Robin Hood & Expectations

Warning: This review contains minor spoilers!

Last Friday night I saw an excellent film, Robin Hood. The cast was great, the story well-told, and the production design and cinematography excellent. However, this same film has a mere 45% on Rotten Tomatoes. The main thing generating the negative reviews, I think, is that this simply isn't the Robin Hood movie those reviewers wanted to see. 

Roger Ebert, for one, writes that this film  "is a high-tech and well made violent action picture using the name of Robin Hood for no better reason than that it’s an established brand not protected by copyright." Mr. Ebert was apparently expecting a swashbuckling, tight-wearing, quippy archer from the glen. Not a problem by my standards, I watched Men in Tights the night before I went to the theater to watch Ridley Scott's version. I understood going in that this was a Batman Begins or Casino Royale style reimagining, taking a fantasy character like Batman or Bond, and placing him a more realistic operating world. I thought that was quite clear from the marketing. 

And here's my retort to the thought that Robin Hood should remain typecast as Errol Flynn: There is room for this character to exist in various interpretations all at the same time, not unlike the aforementioned Batman and Bond. I watched the BBC Robin Hood series a couple times and enjoy it, and I think that is also quite different from the other versions of the character. I don't think we need another Errol Flynn Robin Hood. I'm quite glad we got this version.

Another brief note: I don't think version is as "gloomy" as people are saying. I thought there was actually a fair bit of comic relief. I will also say Robin's speech had a tear in my eye. 

I think what enjoyed most, beyond just the sheer gorgeousness of the film (I need a Blu Ray player for this one!) was placing Robin Hood in a full historical context. Sure it glosses over things and mucks with the timeline a bit, but this is a two hour movie and not a 1200 page novel. And a damn fine movie it is. I'm sure part of this bias is my love for anything medieval, but I think if you're inclined to see this movie, and go in with an open mind, you'll find something to love. 

Man, I hope we get a sequel. And bring on the Director's Cut! 

Related: The journey this film took from "Nottingham."

Time to Boycott 3D

I want to open this post by saying I have enjoyed seeing movies in 3D. I've seen Avatar, Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, U23D, and the Toy Story double feature, and most of all Coraline, which I still think is the best use of the format. 

Now, however, I am going to call for a total boycott of 3D screenings. The reason for this is twofold, but let me first explore the reasons behind the seemingly sudden rise of 3D. The main reason, of course, is money. As far as I know, one of the chief people behind it is James Cameron, who envisioned his epic Avatar in 3D everywhere. But what really matters here is money. Avatar didn't become the highest grossing movie of all time by being seen by the most number of people, or being the best, it did because it had the highest per-ticket dollar amount ever. 

As less people go to the theater, 1000% marked up popcorn isn't enough for the theater chains to feel like they make enough money. So 3D seems to make people willing to pay a higher ticket prices. So here we have two upward pressures on 3D: both the studios and the theater chains see more money in 3D, so we get more 3D movies. 

Honestly, I don't really have a problem with this. I don't mind paying slightly more if I feel I'm getting more value added to the experience. However, as I said on Twitter, this recent price hike on 3D screenings "is some bullshit." A regular ticket at my usual theater costs 10.50. I believe I paid 14.50 to see Avatar in 3D Imax. Had I seen How to Train Your Dragon in the same theater this weekend, it would have cost me a whopping $17.50, or 166% of the regular ticket price! I usually don't pay that much to own a movie on DVD! And people wonder why I prefer to go dutch. 

The only way I see to stop this is to boycott 3D all together. That's what I'm doing, because I can't afford it. 

My Favorite Movies of 2009

As of this writing, I saw at least 47 films eligible for this year’s Academy Awards, all but one of them in the theater. That’s well more than double last years total (yes, I’m obsessive about some things. I keep a list) and just reinforces to me that going to the movies is one of my favorite pastimes, even if popcorn is way too expensive. 

I’ve managed to see nine of the ten Best Picture nominees in the theaters, though I’ll probably be skipping The Blind Side.  That definitely meets one of my post-Oscar resolutions from last year, although this accomplishment may have more to do with finding a regular movie-going partner than anything else.  The Oscars are the reason this post was delayed from December, because I don’t live in LA or New York, so I have to wait to see some of these films to hit the small town theaters of Philadelphia in order to see them.  I’ll have an Oscar predictions post closer to the ceremony, but here are my favorite films of the year, regardless of whether they are touched by Oscar’s gold glow.

