Review – Queen Crab

I try to support Jimmy Palmiotti when I can. The guy is a class act all around and I very rarely dislike his output. This particular endeavor was a Kickstarter funded project that I went into completely blind based off of the faith I have in Jimmy’s creative potential. The guy has a sharp mind and a narrative style that I can really get behind. This particular book feels like something unlike what you normally get with a standalone graphic novel in that while it tells a complete story it leaves you with more questions than you may be willing to tolerate.

It’s a brisk read, not at all what you would call dense but featuring a lot of Palmiotti’s trademarks. The dialogue is raw and rugged, the characters are all flawed human beings that don’t fit into any easily identifiable category, and the crux of the narrative is centered around something far outside the realm of normalcy. The twisted sci-fi element of the book comes out of nowhere and is played completely straight, with little effort made to construct it as a mystery that needs to be unraveled. Instead it seems like a setup for that mystery to be handled later after the business at hand is taken care of. This doesn’t have the finality of something like Palmiotti’s “Random Acts of Violence” for example. It seems like an extended first issue of a comic book series that will run for a few issues before reaching a point of closure. I don’t know if there is any plan for further installments with the character because, as I said earlier, I went in completely blind. It’s not a book that everyone will love. It’s a book that will challenge even folks who are big fans of Palmiotti’s regular work.

But, the price tag is extremely reasonable and it’s a nice enough change of pace from the norm that I feel comfortable recommending it. Just know that your expectations are probably going to be subverted in some way because the book simply isn’t conventional in most respects and for that I have to give it a thumbs up.

The 2012 Queso Awards

Last night the Academy Awards happened. Like they do every year. And just like every other year the affair was a mostly tepid mediocre affair with a bland host telling bland jokes and films undeserving of praise walking home with what most would say is the pinnacle of acclaim. The relevance of the Oscars is debatable and while nobody will say that the opinion of a blog that gets perhaps a thousand hits per day at best is worth more than the collective wisdom of the academy, we are going to give a rundown of our picks for the top examples of cinema in 2011.

BEST PICTURE :

• Drive, d. Nicholas Winding-Refn
• Hanna, d. Joe Wright
• The Tree of Life, d. Terrence Malick
• Attack the Block, d. Joe Cornish
• Warrior, d. Gavin O’Connor
• Moneyball, d. Bennett Miller
• Martha Marcy May Marlene, d. Sean Durkin
• Shame, d. Steve McQueen
• Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, d. Tomas Alfredson

The Winner – DRIVE

Let’s be honest, it’s a ballsy movie and helped cement Ryan Gosling as a figure who will go on to be one of the next big leading men. Between his turn in this and Ides of March, he’s had a bang-up year and this was probably his finest hour.Drive is a haunting, melodious and violent magnum opus that works counter to expectation and delivers gut punches from start to finish. It’s a true rarity and I cannot gush over it enough.

BEST DIRECTOR

• Joe Wright, Hanna
• Terrence Malick, The Tree of Life
• David Yates, Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows pt. II
• Nicholas Wynding-Refn, Drive
• Martin Scorsese, Hugo

The Winner - Nicholas Winding-Refn

The direction in this film is top notch, along with just about everything else. But anyone who has seen any of Refn’s previous films knows the sort of tone and style he likes to set and withDrive he finally hit his apex with regard to his material matching his sensibilities. This is a masterwork and he deserves the recognition for it.

BEST ACTOR

• Rainn Wilson, Super
• Joel Edgarton, Warrior
• Ryan Gosling, Drive
• Michael Fassbender, Shame
• Gary Oldman, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

The Winner - Michael Fassbender

Probably the most powerhouse performance you could expect from any actor and somehow he was snubbed by the academy. Fassbender is on a roll and is on his way to being one of the most revered leading men in the industry and it is only a matter of time before he reaches the top of the a-list. Roles like this one are the reason why.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

 

• Alan Rickman, Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows pt. II
• Patton Oswalt, Young Adult
• Andy Serkis – Rise of the Planet of the Apes
• Albert Brooks, Drive
• Tom Hardy, Warrior
• Benedict Cumberbatch, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

The Winner - Tom Hardy, Warrior

Another actor who has been kicking all sorts of ass on his upward trajectory. He’s had two powerhouse roles this year in Warrior and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, both playing subtle and damaged characters who would have seemed overwrought in the hands of a lesser actor. By the time he shows up on screen as Bane in TDKR he’ll have a solid legion of new fans.

