Just More Proof On Exactly Why Zack Snyder Is One Of My Favorite People In Film And Why Joel Silver Sucks Ass...

Zack Snyder has been on my radar since I walked into the theater and plopped down my cash in the hopes of a mildly entertaining remake of George Romero's classic film Dawn of the Dead. Not only did I get that... I got way more! It was perfectly cast and extremely well shot, and basically started the whole 'zombies can move fast' sub genre. He followed that up with 300, which so blurred the lines of the 'Comics to Film' genre that at times during the movie I literally felt as if I was reading Frank Miller's classic comic panel for panel up on the big screen. After that, the kid could do no wrong in my eyes. Then it was announced that he would be heading up the big screen adaption of Watchmen. The Internet almost imploded in on its self, as an adaption of Watchmen had been kicked around for years and had names like Terry Gilliam as director and Joel Silver as a producer attached at various points. They were going to give this grail of a franchise to a nubie with two films under his belt? This seemed like a possible problem in the making. But to be honest, I was confident everything would work out A-OK. In my opinion I was more than correct...

Read More after the Jump....



Snyder turned out to be a huge comic nerd who had extreme reverence for the source comic book. He planned on making the film with the same precision and attention to detail that he had used when adaption 300... and he didn't care how long the movie ended up being. He planned on filming an animated accompaniment for The Black Freighter comic book story within a story from the original novel, as well as one featuring the early tales on the Minutemen. He had a plan for the finale, the one pitfall  that all the critics of a film adaption to Alan Moore's groundbreaking graphic novel always pointed out as impossible to translate to film. And he made it happen.

He cast a group of mostly unknown but perfectly matching actors for the roles of the Watchmen (with the exception of Billy Crudup most of them had minimal exposure prior to Watchmen and have become much bigger actors after) to act in the film, had a rock solid adaption in place, and was ready to make it all happen. Before filming the Internet was abuzz with how Snyder wasn't the right guys for the job... how a guy like Gilliam with his weird sensibilities would be perfect for the material, and that it was too deep and sprawling of an undertaking for a young dude like Snyder to handle. Turned out those people were idiots. The movie, in my humble comic book nerd opinion, is perfect. The changes are minor at best, and his ending (albeit slightly different from the comic) was close enough to be chalked up to cinematic necessity. He didn't just change shit to change it... everything that needed to be in place to convey the tone and feel of the original comic was present in the film. It was as close to perfect that I could have ever hoped for. And most people that I have encountered that know the original source material feel quite the same way. The film was a middling success, making a ton of moeny but not living up to the expectations (ie: HOPES) of a huge payout DC had dreamed of. Oh well.. doesn't mean the movie isn't great.

The Comedian is not amused at your criticism of his film !!!

Snyder has continued making movies of his own unique vision over the years, and with his role as producer on the long awaited 300 sequel 300: Rise of an Empire and as director of the upcoming Batman vs. Superman Snyder is back in front of the press and instead of them asking him questions about his upcoming projects they are still bringing up his work from the past... probably because ousted almost producer Joel Silver and guys like him are still taking shots at him every chance they get. The movie was filmed over 6 years ago, isn't it about time to let it go fellas?

In a recent interview with The Huffington Post to discuss his newest film, the Liam Neeson airplane thriller Non-Stop, Joel Silver couldn't help himself from taking shots at Snyder and his version of Watchmen. Silver talked out of his ass using quotes like Snyder was "too much a slave to the original material" and vowing that his and Gilliam's version would have turned out much better. This is ironic, considering Silver has been involved in his fair share of bombs over the years and Gilliam has many of his own difficulties getting his own films done. Since Snyder is himself on the circuit doing interviews for 300: Rise of and Empire, he was then asked to responded to Silver's assertions. As usual, Snyder did not disappoint!

Snyder found all of the comments laughable, but killed all of the noise with one simple comment. He said he made Watchmen for one reason and one reason only: He made the film for himself, and to save  it from guys like Silver and Gilliam. Wow. That is amazing. Ya see, Snyder was a comic fan long before he ever picked up a camera... and any REAL comic book fan knows how much reverence REAL comic book fans have for continuity and story lines. He was weaned on books like Watchmen... and these dudes thought they could have done better? Get the fuck outta here. Need more proof? Check out Silver's comments of about Gilliam's plans for the final act:

"Instead of the whole notion of the intergalactic thing, which was too hard and too silly, what he did was maintain that the existence of Doctor Manhattan had changed the whole balance of the world economy, the world political structure ... he had the Ozymandias character convince Doctor Manhattan to go back and stop himself from being created, so there never would be a Doctor Manhattan character. And in the vortex that was created after that occurred, these characters from Watchmen only became characters in a comic book".  

Even Dr. Manhattan is horrified by Gilliam's vision !!!

That is a direct quote from Joel Silver... and further proof that dudes don't know when to shut the fuck up nor what a real comic fan would want in their adaption of Watchmen. If you think people ripped apart the casting of Ben Affleck as Batman or Snyder's ending of Watchmen on the Internet, what would have happened if that above ending ended up in cinemas? I think Gilliam would have been ripped to shreds and Silver might have had a bunch of 'splainin to do. Snyder went on to say that these comments by Silver are just more proof that they would have butchered the property and that he is glad he did the film because he is a fan first. So if he could live with it, in his eyes most real comic fans could live with it too. I am truly grateful that real comic fans like Snyder and others are making more comic films these days, as they better represent guys like me and my comic loving sensibilities. Love ya Zack... can't wait to see Bat-Fleck and what you do with the DC Universe once again !!!

Here is a link to Snyder's Huffington Post Interview and Silver's interview from last month.

Roger Ebert: 1942 - 2013

I have loved movies for as long as I can remember. My dad made sure to share tons of films with me as a kid... no genre was safe, and he made sure to mix in early 80s contemporary movies like Q the Winged Serpent and Friday the 13th as well as classics like the Pink Panther films and anything with Audrey Hepburn. I have a ton of great film memories from when I was a kid... but one of my earliest memories was watching At The Movies with Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert.

Please read more of this story after the jump...

The weekly movie review show was must see TV, and the infamous 'Thumbs Up, Thumbs Down' rating system was simple and effective. When Siskel died back in 1999 he was replaced by Richard Roeper, and the show remained important... and the reason was Roger Ebert. He was the driving force, the reason why people turned in, and the voice that many generations of film fans turned to when they wanted an opinion on film. While I certainly didn't always agree with his choices (he hated the whole horror genre and often poo pooed genre films like comic book movies and action films), I always liked that whenever he expressed an opinion he was concise with a WHY he felt a certain way. it was never just a blanket "I hate this...". Nope, he always explained why he hated it... and often provided you with alternatives that he felt got the job done better. if he didn't like something he told you, but the also gave you a few things to seek out to see how much better it could be. I am definitely going to miss him.

One of the great parts of the Internet is the vast wealth of information that exists out there. Thanks to the Chicago Sun Times, Ebert leaves behind a huge plethora of his reviews over at his website, which can be accessed by clicking here. It seems that the last posted review he has on the site is for Stephanie Meyer's 'The Host', which he gave 2.5 stars. Get over there and check out all the great work he has done. The man is a cultural icon and should be revered. Rest In Peace Roger... thanks for all the tips and help with the movies I love so much!!!!    

'The Return of Mr. Plinkett' - Red Letter Media Takes On The Orginal Star Wars

Mr. Plinkett and the gang over at Red Letter Media became quite famous (or should I say infamous) for their scalding critiques of the three Star Wars prequels. Their diatribes are the blueprint for all Internet complaint videos and are legendary when it comes to geek culture. I always wondered why people love to bash new inclinations of old franchises (the Prequels, Prometheus, Wolverine Origins, etc) while revering the old material as if it were perfect. How come these guys don't pick apart the classics like they do the new films? Maybe because they don't want to admit that you can find fault in just about anything if you look hard enough. Well, Mr. Plinkett has decided to do just that, albeit in a bit of a different fashion. Instead of blasting every frame by frame VIDEO of the original Star Wars in a similar fashion that he did the prequels, Plinkett has created an audio track to accompany the original film. It is 2 hours long and from what I have read over at /Film is a bit easier on the criticism (not surprising there), but my interest is definitely piqued and I will eventually sync this up with the film to see Plinkett's thoughts. I would like them to go old school RLM and do a full on video for the first three SW films though. My guess is they won't because they will then lose credibility when they don't blast silly things like the Ewoks and the most deadly bounty hunter in the world dying via trip and fall.... but that is just my opinion. Check out the embedded audio tack after the jump....

In Defense Of Sucker Punch...

Ok... so I saw Sucker Punch, Zach Snyder's latest cinematic opus, over this past weekend. Ever since it came out on Thursday @ midnight, geek websites across the net have been running stories about it. I wanted to avoid all of them at all cost until I had seen the film myself, so I HAD to see it on Sunday because I could not continue to ignore some of my favorite sites for to long. I wanted to hear what they had to say... but wanted to experience it myself first.

Let me start off by saying I have been waiting on this one for quite a bit. Ever since I saw the first shots of Emily Browning and her gang of gorgeous misfits fighting dragons & nazi zombies. How could this be bad. Short skirts, knee highs, boobs, guns, swords, and villains galore. This seemed to be the makings of something that I not only wanted to see, I needed to see it.

***Please click Read more below to see more of my defense of Sucker Punch***

Checking in on Rotten Tomatoes, we find a interesting paradox. The critics bashed it, giving it a 20% fresh rating. Thats pretty bad. Beastly & Red Riding Hood bad. But on the same site, the audience members (people who actually PAY to see movies THEY WANT TO see) gave it a 62% rating. This gets me so fustrated. Movie critics are quick to bash a flick, especially if its in a genre that is out of their comfort zone or age bracket (ie: Horror movies almost always get shit on, comedies usually get panned despite the fact they are extremely humorous, and cartoon/comic book movies are judged against Casablanca-like movie standards of guys in their 50's/60's.) I usually don't listen to critics... I respect their opinion, but you can't ignore their long history of bias. Now, polling people coming out of the theater is a much better way to judge the flick. These people CHOSE this movie, BOUGHT tickets, and I want an opinion under these circumstances... they are not conforming or formulating a review. It comes down to facts... did they like it or not? Thats the kind of opinions I want.

This is where I come in. I personally loved Sucker Punch. But, being the realist that I am, I can see exactly why some people wouldn't. Thats something I do alot... I can easily formulate my own opinion, but I often wonder why other people feel a certain way. So here is my (spoiler free) opinion of the movie, followed by why most people probably won't/don't like it.

My Faves:

1. The Cast: Wow... just wow. The girls (Emily Browning, Abbie Cornish, Vanessa Hudgens, Jenna Malone, and Jaime Chung) were amazing, but its the supporting cast that gets me the most. Oscar Isaac is wonderful as the dispicable villain Blue, Carla Gugino was sexy and sophisticated as Madam Gorski, and Scott Glenn is as superb as ever as the girls guiding angel. Throw in Jon Hamm & the rest of the stunt actors, and I feel like Snyder got everybody in his cast just right.
2. So Baby Doll (Browning) can hypnotize people when she dances. Ok... so whats wrong with that? I have heard people bash the movie for not showing her dance. But guess what... this is when she enters the dream fantasy/fighting sequences. I can figure out what kind of dancing she is doing... I don't need to see it. Plus, how else could they segue into the fighting sequences?
3. Snyder's story is ambitious and takes chances... and original. These are qualities that are few and far between now-a-days in films. This is especially true in our beloved sub-genres. There are record number sequels, prequels, reboots & adaptions being made... and here comes a dude with an original idea, and they say its "too original". Wait... what? Just on original concept alone, people need to at least give this one a shot.
4. It's not all about Baby Doll. The supporting characters all play an important part in the culmination of the movie. They all play a part... and some become EXTREMELY important.
5. I like the look and feel of the flick. It has the feeling that it is set back in the day (creepy & spooky, dark) but once the girls jump into the fantasy world(s) shit gets super interesting. You get Fuedal Japan, Nazi Germany, The Middle Ages, and a futuristic Space World. With all of these locales, Snyder does them all justice... they all look visually stunning and took my breath away.
6. I like the way it ended up... not going to discuss it yet, but I liked the way Snyder closed it out.

Now for why I think some people will hate it:

1. Women protagonists: Say what you want, but most guys can't feel for a female lead. They my like the skimpy outfits, and love the gun and sword wielding beauties kicking ass... but they don't "feel" for their pain. The just don't get it, and that is one of the driving forces of the movie. Understanding why Baby Doll is in the asylum in the first place, why she constructs her plan for escape, and why events play out the way they do is the most important piece to LIKING this movie. If you don't make this connection, chances are you will either be indifferent to the movie or dislike it alltogether.
2. Ok, so its far fetched... SO??? It's a fantasy film. WTF? I don't get this. Most people say Raimi's 1st Spiderman film is pure genius (I agree), but why can we believe that a radioactive spider can bite a kid and give him spider powers? We can because its familiar to us, especially us nerds. EVERYONE KNOWS SPIDERMAN. But in this case, it's all new characters... and that would require thinking. Who are these broads, and why do they have the abilities they do? Nah... give me another cookie cutter superhero movie that the screenwriters will fuck up the origin story/costumes for. Thats so much easier.
3. Sucker Punch moves at a breakneck pace. Oh yeah... this is true. It is a mile a minute, balls to the wall action. Things you never would imagine in one scene (modern machine guns in WW I or II settings, dragons dogfighting with bi-planes, robots fistfighting with chicks) happen throughout. Whats so bad about this? Oh yeah, thats right... its new. Stuff that has never really been done before. Yeah, that probably sucks. Can we make another reboot please? WTF people. It's an ACTION movie... I want ACTION. I got that. I'm satisfied... why not you? If I wanted realistic and calm, I'd watch The King's Speech.
4.  No boobies. Yup, I was disappointed as well. The movie is high on sexuality, the costumes are just as hot as the women wearing them, and Jon Hamm/Oscar Isaac even give the ladies some male eye candy. I expected some boobs... meh. Not in the cards. But I can see why people would go in expecting tons of boobage and not getting any... I guess this might piss me off as well.
5. I won't discuss the ending here, but I will just say this was probably the most likely source of hatred towards the flick. I don't know why (I loved it), but can see why it would be a problem for others.

All in all, I thought it was great. Very original, high concept, well executed and shot, and overall good job. That is my opinion. I would say it is a solid 3.5/4 out of 5 stars. Don't agree? Tell me about it in the comment section below. Try to keep it spoiler free, and email me at mdevito730@gmail.com if you want the discussion to get spoilerific. I'm all ears... talk to me people!!!