Hancock Review

•July 5, 2008 • Leave a Comment

So, like I promised I would (see below), I’ve been ignoring the movie critics lately as we seem to have a differing opinion on what good cinema entails. To summarize; they call boring movies brilliant and entertaining movies crap. Once again, we are at odds with one another (I’m sure they care) with the movie Hancock, which for some of its faults, I still enjoyed rather thoroughly.

I’m not going to summarize the plot; read Wikipedia if you want that. Just be alerted; major spoilers ahead.

First of all, I loved the concept of taking the consequences of super-heroics and making them so bad that the public would rather loose a few lives than have this bumbling alcoholic burden the taxpayers with literally millions of dollars in damage. Its just funny to me; we never see that in a superhero movie/show/comic etc. Sure the Man of Steel and the Caped Crusader save the day, but if you actually pay attention from now on, you’ll notice they wreak a lot of shit while they’re doing it. Ooops, sorry to completely trash your city’s infrastructure; but little Timmy is safe! The movies have a tendency to focus on what looks cool without ever having to focus on the fact that someone has to clean it up afterwards. I doubt even the board members of Wayne Enterprises ignore that they loose millions a month to public repair costs with no solid explanation as to why. But Hancock takes this to the extreme and makes it one of the movies central themes; good for it. I love it.

And I liked Jason Bateman’s character of Ray; just a good guy trying to do a good thing. You see this alot in Superhero movies, but its usually the hero, not their publicist, who is the moral center of the flick. Whereas Will Smith’s Hancock is also greatly played; he’s not the wisecracking but flashy star you see in most of his movies (don’t get me wrong, I like those roles), I really believed him as an asshole who’s just doing what he feels obligated to do because of his powers. Although, let me get this out of the way now as one of the things I didn’t like about this movie; the whole “don’t call me asshole” thing got on my nerves the same way the “don’t call me chicken” thing annoyed me in Back to the Future 2. It’s just so corny, in a bad way.

But the thing that I’ve noticed when reading reviews of both critics and the wonderfully articulate people on message boards (loooolz fo realz) is that even if people liked the first half of the movie, involving rehabilitating Hancock into a superhero the people can get behind, many people lost love for this movie at the twist halfway through. Well, I’m here to say to all of those people … fuck you, I loved it and it did make sense.

Now understand that two of my favourite TV shows in the history of forever are Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel. The two of them taking place within the same universe (or as the super-cool call it, the Buffyverse), over time you are treated to stories of superstrength that has been passed on from one girl to the next over thousands of years and a two-hundred year love-quartet between four incredibly detailed vampire characters which is told in pieces over the run of the show. So the revelation in this movie? Not so far outside the box for a Joss Whedon fan. In fact, the idea that the superheroes in this movie are helpers of the gods is about as believable as being bitten by a radioactive spider or “evolving” and getting superpowers out of the deal. The reality for the last two; cancer. Become a scientist like me and you’ll realize that all those fun mutations you read the heroes getting in the comic books are lies and you’re really just going to end up with lots of dead people. Plus, how “scientific” is Superman’s origin? Just because he has a spaceship? Please. You lost your ability to criticize the reality of their superpowers origin when you accepted they had superpowers in the first place.

So, back to how awesome the Hancock origin is (remember the spoilers ahead? we are in fact here). To summarize for the people who didn’t get it; the gods made heroes, or protectors, or whatever you want to call it. They sent them to earth to protect people thousands of years ago. There were many of them. However, they made them in pairs; each half of the pair was the other’s counterpart and they were inevitably attracted to each other. This meant that a sacrifice had to be made on the part of the heroes; they could either retain their powers and help mankind, or they could be with the one they were destined for in exchange for their immortality. This meant that whenever the pairs were in close proximity to each other, they start to become mortal, and if they stayed together, they would eventually die a normal death. Well after thousands of years of being apart and doing what they could for humanity, most of the pairs decided they’d done enough and deserved some loving; or “paired up and died out” as Charlize Theron’s character puts it. This looses some people, but as I said, being a Whedon fan means that this kind of story is one you’d accept and probably love. It makes about as much sense as the “perfect happiness” clause in Angel’s curse, anyway, and thats a damn good storyline.