BEST ACTRESS

• Mia Wasikowska, Jane Eyre
• Ellen Page, Super
• Saoirse Ronan, Hanna
• Hayley Atwell, Capt. America – The First Avenger
• Elizabeth Olsen, Martha Marcy May Marlene
• Carey Mulligan, Shame

The Winner - Ellen Page, Super

Ellen Page plays a certain type 95% of the time. Here she plays so far against type that you suddenly find yourself uncomfortable. She was absolutely shocking in her role as the obsessed fangirl-turned-vigilante who partnered up with Rainn Wilson’s Crimson Bolt. The movie was a disturbing deconstruction of the realistic superhero genre of films and Ellen Page was one of the myriad of reasons it worked so well.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

• Kat Dennings, THOR

I’ll be honest, I can’t think of that many supporting actresses that wowed me this year and Kat Dennings was one of my favorite things about Thor so she wins this one by default. She shouldn’t get too cocky because 2 Broke Girls makes my head hurt.

BEST SCREENPLAY, ORIGINAL OR OTHERWISE

• Super, James Gunn
• Super 8, JJ Abrams
• Warrior, Gavin O’Connor, Anthony Tambakis, Cliff Dorfman
• Drive, Nicholas Winding-Refn, Hossein Amini
• Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Bridget O’Connor, Peter Straughan

The Winner - Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Adapting John Le’Carre’s sprawling novel into a comprehensible film is a herculean task. Considering that the previous adaptation of the material was a mini-series that ran several hours in length, that this film was so well put together is a damn marvel. It’s still somewhat dense and some would argue that it’s hard to follow, but like the best of all screenplays it challenges the viewer to keep up and the writing is sharp as a tack.

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY

• The Tree of Life, Emmanuel Lubezki
• Drive, Newton Thomas Sigel
• Contagion, Steven Soderbergh
• Mission Impossible – Ghost Protocol, Robert Elswit

The Winner – Drive

This was very close, as all the films I’ve listed were absolutely stunning. But the way L.A. was framed in Drive made it seem as if I’d never seen the city on screen before and the use of lighting was absolutely stunning. A masterclass in how to shoot a film.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

That’s it for this year. Feel free to let me know what your own picks for the best of the year were in the comments section. I’m sure there are some compelling arguments for many films and all of them make more sense than the picks of the academy.

Trailer Debut : The Bourne Legacy

Matt Damon walking away from the franchise didn’t seem to stop the producers from moving forward with another installment. Here’s the trailer for the new film The Bourne Legacy starring Jeremy Renner as the new protagonist. I have to say based off of what little the trailer offers that it could be a step up for the franchise because I could actually follow the action. The lack of “shaky-cam” alone is enough to get me in the theater but the addition of Edward Norton and Stacy Keach also pique my interest.

I can’t speak definitively but I could see this being just as good if not better than the previous three entries. I would actually be interested in seeing the series continue with new leads every couple of movies. Eventually they will have to drop the “Bourne” name but I’m sure they’ll find a way to keep the threads connected. I honestly would rather they continue the franchise with a new lead every so often than have to deal with an inevitable reboot/remake situation. We’ll see how things play out when the film hits later this summer. If it does as well as the Damon installments I expect to hear sequel talk pop up pretty quickly.

 

Trailer Dump and Subsequent Commentary

The Superbowl brought us a bevy of new trailers for some pretty important nerd properties. I probably should have commented on this sooner but my personal life has been taking a dramatic upswing in quality and I honestly didn’t even get to watch them until last night and, in the case of the new Amazing Spider-Man trailer, this morning.

All that you need to see are posted below and some of them impressed me more than I was expecting, especially that one for Spider-Man, because the initial teaser left me wondering if I should even bother seeing it in theaters. But that’s not the point. The point is that there are a bunch of new promos for some big nerd properties and you may now commence drooling.

THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN

AVENGERS

BATTLESHIP

G.I. JOE RETALIATION

JOHN CARTER

Observations: The Avengers sold me with the “We Have A Hulk” line. G.I. Joe looks like it’ll be cheesy fun that makes up for the first installment. Battleship looks like ass. John Carter looks like it will be a good film that gets passed over because it doesn’t really grab the attention of the viewer. They really should have kept the “Of Mars” in the title there.

Novel Review – Star Wars : Darth Plagueis

“Did you ever hear the Tragedy of Darth Plagueis the Wise? It’s a Sith legend. Darth Plagueis was a Dark Lord of the Sith, so powerful and so wise that he could use the Force to influence the midi-chlorians to create life. He had such a knowledge of the dark side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying.” —Supreme Chancellor Palpatine, Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith

That line didn’t really mean much when I saw Revenge of the Sith back when it was released in theaters. I always took it for a throwaway line meant to illustrate Palpatine’s ability to manipulate Anakin Skywalker by probing what he most wanted to hear. I didn’t really expect it to ever be explored in depth. I guess I should have known otherwise as every other aspect of the Star Wars timeline has been mined by the expanded universe over the years. What is particularly intriguing about this particular novel is how widely it deviates from what I expected in my mind. The above quote that inspired the novel seems to imply that Plagueis was an ancient figure, a “legend” as Palpatine says. However, we will come to find out over the course of the book that Plagueis was the sith lord who annointed Palpatine as Sideous and the events of his lifetime intersect with Anakin Skywalker’s youth. I don’t know about you, but the term “legend” doesn’t seem to apply much to guys whose major exploits only happened ten years ago. But I suppose I’m just projecting my own feelings on how they chose to retcon Plagueis into the events leading up to and during The Phantom Menace.

Viewed for what it is, the book is one of the better expanded universe entries I’ve read in a while. The timeline seems carefully constructed so that all the pieces fit together without conflicting all too terribly and the parts that get explained, such as Palpatine’s introduction to the world of the sith as well as the details of the rise of the Trade Federation all make for a better understanding of the Star Wars universe during the prequel era. I think that I would have enjoyed the book far more if they would have given it a different title. Plagueis at times feels like an afterthought to the story. This book is really about Palpatine, and because he is such an interesting character that can’t be viewed as a bad thing. The only negative is that while you get so invested in his narrative it is easy to be disappointed when the story breaks in other directions and seems to lose focus. But make no mistake, fans of the Star Wars universe will be able to overlook the small flaws and find an enjoyable read.

It takes a while to find its footing and every once in a while it will lose narrative focus, but overall it is something worth looking into. I will say that author James Lucerno does have a tendency to utilize some groan inducing references but his writing style is suited to the voices of these characters and this universe, so those minor grievances can also be overlooked.

Rating: 3.5/5

Ready or Not, Here it Comes : The Watchmen Prequels

Well folks, the hammer finally dropped. It looks as if DC comics has finally decided to unleash the prequels for Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons’ seminal classic Watchmen under the uninspired banner-title of “Before Watchmen.” We’ve been hearing rumors about this for quite some time and while initially it seemed like a bad joke, last year BleedingCool started running supposed concept art for the project that started getting yanked down at the request of DC, adding legitimacy to the ruView postmor and fanning the fires of speculation. The speculation has finally ended and the truth has come out.

Neither Alan Moore nor Dave Gibbons will be involved creatively in the project, with several mini-series being handled by a cadre of talent that ranges from exciting to unsettling. Alan Moore could probably care less about the development, as his feelings on the matter are pretty well established even if he did speak them in a magical language that only Alan Moore himself understands. Watchmen artist Dave Gibbons however gave a comment to DC’s The Source which broke the news today saying:

“The original series of WATCHMEN is the complete story that Alan Moore and I wanted to tell. However, I appreciate DC’s reasons for this initiative and the wish of the artists and writers involved to pay tribute to our work. May these new additions have the success they desire[.]”