 

Best Movie of the Year: Inglourious Basterds

Basterds is my favorite kind of movie—Tarantino aside for a moment—it’s an action movie with a brain. The best action movies are not only smart in how they show action, but also that you care about the outcome and the characters. Not only is Basterds excellently written, with sharp dialogue, and an intricate plot, but what really makes this movie work is two things: One, the well-defined but not shallow characters, and Tarantino’s newfound mastery of suspense. As a total package, this was the best movie-going experience I had all year.

 

Most Gripping Performance (Actor): Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

It’s no secret that Waltz is one of the major reasons why Basterds works so well. Every time he was on screen, the tension ramps up immediately, as everyone on screen and in the audience knows that they are in the presence of evil genius. Also, I feel bad to say this, but he even beat out Robert Downey, Jr. as having the best on-screen Sherlock Holmes this year, though his character is morally aligned with Moriarity.

 

Most Gripping Performance (Actress): Mo’Nique, Precious

All I have to say about Mo’Nique performance is that I left seeing Precious having to immediately acquire a new pair of pants.

 

Best Comic Book Movie: Watchmen

This pretty much wins by default, beating out the awful Wolverine and the rumored-to-be-worse Whiteout.

 

Best Action Movie: Sherlock Holmes

I’m so happy Guy Ritchie found something worthwhile to apply himself to, and Robert Downey Jr. once again makes it look easy to have fun at the movies.

 

Best Sci-Fi Film: Moon

This is exactly why I’m excited about the costs of technology coming down. Moon and District 9 both are shining examples of how this can lead to quality “hard” sci-fi at a low budget. What puts Moon over the top is the performance of Sam Rockwell, who basically carried the whole movie and pulled it off.

 

Most Overlooked Movie: The Brothers Bloom
I love con movies. And I love movies that feel literary. So a lighthearted literary con movie (featuring Rachel Weisz, one of my favorite actresses nonetheless) was too much to pass up. It’s criminal that this movie wasn’t more widely seen, and at the very least, I will force feed this movie to as many of my friends as possible. It’s my new favorite camel.

 

Best Actor: George Clooney

I’m stunned. Until this year, I’ve only liked Clooney in the Ocean’s movies and under the tutelage of the Coens. However, this year gave me three fantastic movies all starring George Clooney. First was Men Who Stare at Goats, a fantastic tour of the American military and psi-ops, then followed Fantastic Mr. Fox (more on that soon), and Up in the Air, another Jason Reitman triumph. He had a fantastic year. Runner up: Jeff Bridges for the aforementioned Goats and Crazy Heart.

 

Best Actress: Meryl Streep

Like Mr. Clooney, Meryl Streep had an excellent year, also with three movies that I very much enjoyed. Not only was she in Fantasic Mr. Fox (as the wonderful Mrs. Fox), but also Julie and Julia, easily the most delicious move of the year. It’s Complicated looks like an also-ran in this company, but it had a great cast, and I suspect part of my faults with it may be my age relative to the main cast.

 

Best Film Based on a Children’s Book: The Fantastic Mr. Fox

I love this movie. It’s completely wonderful in every way. Funny, heartfelt, touching, suspenseful, and artfully made, as well as boasting a great soundtrack, it may be Wes Anderson’s best movie, and features a great cast of Anderson Players and newcomers. A complete joy to watch. Runner up: Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs

 

Best Romantic Comedy: (500) Days of Summer

A great film that dances around and through genre tropes with death-defying ease, bolstered by the charming performances of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel. I haven’t seen this movie in six months, and I still think about scenes in this movie on a weekly basis.

 

Best Movie I Had to be Talked into Seeing: The Informant!

I went into this movie completely expecting not to like it, but I came out positively raving. Matt Damon’s performance as Mark Whitacre was severely overlooked this awards season. Runner up: Julie and Julia

 

Best Franchise Movie: Star Trek

Such a venerable franchise had fallen by the wayside until JJ Abrams gave Trek it's groove back. Playful, sexy, and fun, this is a Trek I can't wait to take again. This is how you do a reboot. Enough fan fodder to make it feel like the property, but ground-floor enough for everyone else.  