So, as super-Charlize eventually explains, her and Hancock, being each other’s counterpart, spent many years together and then apart and then together again throughout the millenia. They’d pair up, enjoy some grown up time during a few mortal years, then they’d split up to do their superhero thang. Problem is, when you’re a hero, you tend to piss people off and so when they went all couple-y and became vulnerable, their enemies would attack them. They always scraped by and split up, bu 80 years ago, Mr. Smith got himself a nice case of amnesia from a skull fracture. No doubt, when he says it cleared up in an hour, it was during that hour that superchick decided that it would be better for both of them and they people they were meant to save if he had no memory of her and she disappeared from his life. She goes away, and presto, he’s healed and a superhero without a memory or a purpose. Hence the drinking

Its so sad when he contemplates how much an asshole he had to be in order to have noone to claim him in the hospital; when really the one person who could have claimed him didn’t because she loved him too much. Maybe more people would have believed it if they’d seen the flashbacks, of the two of them and of him waking up in the hospital. Why would people want a standard story of memory loss and superpowers due to government experimentation? Doesn’t his suit look enough like Wolverine’s? Why’d you want him to copy Wolverine’s backstory too? I couldn’t imagine it; not when this is so much more rich.

Maybe its the Whedon fan in me, maybe its the ficcer, or maybe a bit of both, but I can just see so many untold tales of them, the other pairs that died out, their quests, their romances of the past, and even more recently, her disappointment in him when her sacrifice only makes him a drunken slob hated by the public. I’m not necessarily a romantic person persay, but I love a good story, and I wish they’d spent a little more time fleshing their’s out instead of making it unaccessible heresay. Oh wells.

On a final note, I will point out the other flaw in this otherwise enjoyable film, and that’s the lack of a good villain. For a superhero like Hancock, it would have been smart to include a villain that gets notorious enough to drive Hancock to straighten himself out for the fight. His getting shot in a liquor store is a bit anticlimactic, and when the final fight goes down, you’re not even the least bit concerned about Captain Hook.

I’d like to see a comic book or even better a television show chronicling the tales of God’s Angels or whatever they are called. Overall, 4/5. Good ride and even better twist.

New Blog/Site: The Dexterminators

•June 17, 2008 • Leave a Comment

I’ve just started a Dexter Fanfiction Awards site called “The Dexterminators.” Yay! All my Dexter related things will now be located there, including my stories and reviews. Which means I’m deleting them from this blog. Yah.

Woot.

To All Artsy Film Makers

•May 12, 2008 • 2 Comments

Pick. Up. The. Fucking. Pace.

I understand it’s a difficult time nowadays if you are true creative filmmaker, surrounded by uninspired sequels, remakes and live-action versions of television shows from the 60’s. I understand that from a picture to picture basis, the quality of a movie has been compromised in exchange for movies guaranteed to bring in box office shattering revenue. I get it, it’s frustrating for audiences too. We often go to a movie, enjoy the hell out of it while its happening, maybe pick up a few choice phrases we can repeat to our peers or coworkers for a few weeks while the movie is still hot, but eventually most of the movies fade to the background. Half a year down the road, when the movie is out on DVD, we think to ourselves “Oh yeah, I saw that. It was alright, I guess.” No life-shattering, profound moments; only exciting mediocrity which is eventually makes it to the $4.99 Previously Viewed bin at Blockbuster.

However, your response to this increasingly common phenomenon has been equally infuriating.

When the award season has rolled around the past few years, people have been confused as all hell. More often than not, most people haven’t seen or maybe even heard of three out of the five movies nominated for best picture. It’s reasonable to assume why; Pirates of the Caribbean 3, while entertaining, isn’t winning any Oscars. However, it seems to me that Academy voters, desperate to seem refined and counter to the culture of empty commercial films, pick independent or small budget artsy movies in order to come off as seeking something with substance. Which is fine, except the movies that you keep on picking are boring as shit.

I have now seen 4/5 movies that were nominated for Best Picture earlier this year, and here’s my quick review of each;

Atonement: Nice dress, hot sex, overall unimpressive and dull. Oh look, twist ending…meh.

Juno: Funny, heartwarming, delightful. Short and sweet. Loved it.

No Country for Old Men: Boring…boring…okay this is a bit scary…boring…

There Will Be Blood: I spent the entire time just hoping each scene was the last. I just wanted the tedium to end.