So what can we look forward to in this little prequel installment? Here’s the rundown of all the titles:

RORSCHACH, a 4-issue miniseries by writer Brian Azzarello with art by Lee Bermejo
MINUTEMEN, a 6-issue miniseries with writing and art handled by Darwyn Cooke
COMEDIAN, a 6-issue miniseries by writer Brian Azzarello with art by J.G. Jones
DR. MANHATTAN, a 4-issue miniseries by writer J. Michael Straczynski with art by Adam Hughes
NITE OWL, a 4- issue miniseries by writer J. Michael Straczynski with art by Joe and Andy Kubert
OZYMANDIAS, a 6 -issue miniseries by writer Len Wein with art by Jae Lee
SILK SPECTRE, a 4-issue miniseries by writer Darwyn Cook with art by Amanda Conner

So how do I feel about all this?

Let’s be honest. Watchmen is an amazing book. It’s a classic and its importance to the world of graphic literature cannot be understated. It represents a shift in the way comics were written and understood and that does not change just because we’re getting more books with those characters by other creators down the line. The characters were hobbled from the Charleston universe and twisted into their own place by Alan Moore in the eighties. So while there is a standalone universe to Watchmen it isn’t necessarily an original invention. Getting angry that someone else wants to play in that sandbox when the entire medium is predicated on people further developing the ideas of others (at least in the mainstream superhero industry) just doesn’t work.

Let’s look at the lineup for the talent on this project for a bit. Brian Azzarello, Darwyn Cooke, and Amanda Conner are all folks who pretty much guarantee that I’ll pick up their work sight unseen because their track record is pretty stellar. I can tell you that I am indeed interested in Rorschach, Minutemen, Comedian and Silk Spectre based off of their involvement alone. I think they’re all talented writers and artists who could do something really interesting with these particular characters. Now, the x-factor here is Stracynski. He can be a phenomenal writer when he’s on top of his game. I loved his run on Thor and while he may have made some decisions I didn’t agree with over the course of his career many of those can be attributed to editorial meddling and I won’t delve into that quagmire here. Given the characters that he’s handling, I think Dr. Manhattan is certainly something he could mine some good material out of. Especially if he hits the same notes he was while writing Thor. Nite Owl is a little trickier. If I’d had my way I would have had someone like Greg Rucka on that particular title. But I’m not in charge and at this point all I can do is speculate about how all of this is going to turn out.

As I’ve said, my main issue here isn’t with the fact that we’re getting prequels. It’s not inheritly a bad thing. What I am afraid of is that the stories they are going to tell won’t match up with what has been brewing in the fan culture’s subconscious for several decades and that the whole project will flounder as a result. I can’t help but draw parallels to the Star Wars prequels which saw a great deal of hype only to be cut down by fanboys who didn’t like the direction the franchise took. But at least in that instance the fans could point the finger at George Lucas and say he ruined his own creation. This time around we have the added buffer zone of it being separated from the original creators. If people don’t like it they will try to say that it’s not “canon” or that it “doesn’t matter.” Which is, in a way, a double edged sword. It lacks the legitimacy of having the original creators involved and that is either a great thing or a horrible thing depending on which way you look at it. I mean, Frank Miller himself handled the followup for The Dark Knight Returns and that was absolute garbage. I know we put Alan Moore on a pedestal sometimes but I think in this instance the talent involved is enough to warrant the community keeping an open mind.

Happy New Year!

Hey guys, its a whole new year and the beginning of my third year writing for this site. I started this blog back in January of 2009 if you can believe it and we’ve seen some AMAZING growth since then, despite the fact that I’ve seemingly had less and less time to dedicate to the site. I plan on trying to force myself into updating regularly, because I’m paying for the site to stay up so I might as well strive to provide new content, right?

That having been said, I’m going to be taking the next few weeks off to try to reconfigure the site into something more in line with what I’d like it to be. We’re going to be implementing new aspects to the site that just won’t work with how it’s being run now so it’s time to make a few upgrades. I’m sure you all will be happy with the changes that are coming.

Here’s to a great 2012!