Here’s my Top Ten:

10. An Education

9. Julie & Julia

8. Whip It!

7. The Hangover

6. Up in the Air

5. Up

4. (500) Days of Summer

3.  The Brothers Bloom

2. Fantastic Mr. Fox

1. Inglouriuous Basterds

My Favorite Movies of the Past Decade

Here are my favorite movies of the past ten years. In alphabetical order:

Children of Men
Easily the best sci-fi movie of the past decade, this movie took the dystopia and made it feel real. Alfosno Cuarón is an amazing director, and manages to balance the movie’s realistic and gritty feel with it’s sci-fi elements and deeper themes, like a fantastic Christian allegory. The action is also shown in a great way, and the chase shot alone is something to be studied.  Brilliant. 

High Fidelity
One of the more serious movies in the “chick flicks for dudes” genre, High Fidelity is one of the best movies I have ever seen about love and loss. In this movie based on the book by Nick Hornby, Rob Gordon (John Cusack) recounts his “Top Five” breakups in a quest to figure out why he is aging and miserable. Along the way, he discovers that he isn’t miserable because of his relationships, but because of how he feels about his own life. Rob owns a record store, so the movie has an awesome soundtrack, and a wonderful caricature of record store workers in Todd Louiso and Jack Black’s Dick and Barry. 

The Incredibles
Half of this list could have easily been Pixar output, but the reason this reigns supreme is that it’s the best superhero movie of the decade, and manages to do the Watchmen story on screen better than the movie that straight-up adapted the comic book. It’s the best Fantastic Four movie ever made, with both nonstop action and heart through and through. 

Inglourious Basterds
I think Brad Pitt’s character Aldo Raine sums up this movie perfectly. Towards the end of the movie he says, “I think this might just be my masterpiece.” This is Quentin Tarantino’s masterpiece. It combines perfectly his mastery of dialogue with the building of suspense in such a way that makes this film a Hitchcockian thrill ride from start to finish. It’s a Bingo!

The Italian Job
I love heist movies. Especially smart ones, and there are few smarter ones that 2003’s remake of the Italian Job. What really shines here is the excellent ensemble cast led by Mark Wahlberg and Charlize Theron, allowing the movie’s thriller and comic tones to work equally well. 

Lord of the Rings
Making the most epic novel in existence into a film is something only a crazy man would attempt. And Peter Jackson is crazy. Lucky for us, he also happens to be a filmmaker of the highest caliber. Pulling this all together and doing it all so well may be the single greatest achievement in film of the past decade. 

O Brother Where Art Thou
What I love about this film is that it is about so many things all at the same time. The Odyssey, the South (politics, culture) in the 1930’s, Americana, etc. Featuring great performances from Coen Bros. staples, this is a vision of a film. And features the best (and most important) soundtrack of the decade). 

Sideways
Not since Annie Hall has this movie deconstructed nerdish maledom in mid-life so well. Paul Giamatti and Thomas Haden Church play not only well-rounded male friends, but absolutely believable as real people. The relationships between the characters feel vibrant and real, making this one of the best depictions of real people on film. 

Stranger Than Fiction
I have watched this movie upwards of 10 times, and there are still metaphysical questions to be answered. This from a quirky rom com starring Will Ferrell, Dustin Hoffman, and Maggie Gyllenhall. This movie is funny, poignant, and deeper than it first appears.  

Unbreakable
M. Night’s best film, and the best superhero origin deconstruction ever put to film. Before Chris Nolan ever decided to take on the Dark Night, M. Night imagined what superheroes would look like in our world without loosing the iconography that makes them superheroes. Highly underrated, with excellent character performances by both Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson. 

Movie Review: The Informant!

*This review is 100% USDA certified Spoiler-free!

I enjoy being "dragged" to movies (because I enjoy it, there usually isn't much resistance) because I often see movies I wouldn't otherwise, and sometimes it really works out. The Informant! is a perfect example. Ocean's aside, I usually give Steven Soderbergh films a wide berth. 