Now I know there were a lot more movies nominated for other categories, but this was supposed to be the cream of the crop with respect to all aspects of filmmaking in 2007. Let’s see; Atonement, No Country for Old Men, and There Will Be Blood, all snoozefests and all clocking it in at 2 hours plus, while Juno was witty and fun, and managed to wrap it up in an hour and a half. And I’m pretty sure there was only an hour and a half worth of story for all of them. So why are so many movies dragging it out (and more importantly, dragging me down?)

What I’m seeing is an attempt for filmmakers to revolutionize the cinematic style by making scenes “more real,” “more authentic,” etc. They will show an action in its entirety to try and emulate real life, ESPECIALLY ones where it’s just one person doing something with little to no dialogue at all. Let me explain something; the only time I care about the second to second of these fictional people’s lives is when it’s Jack Bauer’s life working for CTU and there’s no time before the bomb goes off, damn it! I do not need to see somebody realize something bad is happening, watch the long arduous journey to the place where the bad thing is happening, watch his real-life attempt at overcoming minor obstacles, and then finally make it to the place where the bad thing is happening. Realization, arrival, done! That’s all that’s needed, because the in-between is boring. It’s fine if you have one slow paced scene in a movie, but to make the entire movie feel like watching paint dry is NOT art. If I wanted to experience the mediocrity that is living moment to moment, I wouldn’t be watching a movie!

The point of cinema is to escape your reality for a couple of hours. One can still get a poignant message across to an audience in under two hours, and chances are the message will stick better because they won’t be sleeping through the last half. Now there are some 2+ hour movies that were fantastic, which off the top of my head include Silence of the Lambs, Erin Brockovich, Philadelphia, American Beauty, A Few Good Men, The American President and Gandhi, just to name a few that I’ve watched recently. But they had quicker pacing, more interesting storylines, drama, thrills, wit, history, romance, but most importantly, they kept the movie moments in and the real-life boring moments out!

The next “real” movie I watch better be really interesting, because the “quality” that has been presented to me of late has been a real turn off. And that’s what I’ll do the next time I see I’m in for another slow paced shitfest; I’m turning it off.

Deviously Different Dexter’s: The Books versus The Series

•March 21, 2008 • Leave a Comment

Warning: Spoilers abound.

Keep in mind, first, that I have not read the entire series of books. I am fresh off reading the first book now, and I finished the second season over two weeks ago (wow, has it really been that long?)

Keep in mind, also, though a novel is usually superior to its visual counterpart (extreme re: Harry Potter), there have been a few instances in the past I prefer the presentation of a movie or a television series over the original written word (re: Silence of the Lambs).

Such is the case with Dexter the Series versus Jeff Lindsay’s novel Darkly Dreaming Dexter(DDD).

Continue reading ‘Deviously Different Dexter’s: The Books versus The Series’

Disturbingly Delightful Dexter

•March 9, 2008 • 1 Comment


I cannot begin to describe how much I love this show. This is a love that came out of nowhere and hit me like a mac-truck; but in a much more pleasant way.
Sunday night, I caught the 3rd episode of Season One, “Popping Cherry.” By 2 am that morning, I had seen the first 4 episodes. Tuesday at 2 am, only 48 hours later, I had seen all 24 episodes of Dexter’s two seasons; having only come up for air to go to class or sleep (very sparingly). The repercussions of this are still affecting my sleep patterns, as I had a busy week. But love will make you do crazy things.

Continue reading ‘Disturbingly Delightful Dexter’

Where comes this high visitor count from?

•March 7, 2008 • 1 Comment

So, I can’t help but notice that my steady page hits went from a couple a day to over 2000 in a week’s time. I think it’s kind of weird; can anyone tell me who or what’s linking them to my page?

Across the Universe: Style >> Substance

•February 20, 2008 • 2 Comments

No, I hadn’t forgotten about this blog at all. I’ve just been busy/not had the immediate desire to write something. Let’s face it; the Sweeney Todd Review, though worthy of a Nobel Prize, was a long piece of bloggage. Though I’ve felt looking at my blog up until now with the Sweeney pictures gives me the appearance of being sinister and…throat slicey. Now, I’ma go for Beatle-loving stoner (is there any other kind ;?). And I’ve been lying to myself, saying that if I write for this blog and not my science paper, then I’m wasting my time. Well, I haven’t been writing my science paper (and it’s due in a week), so what the hell? I’ve got something to say about Across the Universe.
Ahhhhhhh ahhh, because the world is round, it turns me on.
When I saw this movie in theaters (back when it was only released in Toronto during the Film Festival), I had felt a little let down by it. I’d been told by someone that the trailer looks amazing, but the movie doesn’t deliver. I fell in love with the trailer, but I came out of the movie feeling something was missing. I’ve since determined that Across the Universe makes a much better soundtrack then a movie.