Christmas Review – Batman: Noel

I picked this one up as a Christmas special. Figured it would be a nice little diversion as most DC graphic novels are. Azzarello and Bermejo’s Joker hardcover was fun and I still have the Teen Titans: Games hardcover sitting on my desk. I’ve often had debates over why DC and Marvel don’t invest more heavily in single-serving graphic novels considering how easy they are to promote and build buzz around. The general public is far more likely to pick up a graphic novel than get hooked on individual monthly issues. I remember when Earth One came out everyone seemingly lost their shit over it and it went to multiple printings. It seems to me if you want to entice new readers you should try to cater to them in a format they enjoy. I don’t think that DC and Marvel need to curb their monthlies altogether but I’ll be damned if they’re not shooting themselves in the foot by dragging their feet on graphic novel production. I know artists are somewhat hesitant to jump on-board graphic novels because they would rather get paid their monthly page-rate but I’m sure there’s a compromise there somewhere that could mean big business for the comic publishing world.

Batman : Noel is a pretty good little graphic novel. Lee Bermejo does double duty on writing and art, though Charles Dickens should get a writer credit seeing how this is a pretty direct adaptation of A Christmas Carol even if they didn’t use the title. The story centers around Bob, a lowly runner for the Joker who has a chance run-in with Batman who in the context of this story exemplifies the persona of Scrooge. They really play up the “Batman is a bastard” angle here. I have to say that it’s not the sort of Batman I normally enjoy reading. Too dour, too tied to Frank Miller’s insanity and grumpiness. It would have been a complete turnoff if not for the fact that it was done to serve the purpose of the narrative. I mean, we’re all familiar enough with Dickens’ work to know that he’ll have a change of heart in the end.

The fun of Noel is in Bermejo’s use of Batman’s cast of characters to fill slots in the Dickens lore and the beautiful artwork that he does it with. Say what you will about the book, it is hard to deny that the artwork is anything less than stunning. The layouts, the finishes, the colors…all of it comes together to create something that truly pops. If you were to show this to someone who doesn’t read comics regularly, you can bet your sweet ass they would be impressed. It is some of Bermejo’s best work. It’s vibrant and eye-catching in a way that his work in something like Joker wasn’t. While that artwork was still impressive, it was a muddy, dark blotch. It was too dark to truly impress. Here you get a real feel for how good Bermejo really is.

I admit that the pricetag is a bit hefty for the story content, but it’s a good read and something that I’ll probably pull out around this time each year just for a lark. I would say that’s enough to give it a hearty recommendation.

RATING: 7/10

Film Review – The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (2011)

I am going to begin this review by saying that I started the novel on which this film is based and never finished it. I thought it was poorly written and more than a little dull. Don’t bombard me with hatred over it, it is only a matter of personal preference. I thought, structurally speaking, that it wasn’t very well constructed and it doesn’t deserve the praise that gets heaped upon it. It is a lot like The DaVinci Code in my eyes. A book that garners a lot of attention due to manufactured controversy with the actual content between the covers being average at best.

That having been said, I have seen the original film adaptation and felt that all of the problems with the book were still present on film and that it was highly unlikely that they could be fixed without a major overhaul. When talks of the remake started popping up I wasn’t interested simply because of my problems with the novel and the original adaptation. I figured that a remake wouldn’t help those problems and that the film wouldn’t be worth my time. Then I found out that David Fincher would be involved and that the cast included Rooney Mara, Daniel Craig, and Stellan Skarsgard. I was starting to think that perhaps there could be something there of interest to me. I heard rumors that the script by Steve Zaillian deviated quite a bit from the source and that Fincher would be doing a true “adaptation” rather than a direct translation from book to screen. I began to put my trust in a film that I could be forgiven for dismissing.

Then the trailers started to hit and I’ll be damned if it didn’t look like a real Oscar contender of a film. Fincher had seemingly crafted something stunning in terms of texture and mood that hooked me in and really made me want to sit down and watch with an open mind. I went in willing to give the material a fair shot and be proven wrong in regards to my feeling that the story was a dull, plodding mess that strove for intricacy but collapsed under its own sense of grandeur and intrigue.