Yesterday I was "dragged" to see The Informant!, starring Matt Damon as Mark Whitacre, an executive at Archer Daniels Midland, a bunch of TV actors (ranging from sitcoms to Star Trek), and Biff Tannen from Back to the Future. The cast is certainly eclectic, but along with Damon's ability to lose himself in the role helps to reinforce the idea that none of these people are particularly extraordinary, but the situation they find themselves in is a fantastic one to be sure.

A rare comedy based on a true story, and perhaps even rarer, a comedy based on white collar crime (the only other one being Office Space, though I find Boiler Room to be pretty funny) and rarer still, a discussion of price fixing outside the economic classroom. 

As the audience gets pulled further and further into Whitacre's deception (and layers thereof), one can't help but feel sorry for the man, and Soderbergh is deft at making no one in the movie seem like a particularly bad guy, and using an unreliable narrator to the fullest effect. 

This is a guy who believes he's a spy, and the voice-over insights into Whitacre's mind (polar bears have black noses) and the music used both effectively serve to help the audience understand the protagonists' mind set. 

In short, this movie reminds me of what would have happened if the Cohen Brothers had directed Catch Me If You Can. It's smart even if the characters aren't, and it makes the protagonist sympathetic but not overly so. 

Highly recommended. 

Also, there is a book, and This American Life did a show about Whitacre. 

Movie Review: It Might Get Loud

"Right now he's probably saying "totally organic" into his Blackberry" - Jack White on The Edge

Until the past year or two, I was never really a fan of documentaries. Sure, I read a lot of non-fiction, but documentaries always seem to involve people saying weird things to a disembodied camera. Then I saw King of Kong: A Fistfull of Quarters. Then Helvetica. And I realized that geeky documentaries could be really awesome. 

See, for a documentary to be really good, the people the film focuses on need to be both extremely passionate but also relatable. King of Kong does this immensely well though the perspective of Steve Wiebe. 

ANYWAY*, as someone who loves rock music, a group of generation spanning guitarists meeting for the first time seemed like fantastic docu-fodder. It Might Get Loud is exactly that, from conception to execution. Directed by the guy who brought Al Gore's PowerPoint to the big screen, IMGL is basically three dudes geeking out about guitars. 

Those three are luminaries Jimmy Page (of the Yardbirds and Led Zeppelin), The Edge (of U2), and Jack White (of the White Stripes, Raconteurs, The Dead Weather...). Upon watching the documentary, these three choices make perfect sense because the way they approach playing their common instrument is so fundamentally different. Page is almost a classical-rock guitarist, the Edge like electronics, and White likes stripped-down, visceral rock. 

The movie divides its time between the backgrounds of these three legends and "The Summit," where they meet for the first time and talk about guitars and play. 

I learned a lot from watching them, and I really enjoyed the deeper look at why they played the way they did: their experiences growing up, their first exposure to music, etc. I always liked Jack White's music, but was never a big fan of him personally. This documentary changed that. I now have a lot more respect from him personally, and his choices in musical direction(s) now make sense rather than seeming disjointed (though I still think sometimes he's just weird to be weird). 

It was also cool to see legends get excited about little things, like Jimmy Page simply playing records. Easily one of my favorite moments of the film. Watching these three guitarists in the same room interacting, I was forced to choose between trying to watch them play and trying to watch them watch each other play, which are both deeply enriching experiences. 

I do have some minor gripes with the film and one major one. First, minorly, I am really really done with the Ken Burns picture-zoom-in thing. We need to find a new thing, especially since I'm pretty sure my Mac can do that in three clicks. Also I wish they had shown a little more post-meeting. 

Major gripe: Why can't I buy the soundtrack? Even if they only used one or two tracks each from Led Zeppelin, U2, and The White Stripes, there is enough over music in the movie to make a really kickass soundtrack. Especially when they all jam together on guitars. Who would watch this movie and not want to listen to that over and over? 

Overall, this is one of those movies where if you think you might want to see it, you probably should. Basically, if you enjoy rock music, and want a behind the scenes at the creation of song, this is an excellent opportunity. 

It Might Get Loud is currently playing at the Ritz 5 in Philadelphia.

*Apologize to Chuck Klosterman for that.

