[Every since I took these Free Form posts off of Wednesdays because I did not want this and the LOST blog going up at the same time, I just forgot about them. It was my intention to put these up Fridays. Sorry if you needed them.]
Say whatever you want to in the comments to this post -- random, off topic thoughts, ideas, suggestions, questions, recommendations, criticisms (which can be anonymous), surveys, introductions if you have never commented before, personal news, self-promotion, requests to be added to the blog roll and so on. If I forget, remind me. Remember these comments can be directed at all the readers, not just me.
ALSO. You can use this space to re-ask me questions you asked me before that I failed to answer because I was too busy.
AND you can use this space to comment on posts that are old enough that no one is reading the comments threads anymore.
You do not have to have a blogger account or gmail account to post a comment -- you can write a comment, write your name at the bottom of your comment like an e mail, and then post using the "anonymous" option.
WRITING FOR THIS BLOG. If I see a big free form comment that deserves more attention, I will pull it and make it its own post, with a label on the post and on the sidebar that will always link to all the posts you write for this blog. I am always looking for reviews of games, tv, movies, music, books and iPhone apps.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Thursday, April 29, 2010
A Nightmare on Elm Street: The Remake
[My friend Lucas, obsessed with the original A Nightmare on Elm Street, discusses remaking his favorite movie. Welcome this new guest blogger, and whatever you do, do not fall asleep while reading this, because it would probably hurt his feelings.]
This weekend, Platinum Dunes, the Michael Bay-helmed production company behind remakes of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Amityville Horror, The Hitcher and Friday the 13th, is releasing its latest abomination: A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. I think it's safe to say that I am not pleased.
Before I lose myself in a harangue, I'd like to clarify two things:
1) This is not a review. I have not yet seen this movie. This is a preview. I have only seen the trailers and read articles and interviews about the movie. Thus, this piece is heavily steeped in presumption, and
2) my presumption is NOT that A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET will suck as a movie (that is my fucking prediction!), but rather that it will suck as a remake.
And here's why:
This weekend, Platinum Dunes, the Michael Bay-helmed production company behind remakes of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Amityville Horror, The Hitcher and Friday the 13th, is releasing its latest abomination: A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. I think it's safe to say that I am not pleased.
Before I lose myself in a harangue, I'd like to clarify two things:
1) This is not a review. I have not yet seen this movie. This is a preview. I have only seen the trailers and read articles and interviews about the movie. Thus, this piece is heavily steeped in presumption, and
2) my presumption is NOT that A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET will suck as a movie (that is my fucking prediction!), but rather that it will suck as a remake.
And here's why:
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Uncanny X-Men #266
[Jason Powell continues to look at every Claremont X-Men issue. Can you believe we are already at GAMBIT! God I loved that character when I was a kid. A dumb kid.]
“Gambit – Out of the Frying Pan”
More layers of duality emerge here, beginning with the title, which forms two pairs: First with the title of the previous issue (“Gambit” is matched with “Storm”) and then again with the next (“Into the Fire”). The introduction of Gambit himself – who, like Ororo, is a mutant and a thief – creates more parallels. Note how Dr. Shen’s predatorial sexual attraction to Gambit is set up as a mirror with the Shadow King’s for Storm; and that the old-male-mentor/young-female-protégé dynamic has two iterations here (Gambit/Ororo, Shadow King/Dr. Shen) and a third one off-panel (Wolverine/Jubilee).
The plot mechanics of the issue are in keeping with the motif as well, built on a structure of leap-frogging rescues between Gambit and Storm. Claremont’s feminism is at work here, as he attempts to keep the scales in rigorous balance between his favorite girl and the new, “cool” male character (a co-creation with Jim Lee which was plainly meant to appeal to the core, teenage-boy faction of the comic-book-readng audience). Gambit may be allowed to rescue the damsel in distress, but not without the damsel turning around and rescuing him two pages later.
Leap-frogging is occurring on the production level as well, as Michael Collins jumps back over Bill Jaaska to provide fill-in art for Uncanny 266. Given that this is Gambit’s first in-story appearance (his first published appearance having occurred a month earlier in the chronologically misplaced X-Men Annual 14), it seems odd that co-creator Jim Lee was not assigned as the penciller. Collins’ storytelling style is a bit stiff and inorganic here, drawing a bit too much attention to Claremont’s contrived multiple-rescue scenario (thus necessitating Gambit’s self-aware bit of dialogue: “I’ve lost track … who rescues whom next?”).