I will say that this adaptation has mood and texture in spades. It is a well made film. It’s crafted and acted in a way that really is quite amazing. Rooney Mara gives a performance that really showcases her range and subtlety and Daniel Craig does a great job handling the part handed to him. The problem with the film, once again, is that the story is a muddled, dull, and honestly not-that-interesting mess. The narrative is extremely disjointed in the first hour and a half and by the time Craig and Mara finally pair up I had pretty much lost patience with the flow of the story. If someone like Fincher who did such an amazing job weaving the narrative of a film like Zodiac has trouble with something as pedestrian as this you know there’s a problem. The film really did not need to be as long as it ends up being and calling it a slog is being a bit generous. As an acting showcase it’s quite interesting but as an overall film it’s a disaster.

Fans of the novel will probably be pleased with this American adaptation but I can’t muster much excitement about it. I had hoped that Fincher could pull together the parts that did work in the novel and weave them effectively into a manageable film but what he released is a choppy, disjointed, over-long mess and I can’t really say that it was worth the money it took to make with the original Swedish version doing everything this one did. The only difference is a perceived upswing in production value and I do think that Craig did a better job in his part than his Swedish counterpart (who incidentally played the villain role in Mission Impossible : Ghost Protocol and didn’t really bring much to the table there either).

Sad to say, this was a real disappointment, even looking through the lens of my initial low expectations. Hopefully Fincher will put out something with the same sort of zing that The Social Network had before getting locked into the sequels for this because I’m almost certain that my sentiments will not be echoed by the majority of people who will see this and consider it cinematic gold.

RATING: 4/10

Film Review – Mission Impossible : Ghost Protocol

Before anyone asks, yes I did see it in the IMAX format and yes I did see the Dark Knight Rises prologue. I’ll have a little editorial about that up in a little while. But this entry is specifically about MI4.

Let me start out by saying that I enjoyed this entry far more than any of the other films in the series. I guess number three comes closest. I think that the direction Abrams took the franchise and the followup work done by Brad Bird here on the fourth film is closer in line with my sensibilities than the first or second installments. I liked the first Mission Impossible and still regard it as a solid action/thriller. The second one kinda flew off the rails. I don’t hate it the way some folks do but I don’t think that it really worked. Part three was a damn good movie, and though JJ Abrams directing was a little shaky it did an admirable job of getting the series back on the right track.

Ghost Protocol shifts a little bit in style but retains much of JJ Abrams sensibility. Not surprising considering he stayed on as a producer. The film still hinges on the team-based operations that were jettisoned in MI2 and brought back to the forefront in part three. This time around we get much more of scene stealing Simon Pegg, as well as the added bonus of Paula Patton who looks a lot like Rashida Jones and I think my feelings on her are pretty well documented, and Jeremy Renner coming in and doing a bang-up job all around. Based on the trailers and online speculation I was prepared not to like Renner’s inclusion and was fearing that his purpose would be utterly cliche but the film wisely avoids all of that and instead works on molding him into the dynamic in a way that doesn’t feel forced. He adds something different to the group much in the way that Cruise, Pegg, and Patton do. They all have distinct character traits and each serves a function. I rather enjoyed that.

I have to say that never once was I bothered by Tom Cruise. Every once in a while in a film he’ll do something that completely takes me out of the moment and ruins the effect. Here he does a good job of reminding people why he rose to prominence as a leading man in the film industry in the first place. Despite all of his faults, he can hold a film together quite well and this is definitely a return to form for him. It’s been a while since I’ve enjoyed one of his movies so this was a nice change of pace in that regard.

The real star of the film however is Brad Bird, who has an eye for shooting action scenes unlike any other working director. His sense of direction doesn’t have the limited scope of his peers due to his long-standing work in the animation field. This being his first time working in live action I would have been prepared to overlook any sense of awkwardness he may have had behind the camera but he really knocked it out of the park. The only sequence I will question his judgement on was the chase through Dubai set during a sandstorm. In theory it seems like a cool idea but on camera you can’t really see too much and the kinetic energy of the moment gets lost in the confusion. That minor gripe aside, the film is spectacularly framed and a beauty to behold on an IMAX screen.

I would say this is probably your best bet for a good time in the theaters this December. Tintin looks promising but could swing either way and I doubt people will be seeing Dragon Tattoo for a lark. Best to slap down some money for this and enjoy yourself with a big fat grin on your face.

RATING: 8/10