Movie Review: Inglourious Basterds

So now all of my anticipated summer movies have come out, and they may have saved the best for last. I’ve been a Quentin Tarantino fan since some point in high school, when I decided Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction were movies I needed to see. The combination of kinetic dialogue, unpredictable action, and fantastic music selections made them some of my favorite films of all time. After Death Proof, even though I enjoyed it, I was afraid the man had lost his touch. Still, Inglourious Basterds was a project long promised, and I was excited (and a little surprised) to see it had actually been completed.

This movie defied all of my expectations. In fact, in this “review” I cannot offer a true criticism. Tarantino made choices I don’t necessarily agree with, but they certainly mesh well with his vision. I also don’t think I’m being too forgiving either, as this is easily his best work since Pulp Fiction, and I suspect it may be better (I need to rewatch both in close proximity to be able to tell for sure).

Inglourious Basterds borrows heavily from one of Tarantino’s favorite films, Sergio Leone’s The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, the top of the heap in terms of spaghetti westerns. Unlike Leone’s classic, I had no trouble watching Basterds in one sitting. Sure it’s twenty minutes shorter, but even at 153 minutes the pacing feels brisk, perhaps because a whole two more films worth of material were cut down in the script editing process. Having chapter breaks also helps.

Tarantino also does his career best in terms of building dramatic tension through dialogue and plot, throwing his characters into the exact situations they don’t want to be in and letting the fireworks fly. It’s a beautiful thing, and is note perfect throughout the movie.

Now, I think I may have enjoyed the movie more because I am of Jewish decent. As a revenge movie, this works extremely well. Watching Hitler and Goebbels die in that matter, though gruesome, was extremely satisfying. It is this act, as well as Shoshanna’s turning of the cinema into an ironic oven made the film extremely satisfying on the revenge-flick level.

For people who do not come from that background, the opening scene of the movie, featuring a French dairy farmer and his family, provides a fresh reminder of why exactly the Nazis in the movie get what they deserve. The brutal shooting of hidden Jews under floorboards by the men under the command of the film’s villain, Hans Landa—nicknamed The Jew Hunter—is reminder enough as to why Nazis are the villains in so many films.

The most recent action film where Nazis—brutal Nazis—were the villains might have been Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. There have been plenty of films since 1989 that take place during WWII with Germans as the bad guys, but the German soldiers of Saving Private Ryan or U-571 aren’t exactly very Nazi-like.

Here’s an except from an interview with Chrisoph Waltz, who played Landa:

We are aware that Nazi films, like Downfall, are all historically correct. Inglourious Basterds clearly isn’t. Is it ok to laugh about the Nazis? What do you think the reaction will be in Germany and Austria?

“I have a slightly different approach to this issue, because I detest these movies that try to make us believe that they are telling the truth. I find it ludicrous, but not laughable, unfortunately. I think it’s hypocritical to say ‘we want to tell, especially a young audience, how Hitler really was as a person’. First of all I’d like to know why?

Second I’d like to know why young audiences need to know how Hitler was as a real person, because how does it help them in their lives? Is that really dealing with the subject in a responsible manner? I could go on for a year and a half about why this is the irresponsible approach to turn it into a backdrop for a sh**** movie that’s boring in the first place. It’s neither this nor that because the approach is boring; what are we meant to derive from it? What message does it give us? That Nazi’s were actually people? ‘This is how it really was, you must not forget’? We know! It’s supposed to appease our conscience; it’s the politically correct rubbish - the overlooking of the criteria that helps us to deal with the subject. We are only the second of third generation after the disaster, the biggest disaster in the history of humanity, and we’re using it to think, ‘we are all good, we are all right because we know that they were wrong’, but how does that help us to get an idea about the course of history? It doesn’t.

But look what Quentin does; he rips it open and all of a sudden you gain a completely new perspective. The question ‘what if?’ isn’t irresponsible, it actually triggers a process within you and you think ‘yes, what if? What can I contribute so that the process and the consciousness of this disaster actually turns in to something that helps me, and helps us all to avoid it in the future. It gives us an active understanding and an active way of dealing with the subject, and doesn’t turn the process in to a consumable product so that we find ourselves saying, ‘good, let’s go and have dinner because we don’t have to deal with this any further’.

