X Men Origins: Wiping Your Arse With Claws.

Last Saturday, my glamorous other half and I went to the pictures to see the new Wolverine movie. In the queue with us was a guy dressed as Wolverine. He had the hairstyle and the vest and some leather fingerless gloves with the claws built in. I would've called him a sad fucker but he might eviscerate me with said appendages. Why is it only comic-book movies that attract these people? (Actually, come to think of it, which I do, that's not true; people dress up as nuns when they go and see The Sound Of Music, don't they?) You don't see people turning up at, let's say, The Reader, dressed as a death camp commandant. I did once think that a load of people dressed up and acting like zombies were queing up to see Day Of The Dead, but I was mistaken, it's just what any queue at a Broad Street cinema looks like.
The film itself was okay, nothing special. They whizz through Wolvie's early life showing us snippets of what could've been a more interesting film than the one that was made. For example, they don't tell us how he got the name Logan, but they do tell us how he got his leather jacket. Some of the CGI was very shoddy, too. Despite a few interesting ideas and a standout action set-piece involving Logan fighting a helicopter, this film was generally a wasted opportunity.
However, my girlfriend thought it was great, as she's in love with Hugh Jackman, and as it is basically two hours of him running around with no shirt on, she was in movie heaven. (I've no issue with that, I do, however, have issues with Jackman's hair in this film; he no longer has that 'pointy ears' haircut that his comic book equivalent has, he's got some kind of long curtains thing going on. It just looks rubbish. I know it's supposed to be set in the seventies, but Logan has never struck me as being a fashion slave. They should've given him a pair of flares and a belted cardigan to complete the look.)

After the movie, as usual, my bladder was the size of a space hopper, so I went to the toilets, and in there was the guy dressed as Wolverine drying his hands under the hot air dryer. He still had the claws on. So, he must've had a wee with them on. That's taking a risk, if you ask me. It's a good job he didn't go for a number two. Imagine wiping yourself with those things on!

Anyway, if this movie is an indication of what the summer blockbusters are going to be like, it's going to be a dull summer.

Heather's going to see again on Monday with the girls from work. I'm obviously not the film's target audience.

Sláine: The Movie?

Continuing the Irish theme (albeit a bit tenuously) from the last post, here's a frankly astounding fan film based on Pat Mills and Simon Bisley's Sláine: The Horned God. It's by a guy named Miguel Mesas, who should be signed up to do it for real. It's a bit odd hearing Ukko the dwarf talking in Spanish, though.
I used to be a big fan of Sláine. Bisley's excellent, but I always preferred Glenn Fabry's stuff. Mike McMahon's take on the character was excellent too, simultaneously stylised and realistic. I stopped reading when Sláine started travelling through time and the art was too CG influenced, though. Anyway, I digress. Watch it and be amazed:

More Bale.

It's going to be a low content couple of weeks, so this post is a quickie, as I've got some drawing to do. Sticking with the Christian Bale theme instigated by the last post, I've found the new trailer for the upcoming Terminator movie, and despite my misgivings (mostly concerning the stupidly-named director's previous output) it looks kinda cool. Let's face it, it can't be any worse than T3, which was just a retread of T2, but with a lady robot as the antagonist and a bleak ending instead of a hopeful one. Also cool is the use of Nine Inch Nails' track The Day The World Went Away. I love that band.
And never mind Bale's well-publicised rant. I think it looks very well lit indeed.


I'm not sure about the title either. Terminator Salvation instead of T4. I suppose it's because it's a prequel and therefore should be T-zero, or it might be because calling it T4 might make people think it's a film about Channel Four's endless repeats of Friends and The Simpsons linked together with inane chat from Steve Jones (the bland Welsh bloke, not the Pistols' guitarist) and Miquita Oliver.

Batman vs. Johnny Cash.

This is a clip of Chtistian Bale and Joaquin Phoenix giving an award at the recent IFC Spirit awards. If you're at work, PLEASE BE CAREFUL, as we all know how volatile Christian gets when he's angry. Does he kiss his mother with that mouth? Probably not, he's more likely to smack his mom in the kisser. Allegedly.