Still, the point gets across: Young Ororo has found herself a kindred spirit, clearly destined to be a new addition to the X-Men’s cast (and the last major character Claremont would contribute to the mythos).
“Gambit – Out of the Frying Pan”
More layers of duality emerge here, beginning with the title, which forms two pairs: First with the title of the previous issue (“Gambit” is matched with “Storm”) and then again with the next (“Into the Fire”). The introduction of Gambit himself – who, like Ororo, is a mutant and a thief – creates more parallels. Note how Dr. Shen’s predatorial sexual attraction to Gambit is set up as a mirror with the Shadow King’s for Storm; and that the old-male-mentor/young-female-protégé dynamic has two iterations here (Gambit/Ororo, Shadow King/Dr. Shen) and a third one off-panel (Wolverine/Jubilee).
The plot mechanics of the issue are in keeping with the motif as well, built on a structure of leap-frogging rescues between Gambit and Storm. Claremont’s feminism is at work here, as he attempts to keep the scales in rigorous balance between his favorite girl and the new, “cool” male character (a co-creation with Jim Lee which was plainly meant to appeal to the core, teenage-boy faction of the comic-book-readng audience). Gambit may be allowed to rescue the damsel in distress, but not without the damsel turning around and rescuing him two pages later.
Leap-frogging is occurring on the production level as well, as Michael Collins jumps back over Bill Jaaska to provide fill-in art for Uncanny 266. Given that this is Gambit’s first in-story appearance (his first published appearance having occurred a month earlier in the chronologically misplaced X-Men Annual 14), it seems odd that co-creator Jim Lee was not assigned as the penciller. Collins’ storytelling style is a bit stiff and inorganic here, drawing a bit too much attention to Claremont’s contrived multiple-rescue scenario (thus necessitating Gambit’s self-aware bit of dialogue: “I’ve lost track … who rescues whom next?”).
Still, the point gets across: Young Ororo has found herself a kindred spirit, clearly destined to be a new addition to the X-Men’s cast (and the last major character Claremont would contribute to the mythos).
Saturday, April 24, 2010
An Open Letter to Anthony Lane, in Response to his New Yorker Kick-Ass Review
[Major spoilers for Remember Me, and light spoilers on Kick-Ass, but the ending is not discussed. Lane does spoil it, so look out if you click through to his review.]
Dear Anthony Lane,
Nearly a year ago I wrote on this blog a response to your colleague David Denby for his review of Inglourious Basterds, in part because he felt the need to spoil the ending of a movie he did not like. In that open letter I mentioned something you did that bothered me: you spoiled the ending of the movie Watchmen, a movie you did not like. I have heard arguments that movie reviewers should be able to spoil movies, because now they are too straightjacketed by "rules." I am sympathetic to this. The ending of the movie is part of the movie, and as a reader I might need to know about it to understand if it is any good. I never really got into Seinfeld until the brilliant final episode, and it was a wrongly mailed to me copy of Entertainment Weekly that spoiled the season 2 ending of Alias for me and got me into that show -- and from there to LOST, a show I love. And a lot of times I want the review instead of the movie. I am never going to see Remember Me, but I totally wanted to hear about the absurd ending in which it turns out this dumb love story -- surprise! -- does not take place in the present day, but in 2001, and ends with our guy going up the Twin Towers the morning of September 11. So if you guys decided to open reviews up to discussing the endings, this could be a neat thing. It would put you ahead of the game maybe.
But the New Yorker has not done this. I know, because after your review of Watchmen your magazine printed a letter to the editor from a reader who was bothered that you spoiled the ending. This was, I think, a gentle rebuke from your editor surely. In printing the letter the New Yorker was saying "hey, we think this guy has a valid point." That may seem like a dumb thing to point out to someone like you, but the fact that you later spoiled the ending of Kick-Ass shows that you were unable to see that. And I don't think that you want to have a spoiler-ific discussion of movies anyway. I think you believe that movies should NOT be spoiled. That is why you only spoil movies like Kick-Ass and Watchmen -- movies you hate. You are spoiling these not for discussion, but for spite.