Continue reading ‘Across the Universe: Style >> Substance’

Sweeney Todd: The Best Damn Film of 2007

•February 2, 2008 • 2 Comments

“There’s a hole in the world like a great black pit/ and it’s filled with people who are filled with shit.” ~ Epiphany sung by Sweeney Todd.

Indeed.
The Golden Globes came, and though I never thought the Hollywood Foreign Press would be so kind, they named Sweeney Todd Best Musical or Comedy, and rightfully awarded Johnny Depp as best actor. I was squealing with delight at this because, even though it was my favourite movie of 2007, Sweeney wouldn’t win Best Picture at the Oscars because…well, quite often the Academy seems to pick movies that make people “think” rather than entertain (with the exception this year of Juno, which was the cutest movie I’ve seen in a long time). However, never did my blonde little brain ever imagine that this would hold so true that they WOULDN”T EVEN NOMINATE IT. Merciful Zeus! I am tickled-pink that Mr. Depp got a spot for Best Actor, but from what I hear, Daniel Day-Lewis has got that sewn up. So, this film; this glorious, magnificent combination of blood, singing and general creepiness ever so artfully done, has no shot at any of the major awards this Oscar season. Fuck.

The only thing I can think to compensate for is this; I award Tim Burton’s Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street as Carpe Noctem’s 2007 Best Damn Film. I also award Johnny Depp with Carpe Noctem’s 2007 Best Damn Actor for his joint work in Sweeney Todd and Pirates of the Caribbean 3 (an excellent and overlooked film, far superior to its predecessor [but doesn't rival the first]). Helena Bohnam Carter gets Carpe Noctem’s 2007 Hottest Creepy Babe award, acknowledging her new emotional take on Mrs. Lovett and her wicked portrayal as Bellatrix Lestrange. Tim Burton, of course, wins Carpe Noctem’s Lifetime Achievement Award for not only being able to create a creepy yet interesting style that allows the viewer to immediately identify a movie as his, but also find a way to keep it fresh and wondrous every time.

There you go, ensemble; you’ve cleaned up the first Carpe Noctem Awards. I’m sure they’re all very tearful and appreciate how much I care.
Continue reading ‘Sweeney Todd: The Best Damn Film of 2007′

Welcome to my blog, whoever you aren’t.

•February 2, 2008 • Leave a Comment

I’m not quite sure what kind of baby I’m raising with this blog. I don’t know if I’m going to nurture it properly, whether anyone else will pay attention to it, nor what it’s goals in life are going to be.That being said, hello internet! Actually, I am well acquainted with the internet; Facebook, Hotmail, Youtube, etc. are all sites I have frequented daily for the past 10 years. However, this is my first blog. I have leeched off the internet for far too long; here is my contribution. Pretentious, to think that a few random thoughts and linking to other sites can make up for the years of downloading and reading I’ve done? Perhaps (most definitely), but thats the best its going to get, so I suggest thou dost suck it up.

The blog title? A quote from “The Rocky Horror Picture Show,” probably the greatest movie ever made. Ok, I kid, but it is undoubtedly the movie that I have seen more than any other, so its definitely one of my favourites.

Me? I am an Undergraduate Biochemistry Specialist at the University of Toronto. But so the fuck what? There are many other aspects I have to my life, but none of them are as concrete nor as impressive sounding as this. Really, I’m just a chick who used to get top notch grades in the little bubble of high school and have quickly been demoted to ‘middle of the pack’. As such, I find my interests extending beyond the scope of academia; usually to Popular Culture, Politics, and World Events. This intro to my life is even boring me, so I’ll wrap it up right now.

Basically, this blog is an outlet for me to express my opinions without being under the microscope of Facebook or being desperate fr feedback as I often am in the forum setting. If another soul reads one post, I will consider it a miracle. But since I’m not religious, I wont be holding my breath.