WATCHMEN review
Posted by Jim at 1:24am.
Posted in Film & DVD Reviews , Exploitation, Thriller, Cult, Drama, Action, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, USA & Canada.
The comic book series was a jarring, mature-themed milestone. Its effects on popular culture have been undeniable. And now, finally, after many aborted attempts to bring the landmark story to the big screen, it’s finally happened. “Watchmen” is a movie. By now, most of us probably know the basic premise – it’s an alternate version of 1985, one in which super heroes are real, but were long ago banned. The ramifications of that include everything from Richard Nixon continuing on and on as the president of the United States, to a superhuman factor in the U.S./Soviet arms race. The fans of the book will generally be happy with this movie – I should know, I am such a fan, and in the dark of the theater, I loved nearly every moment of this meticulously detailed adaptation. All 163 minutes of it. My non-fan wife, on the other hand, found it long and mostly non-engaging. Ambitious, yes, and definitely worthwhile, if only for the spectacle of it all. But aloof and remote, all the same. Upon further reflection, in the harsh light of the theater lobby and beyond, I can see her point.
Complete with all of the unhealthy trappings we’ve come to expect from a “Friday the 13th” film, comes this reasonably pleasing, polished new remake. Despite director Marcus Nispel and producer Michael Bay’s attempts to somehow retain the key qualities of the original “Friday the 13th” series while simultaneously stripping away its primal allure in favor of a false “grungy gloss”, this rebooted, re-imagined, re-done version (call it what you will) is imminently watchable. That’s more than can be said for the previous Nispel/Bay horror remake, 2003’s unevenly grimy “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre”. 
To all my fellow critics out there, and anyone who’s felt the need to prop this film up – come on people, is this movie really that great?? I have to admit, having finally gotten a chance to see this year-end cinematic critical darling; I’m a little bewildered. Where most see brilliance, I see the wrong kind of artifice, and feel ambivalence. But I’ll get back to that. For starters, I’ll toss out some other semi-random thoughts that the experience of “Revolutionary Road” inspired…
1. The Dark Knight
1. The Happening
I didn’t expect to be surprised by “Punisher: War Zone”, the latest comic book movie sequel that no one asked for. So, was my face ever red upon leaving the theater. Not from all the gratuitously splattered blood, mind you, no, it was actually from laughing so hard. Who know the Punisher could be so funny? That’s right, folks, “Punisher: War Zone” is the most unintentionally hilarious film I’ve seen in a long time. Exploding hooligans… Joel Schumacher’s “Batman” color palette… Bad over-acting by the truckload… Muddled religious overtones… All directed by a world-renowned kickboxing champion! What more could anyone want in a compulsively watchable horrible movie?
Poor production value and a weak story – most everyone knows those are long-standing tenants of your average adult film. Enter Kevin Smith, everyone’s favorite purveyor of foul-mouthed, stitched-together comedies produced with Hollywood money. He is the standard bearer for hilariously raunchy dialogue, which always finds itself set amid stories with a mushy soft center. Up until now, Smith has been a say-it-don’t-show-it kind of filmmaker, and with great success for the most part. As one may surmise from the title, his latest, “Zach and Miri Make a Porno”, crosses his established line. The film dishes up a notable share of skin and sex, (none of it ever actually sexy, might I add,) and as it turns out, Smith’s sleazy aesthetic is a lot more fun when we don’t have to actually see the grotesque acts in question. But the true deal breaker here is the tired and trite boy-gets-girl, boy-loses-girl, etc.” plot at the film’s overly sappy core. With this film, Smith has in effect, delivered the Hollywood equivalent of an adult film – his standard poor production values, and a weak story.
Quick, when the mainstream media opts to cover a comic book convention, who are the attendees they swarm to? You know the answer to this – they go after the most obvious, geekiest fans; the guys who are often in homemade costumes. Such is the way of Larry Charles’ (“Borat”) new documentary/comedy, “Religulous”. To be fair, “Religulous”, by all accounts, actually belongs to its star and writer, Bill Maher. Over the years, Maher has built a name for himself first as comedian (a very good one), then as a political commentator of sorts (an often controversial one). This film follows the ever-skeptical Maher on a global trek with the mission of taking on various religions of the world. “Religulous” (an aside – could they get a worse title?!? This one is not just hard to pronounce, it’s hard to type.) is both funny and thought-proving as it stirs its pot of absurdity. The movie is never dull, and that’s saying something, considering that world religions can be some of the driest material one can deal with. But perhaps that’s the problem with “Religulous” – in the filmmakers’ attempts to simultaneously entertain and provoke, they’ve reduced a very serious and personal topic to a series of punch lines and quirky exchanges.
On October 24-26, St. Louis, MO is finally getting a full blown horror convention - The Monstrous Weekend! - and it sounds like something not to be missed! Kitbuilder’s Magazine is putting on the show, featuring a “Night of the Living Dead” 40th Anniversary reunion, with many of the film’s key on and off screen talent, including director George Romero. Also scheduled to appear are Tura Satana, Tom Savini, Adrienne Barbeau, and Dee Wallace. In addition, they’ve got some great activities planned, with seminars, classes, displays, and of course contests and a dealer’s room. With weekend passes starting at a very reasonable $34, this looks like great way to get your Halloween freak on. 
Just when you thought it was safe to close the book on George Lucas’ galaxy far, far away, a new “Star Wars” film is arriving in theaters. Granted, prior to having seen it, this latest entry in the saga had a few things going against it. First and foremost, although it is “Star Wars”, thereby assuring my interest (on some level) as a lifelong fan, it is “The Clone Wars” – a once enigmatic period of Star Wars history that has since been well covered in a wide variety media. The best of those efforts, Genndy Tartakovsky’s “Clone Wars” animated shorts, were considered by many to be superior to the prequel trilogy which spawned them. Those shorts did a wonderful job of bridging the gap between Episdes II and III. 
I wanted to believe the hype - in this case the ever-so strategically implemented reveal-NOTHING promotional campaign - that the return of the “X-Files” would be a cinematic event worth celebrating. For such a super-secret hush-hush summer film, it’s rather surprising that “The X-Files: I Want to Believe” turns out to merely be a modest, and unfortunately, inconsequential film. Like “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull” earlier this summer, “X-Files” is an under-baked effort that clearly intends to coast on a loyal fan base that is hungry to see their favorite characters in action once again, regardless of overall quality. For those people, the film may be marginally more enjoyable than it will be to the so-so fan, or non-fan. I’d count myself in one of those latter categories – never a rabid fan, but someone who’s seen enough “X-Files” to know that the show was capable of soaring to great heights, albeit also aware of it’s ultimate, maddening implosion – and for me, this film never fulfilles the promise of the series. This should have been the ultimate stand-alone “X-Files” episode. All of this is particularly disappointing, considering that the creator and mastermind of the series, Chris Carter, is not only the film’s co-writer, but also its director.
Anyone stating that Hollywood is creatively tapped out has obviously failed to account for Guillermo del Toro. At the risk of sounding cheese ball, raw imagination consistently comes to life in his films, and “Hellboy II” is the strongest example of this to date. Falling comfortably instep with 2004’s original “Hellboy”, yet managing to push the concepts and characters into entirely new places, this is a worthwhile sequel that constructively builds upon an already firm foundation, most notably its innovative comic book source material by creator Mike Mignola. Unfortunately when it comes to the box office in this already super hero-crowded summer, this film will no doubt find itself trying to live up to the name of its comic publisher - Dark Horse. But then again, the first film survived an uphill battle for recognition, resulting in an extended cut DVD re-release, a couple of great animated movies, and of course this sequel. So hopefully audiences will be willing to look beyond “Wall-E” and “Hancock” to throw the Big Red One a little love.
“Get Smart” is, hands down, the greatest film of the year. Oh, you think I’m lying? Would you believe… that it’s best comedy of the year so far? How about, that it’s probably the best major comedy to be released this week?
“There’s something happening here
The Hulk is back and this time he means business. And by business, I mean box office. If Ang Lee’s 2003 effort was the “artsy” Hulk movie that pleased nobody, (present company excluded, actually,) this is the Hulk movie that’s out to please everybody. The makers of this film have made darn sure to bring the elements that so many longed for, but were denied the first time around - and to leave out all that annoying psychological exploration that Ang Lee is so fond of. So, prepare yourself for the kind of cinematic property damage that you can only find on this scale between late May and early August. This is the “Hulk Smash!” Hulk of the classic comics, but infused with the 1970’s “Incredible Hulk” TV show origin, among other things. 