And that’s why I love Quentin’s work, because he does it again and again and now he’s done it with this part of history. Laughing is a release reaction, that’s why the sound of laughter is explosive; it relieves tension, and the tension in this story is so immense that you need to laugh in order to stand it, in order to endure it to the end. Sorry, I get very passionate about this!”

This interview may reveal why the quadrilingual Landa is such a great villain, and one of the best of the decade. Chistoph Waltz’s performance is the key to the whole movie, and it will take a lot to top it come Oscar time.

The rest of the performances are uniformly great, especially Melanie Laurent’s Shoshanna and Daniel Bruhl’s Fredrick Zoller. Together they are the true central figures of the movie, and it is Shoshanna’s story that the movie is really concerned with. I also immensely enjoyed Mike Meyers’ cameo, and I may change the text tone on my phone to Brad Pitt’s character’s delivery of the word “Nazis.”

These characters populate the backdrop of Nazi-occupied France in a masterful plot. Tarantino shows off his storytelling skills here in a way we’ve not seen before. To this point, Jackie Brown was the only one to have a great plot, and Pulp Fiction’s flaws are hidden behind its non-sequential storytelling. The parallel structure is well crafted, and each portion of the plot serves its purpose toward the film’s resolution, yet (to my recollection) each of the chapters are viewable as a discreet and separate unit (not totally unlike Raiders of the Lost Ark’s status as an ‘uncut’ Republic serial).

This is easily one of my favorite films of the year so far, and I can’t wait to see it again.

Look for a review of the soundtrack this week too, this post is already to long and I need to sleep sometime.

Movie Review: G.I. Joe

So I just got back from seeing the new GI Joe movie (subtitled "Rise of COBRA" but really should be "Collateral Damage"). I don't post an awful lot of movie reviews, despite seeing an awful lot of movies, but I couldn't pass this up.

I don't necessarily think it would be fair to evaluate this movie on the scale of good and bad. Using normal standards, this movie is terrible, but I truly think it defies those standards.

Sitting here now, I honestly cannot tell you what the movie was truly about. I mean, yeah, the bad guys are mad about a couple of things: behing left behind, a dead brother, and an ancestor being insulted by the Spanish in the 17th century.  Also, the Joes are just a bunch of dudes (and Scarlett) who want to do good and you know, stop the bad guys. 

Basically, the plot is tenuous, and the dialogue is cheesy to the point of not needing to bring any for my nachos, but that's what this movie wants to be: a living, breathing, Saturday Morning Cartoon. In that regard, it succeeds on every front: Fantastical weapons and vehicles (that no doubt make cool toys), secret bases (including one underwater!), chase scenes, and characters whose sexual identities are limited to ambiguous dialogue and pecks on the lips. 

Mercifully, the movie doesn't try to be as funny as Transformers does, and at least the stereotypes here have talent (for the most part, I mean Scarlett's gig seemed to be shooting people at point blank range with a laser-sighted mini crossbow ((I reiterate, point. blank. range.))) Also, most of the main cast seemed to suffer from IFS, or Involuntary Flashback Syndrome, of which the only cure seemed to be kissing or death. 

Stylistically, it actually reminds me most of the last Brosnan Bond movie, Die Another Day, the one where Bond had almost dived to the point of self-parody. Basically, this is a movie that does not take itself to seriously. And neither should you. But damn am I confused about what exactly was going on. 

I'm just disappointed it didn't end with a PSA like this one:

Five Comics You Should Read Before the Movie Comes Out

Now that Watchmen is out, there must be a way to make your friends feel uncool for not reading some fantastic comic book before the movie so you can "Pfft, the book was better" on your collective way out of the theater.

Here's five that fulfill that list:

Whiteout – written by Greg Rucka
Movie release September 11, 2009

Greg Rucka is a rare breed of mainstream comic book writer: he’s known for writing strong female characters. This includes the new Batwoman and Renee Montoya (The Question) at DC, and he is probably best known for his work on the outstanding Gotham Central, a series about the Gotham City Police Department (which featured the Montoya character).

Whiteout is a crime comic about US Marshal Carrie Stetko assigned to McMurdo Station in Antartica. When a dead body shows up, she must investigate the first murder ever on the continent. It’s a trail that leads her across the continent and to unexpected circles. Tightly written and action-packed, while featuring black and white art that really lends to the setting.