What A Way To Go! part one.

Bit of a change of tack, this post. Because I've been off work with my crippled shoulder, I've been watching quite a lot of movies, more often than not, big dumb action movies. And one of the things I like about big dumb action movies (especially the ones from the '80s, I've found) are the big ridiculous deaths that happen in them. I likes me an inventive death! (Only in movies, you understand. Seeing anything at all like this in real life would almost definitely disturb me!) So I've decided to make an open-ended list of what I think are the best deaths in movies. It's pointless sticking to a 'top-ten' or 'best 100' because I might think of more good 'uns, or get bored and never post about it again, or some new good 'uns might come along and grab my attention.
Each post will feature one of these gruesome demises, and hopefuly, a clip, if YouTube has them. And there's no particular order of merit, I like them all equally for different reasons. So, enough waffling. Here's What A Way To Go-part one:

Kananga (Live and Let Die, 1973)

as you all know by now, I'm a Bond nerd, so I thought I'd start with a Bond death. Gruesome and inventive dispatches of bad guys have been part and parcel of the Bond franchise from day one. Dr. No was boiled alive in super-heated water (in the novel, however, he was buried alive in a mountain of bird shit; much more inventive!). Goldfinger was sucked out of one of Air Force One's windows. Hugo Drax was shot with a tranquiliser dart then shot out into outer space. Elliot Carver was chopped up by a giant industrial drill, and so on.
(The thing I've noticed about the Bond films is that, generally the henchmen get the cooler deaths and the head honcho just gets quickly offed. I recently watched Licence To Kill (probably the most extreme 007 movie in that respect) again and the henchmen are killed in many unusual ways, eaten to death by maggots, electrocution by eel, head exploded in a decompression chamber, chopped up in a grinding machine, which all make the main bad guy's demise, being burned alive, seem a bit of a let down.)
However, by far and away the most memorable demise in a 007 movie is indeed that of the main villain in Live And Let Die. What makes it so great is the sheer ridiculousness of it. He is forced to swallow a compressed air bullet which makes him expand like a big balloon until he flies up into the air and bursts into a million pieces. Fantastic.
Since when have compressed air bullets been practical? The film says the gun is designed to kill sharks. Surely normal bullets would do the trick just as well? How is blowing them up with compressed air more practical? Especially when you consider Bond is trying to sneak onto the island without raising alarm. Surely sharks suddenly flying into the air and then exploding is going to surprise even the most stupid henchman into action. This is a Bond movie, more importantly, this is a Roger Moore Bond movie, so a certain amount of disbelief-suspension is required. Maybe nearly being eaten by a shark in Thunderball back when he was Sean Connery traumatised Bond so much that he went back to Q branch and asked them to come up with something that would absolutely obliterate the pointy-nosed fuckers.
What also makes Kananga's death so great is how badly it's done. It looks rubbish. I'm sure that even back in 1973 it looked shit, but that adds to its charm. Also there's not a drop of blood to be seen, or no flying guts. This was as gruesome as they allowed PG-rated (or it's equivalent back then) films to get back then. Even the obligatory post-kill quip is a bit rubbish; 'He always did have an inflated opinion of himself' is an awful joke, but that adds to its charm too. ( I reckon 'I think he got the point' from Thunderball is the best death quip in the entire series.)All this, as well as the fart sound effect all add up to you laughing at someone's horrible and undignified death!
It's a ridiculous, fun, tongue-in-cheek demise that suited the tone of the movie. Roger Moore wasn't the best Bond, and LALD certainly isn't the best movie of his tenure, but it still had a sense of fun that was severely lacking in Quantum Of Solace. (don't get me wrong, I liked QoS, but it wasn't 'Bond' enough for me.)
Anyway, enough of me waffling on. Watch and enjoy:



WHAT A WAY TO GO WILL RETURN

Dispirited.