Dear Anthony Lane,
Nearly a year ago I wrote on this blog a response to your colleague David Denby for his review of Inglourious Basterds, in part because he felt the need to spoil the ending of a movie he did not like. In that open letter I mentioned something you did that bothered me: you spoiled the ending of the movie Watchmen, a movie you did not like. I have heard arguments that movie reviewers should be able to spoil movies, because now they are too straightjacketed by "rules." I am sympathetic to this. The ending of the movie is part of the movie, and as a reader I might need to know about it to understand if it is any good. I never really got into Seinfeld until the brilliant final episode, and it was a wrongly mailed to me copy of Entertainment Weekly that spoiled the season 2 ending of Alias for me and got me into that show -- and from there to LOST, a show I love. And a lot of times I want the review instead of the movie. I am never going to see Remember Me, but I totally wanted to hear about the absurd ending in which it turns out this dumb love story -- surprise! -- does not take place in the present day, but in 2001, and ends with our guy going up the Twin Towers the morning of September 11. So if you guys decided to open reviews up to discussing the endings, this could be a neat thing. It would put you ahead of the game maybe.
But the New Yorker has not done this. I know, because after your review of Watchmen your magazine printed a letter to the editor from a reader who was bothered that you spoiled the ending. This was, I think, a gentle rebuke from your editor surely. In printing the letter the New Yorker was saying "hey, we think this guy has a valid point." That may seem like a dumb thing to point out to someone like you, but the fact that you later spoiled the ending of Kick-Ass shows that you were unable to see that. And I don't think that you want to have a spoiler-ific discussion of movies anyway. I think you believe that movies should NOT be spoiled. That is why you only spoil movies like Kick-Ass and Watchmen -- movies you hate. You are spoiling these not for discussion, but for spite.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Lost Season 6, Episode 13: The Last Recruit
My latest LOST blog is up at Smartpop. Here is a sample. Click for more.
Even Jack’s son — who looked weirdly like his mini-me here, in a suit like his dad’s — has my attention. The kid is just too intense looking, with that rich dark hair, for such a young actor. At times he reminds me of Malachi in The Children of the Corn almost. It makes me think he is going to do something crazy, like be the Man in Black. It now looks like the thing that is going to bring everyone together at the hospital will be the birth of Claire’s baby (maybe Sawyer and Miles, with Kate tagging along, will let Sayid see his brother one last time). That would be pretty satisfying — especially if there turns out to be a connection between the dark haired and light haired cousins Aaron and David, Jacob (light hair) and the Man in Black (dark hair as Titus Welliver), and the light haired kid and the dark haired kid we have seen on the island. That could be a really great moment. Plus ending a show with the birth of a kid is just classic television. It can’t be a minor thing that that kid is left to wander the hospital while his dad is in surgery: the hospital is where everyone is. And we still don’t know who his mom is. Pregnancy and generations has been a big thing on this show — this is how to end it surely.
I am still not at all understanding the whole -- once you talk to him you are already compromised thing. Anyone have any thoughts on that.
Even Jack’s son — who looked weirdly like his mini-me here, in a suit like his dad’s — has my attention. The kid is just too intense looking, with that rich dark hair, for such a young actor. At times he reminds me of Malachi in The Children of the Corn almost. It makes me think he is going to do something crazy, like be the Man in Black. It now looks like the thing that is going to bring everyone together at the hospital will be the birth of Claire’s baby (maybe Sawyer and Miles, with Kate tagging along, will let Sayid see his brother one last time). That would be pretty satisfying — especially if there turns out to be a connection between the dark haired and light haired cousins Aaron and David, Jacob (light hair) and the Man in Black (dark hair as Titus Welliver), and the light haired kid and the dark haired kid we have seen on the island. That could be a really great moment. Plus ending a show with the birth of a kid is just classic television. It can’t be a minor thing that that kid is left to wander the hospital while his dad is in surgery: the hospital is where everyone is. And we still don’t know who his mom is. Pregnancy and generations has been a big thing on this show — this is how to end it surely.
I am still not at all understanding the whole -- once you talk to him you are already compromised thing. Anyone have any thoughts on that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