The film has been in production almost since the comic finished in 1998, and will finally see release in September. Kate Beckinsale is playing Stetko. Rucka has praised the adaptation, which seems to expanded the plot somewhat, and I’m definitely looking forward to the movie.

Trailer: http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/whiteout/trailer

The Surrogates – written by Robert Venditti
Movie release September 29, 2009

Inspired by people who live their “real” lives online in World of Warcraft or Second Life, The Surrogates takes place in a future where people live their lives through full-sized remote control proxies. All of the world’s obvious problems have been solved, but like Whiteout, a rare murder occurs and must be investigated.

The comic is well regarded, but it certainly looks like they beefed up the action in the plot for the movie. I do enjoy that they seem to be playing up the phobia of the real world that these people have. It’s like they’ve willingly jacked into the Matrix, or like the cruise line passengers in Wall-E.

Trailer: http://www.apple.com/trailers/touchstone/surrogates/

Kick-Ass – written by Mark Millar
Movie release Early 2010

Dave Lizewski was a fairly average New York teen, lonely and frustrated by life. Then he decided to be a superhero. Thanks to a cell phone video, he is dubbed “Kick-Ass” and has various misadventures as a vigilante. The comic just started in 2008, and the script for the film was finished shortly thereafter.

The comic is known for it’s over the top violence, which serves its purpose as portraying “real world” superheroic attempts. I’ve never been a big Mark Millar fan, but the comic is well done, if not to my tastes.

Jonah Hex - created 1972
Movie release June 18, 2010

Jonah Hex is a longtime DC Comics character, and first debuted in All-Star Western #10. He’s a badly disfigured Confederate veteran traveling around the American West, and has faced off against voodoo priests and other supernatural forces as well as all of the usual Western troublemakers.

I found out about the character from the Batman: The Animated Series episode “Showdown,” but the character has seen a revival since the debut of his self-titled comic in 2005. This is what I’d recommend reading. Justin Gray and Jimmy Palmiotti’s series has been excellent from what I’ve read, and it’s great to see a great mainstream comic outside of the superhero genre. The first part of their series, Face Full of Violence, is a lot of fun and a great intro to the character.

The film is high on my list of anticipated films next year as it stars Josh Brolin in the title role as well as Megan Fox and John Malkovich as the villian Quentin Turnbull. I love modern westerns (like the 3:10 to Yuma remake) and the all-star cast makes this an exciting film.

Scott Pilgrim (vs. the World) – written/drawn by Bryan Lee O’Malley
Movie release TBA 2010

The comic book series is about the Canadian Scott Pilgrim, bass player for the band Sex Bomb-Omb. He falls in love with Ramona V. Flowers, a delivery girl, but must defeat her seven evil ex-boyfriends in order to date her.

Five of the six planned books have been published so far and all to increasing critical acclaim. The book is chock-full of video game and other pop culture references, making for a smartly written geek teen drama.

It’s no surprise, then, that Michael Cera (Juno, Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist) will be playing the title role in the adaptation helmed by Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz). It looks like it’s going to be quite excellent, and although live action, really might capture the madcap over the top world of the comic.

There are plenty of other movies based on comics coming out, but these are the most interesting coming out in the next year (besides Iron Man 2, of course). 

Why Do You Let Me Stay Here?

Looks like Zooey Deschanel and Jason Gordon-Levitt had a lot of fun filming 500 Days of Summer:

Deschanel and Gordon-Levitt say they hope to team up repeatedly and have aspirations of being a regular screen couple, like Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers or Spencer Tracy and Katharine Hepburn.

They're not a real couple, but they're good at faking it.

"I think it's great to have continuous collaborators," Deschanel says. "It's a shortcut that makes it so much more fun. The job is much easier when you can go to set and be like, 'Ah, Joe!' "

"Absolutely. And there's trust," he says.

"And it's not like, 'Hey, nice to meet you — let's make out!LALAlalala," she says, closing her eyes and sticking out her tongue in a mock French kiss.

"As weird as it is filming a love story in front of a million people, at least you have your friend," she says.

I loved 500 Days of Summer and I would love to see them on screen again. They have fantastic chemistry, and maybe you can say they make 'em like they used to.