Whilst in the cinema the other night, I had a flash of inspiration; I reckon I've found a way to ease the world's environmental woes with a brand new totally green energy source. If we can somehow harness the energy of Will Eisner's rapidly rotating corpse we won't need to worry about fuel price increases.
Yes, I watching Frank Miller's woeful The Spirit. It's one of the worst movies I've seen in a very long time, and I've recently watched Australia! (Not usually the type of film I go and see at the pictures, but my girlfriend, who works in PR, got us some tickets to a special preview put on by the Australian tourism board and there was free food and beer (there was one woman there putting food from the buffet into her handbag for later. How Birmingham is that?), we even got free popcorn to munch while we were watching the film, and we were given free Australia-shaped luggage tags and an Australia pen. If you've seen Out Of Africa, Gone With The Wind, The African Queen, Last Of The Mohicans, Red River, Pearl Harbour, or Walkabout I wouldn't bother. To says it's derivative and unoriginal and clichéd is an understatement.You can tell it's Australian because Bryan Brown is in it. I think he's been in every Aussie movie since about 1981. It looks pretty, though, and there's lots of shots of Hugh Jackman with his shirt off. If you like that sort of thing. My girlfriend does. I don't, makes me feel inadequate.)

Anyway, The Spirit! This is not Will Eisner's Spirit, this is most definitely Frank Miller's. I'm not the world's biggest Spirit afficionado (I can recommend Will Eisner's Dropsie Avenue trilogy, referred to in the movie, and his Comics and Sequential Art book is a comic artist's bible), but I've read it, and the movie doesn't resemble what I've read at all. It's trying to be cultish and camp and comedic, but fails miserably.
Eisner was a master visual storyteller, groundbreaking and ahead of his time in his day. The film tries to be visually interesting, but if you've seen Sin City, you've seen it already. And Sin City was a far better movie. Probably because it had a proper director (I know Miller had a co-directing credit, but you know Rodriguez was the real guy in charge.) and decent actors (Jessica Alba excluded, of course) and knew when to use its visual flourishes for maximum effect. The Spirit has the same touches, but are used so inconsistently and for no apparent reason. The acting is terrible (Samuel L. Jackson is so hammy as the villain, The Octopus, I was expecting him to grow a little curly tail at the end) there's only the slimmest of plots and the dialogue is really awful.
It's basically an excuse for Miller to film lots of Hollywood starlets with very little on, and while that's an admirable aim, I'd rather he did his perving in his own time. (I was talking to a colleague about this movie, and he said he thought it was shit, but his teenage son loved it. I can guess why!) It's politically suspect in its portrayal of women ( I know it's supposed to be noirish, but this film is very definitely set in the present day, there's mobile phones and computers and at one point a photocopier on display, doesn't really fit with the look of the film) there are references to paedophilia (not very nice for a supposed kids' movie) and dressing Sam Jackson and Scarlett Johansson up as Nazis is a bit politically suspect as well. They're just dressed like that when they're explaining their grand scheme to our tied-up hero. As if we didn't guess they are bad people by that point, Miller tries to hammer it home by making them dress up as Hitler. And the plot's Macguffins, Heracle's Blood and The Golden Fleece, are not things that should be in a movie based on Will Eisner's comic.
As you can tell, I didn't really like it. It's a bad sign when the best thing about a night out at the cinema is the trailers.

Happy New Year!

Yeah, yeah. I know it's a bit late, but it's been a fairly hectic festive period for me. I didn't even start my Christmas shopping until three days before the big day because I had an art job (maybe I should say 'art favour' seeing as I've not received any payment yet) for a computer games company which took far more time than I wanted it to; it started off being five pages but then I received the script, which crammed far too much into its five pages, so I decided to virtually re-write it, making it more reader-friendly (and making it easier to draw!) and so it ended up being nine pages. Still, it was a useful exercise- I now know, should I need to, that I can produce four fully-inked, fully-lettered pages in a week and still do a day job. (Saying that, I did do the last twelve pages of Septic Isle in a week. I didn't go to work or have any sleep, though!) