactic fight and final confrontation with Gwen where we are scared and on the edge of our seat wondering if she’ll get killed. These are totally awesome reasons for a character not to kill himself. Yep. Definitely. No doubts there.

Tonight, I shall come for your fingernail clippers.

And if he had just been raging it would have been so awesome. The first scene in the woods where he kills the guys, it’s pretty cool. The only problem is that he kills two guys in the pit, jumps out, punches a guy into a wall (werewolves know karate?) then chases a guy into the dark. And yet when Aberline arrives, there are guts and torn bodies all over the clearing. That’s funny, I don’t remember seeing that happen, and boy was I waiting to see that happen! We need some editing to fix this. Even if you add quick cuts where it gets hard to discern anything concrete, you are at least implying that there is shit going down and it’s absolutely serious. If this Wolfman is supposed to be scary, then make him scary. Don’t make him go “rowr” and have the other guys in the scene run away. We don’t need other characters to tell us by their actions that we should be scared, in fact, we hate that. It makes it not scary at all. If they’re scared then we know what’s coming. If they’re not scared or they’re screaming for their lives in confusion and chaos, killed before they know what hits them, that is what we need, now we’re approaching scary.

During that first attack, he’s wearing clothes, which makes sense, as he was clothed when he transformed. The difference is he doesn’t have a coat on, and when he initially changed, he still had his coat on. Now this is likely a purposeful and direct homage to the original The Wolf Man, where he seemingly changes clothing off camera after transforming. If it is, it’s noticeable to fans but probably not too noticeable otherwise. So in this case, I like that this little error happens.

And when it comes to the final fight, I am kind of indifferent. Two werewolves fighting and yet there is a severe lack of biting and clawing compared to the karate moves that are going on. Seriously, who came up with this fight? I’ve written a script with a werewolf fight in it, and let me tell you, I can imagine a fight that’s a hell of a lot more savage and chaotic than what plays out in this movie.

The ending I’m okay with. I’ve heard there’s an alternate ending on the Blu-Ray where Emily Blunt is bitten. That would’ve been a better ending, in my estimation. Maybe it isn’t too much of a surprise, but it would be darkly ironic and meaningful. And a sequel with a female werewolf would be something different that people might want to see. There’s a lot of potential there.

But as it is, the ending is kind of boring and expected. Oh, the guy who never believed in werewolves and spent the movie chasing him ends up becoming the next one in line? The size of your irony is matched by the force of my yawn.

And there has to be another take of Benicio dying. Because that one is one of the lamest and most inexcusable things I’ve seen in a major studio film. (Besides the camera work and direction of Public Enemies. Damn Universal, have you been napping or something?)

There are also some pretty inexcusable lines. “If anything were to happen to you, I’d never forgive myself.” Why couldn’t he say “I’m afraid these attacks aren’t over, and I don’t want you hurt.” Or, best bet, cut out the line so that it’s just a silent response. He just looks at her, and that’s all that need be said. BAM. Fixed your bad scene, Joe.

Now while I just ranted for a long while, please don’t misunderstand me, I do like the movie for what it is. It’s just not as good as I expected a remake of The Wolf Man to be. There are editing problems throughout, with the major set pieces especially, that really drag the film down. It’s frustrating, disappointing, and doesn’t live up to some of the easier to reach standards it should, but it’s a decent flick, especially the unrated cut.

And there are plenty of things to love about it. The atmosphere is spot on. I giggled and grinned at all the fog and trees and darkness, and the scene where Lawrence is bitten is especially moody and beautiful to watch. The production design is stunning, and wonderfully inspired by the classic Universal horror films. Huge huge kudos to the film for this, and in fact, this alone is reason to watch the film.

The acting is pretty solid for the most part, and the shakiest bits come from Benicio, oddly enough. Hopkins is awesome, delivering the best part of the movie when he gives that laugh in the asylum that you see in the second trailer for the movie. Hugo Weaving takes a sound approach to the role of the detective, and Emily Blunt is beautiful and fragile as Gwen.

And the movie’s absolute and undeniable best feature: The Wolfman himself.

Hi. I like to smile.

Rick Baker is a genius, and his makeup is unsurpassed. Didn’t matter what he was doing, when The Wolfman is on screen I was staring wide eyed in amazement. And Benicio does great stalking around the woods in the dark (but mostly when he’s on two legs, when he transfers to running on four it kind of takes you out of the moment). The howl isn’t the best, and there’s not enough gore, but man, I loved The Wolfman as a creature.

A sequel making better use of Rick Baker’s work (and allowing for practical transformation effects) would be quite a treat, though based on this film’s lukewarm reception I wouldn’t expect a sequel. Maybe another remake in a few years? Sign me up to take care of it Universal, I’ll gladly devote myself to an interpretation of the original story.

In fact, why not let me take a crack at reediting the film? Seriously. I truly believe that a large amount of editing could make this a much better movie, and I would be willing to do it just out of love for the property itself! It would be fun and thrilling to take a shot at reediting the remake of one of my favorite movies of all time. How about it, Universal?

I had been wanting to watch this horror flick for awhile now, and finally rented it this weekend to give it a spin.

For those who aren’t familiar with it, The House of the Devil, directed by Ti West, is a throwback to 80′s horror films about a college girl taking a babysitting job for some quick cash. Of course, the jobs turns out to be a little different from what’s expected, and without ruining anything, let’s just say that the title ends up making sense by the end of the movie. At least, in a way.

The majority of the film is setup and tension. We’re introduced to our main character, Samantha, and get a brief glimpse of her current situation before heading to the house for the remainder of the film. She lives in a sucky dorm with a sucky roommate, and wants to get an apartment of her own. She found the perfect place, but needs some money for the down payment. Forget about subsequent payments, this is a true 80′s horror film where that kind of question doesn’t matter, we are concerned with the here and now. I dig that. As long as the movie delivers.

And The House of the Devil surely delivers. When she gets to the house with her friend, we start getting our first eerie feelings. She’s not babysitting a child, she’s babysitting “Mother.”

Well her friend leaves, and the night begins. There are plenty of surprises along the way (one of which was particularly gruesome and awesome) but for the most part it’s good old fashioned tension-building. She walks around in a dark house, exploring rooms out of that special mix of boredom and curiosity. And we keep waiting for “Mother” to appear behind one of those doors.

As time passes, clues begin to appear that something is very wrong about this house, and more for the viewer than Samantha, but she does get herself worked up enough to keep a knife handy at one point. You know, just in case.

I’m coming to get you, carrots…

And then it happens. The ending. It’s such a slow and smooth ascent during the film that you don’t know you’re at the crest of the wave until a fun series of shots makes sure you know without a doubt that you are sitting smack in the middle of the climax of this film, and shit done got serious.

The last ten or fifteen minutes are pretty wild and brutal and don’t let up. Then an amazing moment happens that you don’t see coming, and it would be the most perfect ending to the film, completely satisfying in every way and a great cap to the story.

Except then the moment’s ruined.

I can understand why. I’ve written my fair share of stories and had them reach a supreme moment of awesome, following up said moment with an ending that I feel to be the icing on the cake. The problem is, sometimes we get so attached to the icing we don’t realize we’re dealing with angel food cake. The effect of the end scene is great, it’s a nice horror ending, but rather than serving the story it seems to me that it serves the style of the story. It doesn’t amplify the effect on the viewer, instead it kind of dulls it down a bit.

After seeing the perfect moment to end it on (you’ll be able to tell when it happens, trust me), I was shocked and horrified and pleased and thrilled. Then the ending happened and I was irritated more than anything. It was kind of appalling, but its horror was overshadowed by its predictability and slow reveal. (You don’t spend your entire movie creating slow tension only to have it escalate into a frenzied climax and then cap it with a slow slow build into that final sputter). But that being said, I did like it.

Satan is a fan of pastels.

So what’s the final verdict? At least rent it, it’s worth seeing for sure. And if you dig it, buy it. It’s a good flick and an enjoyable time.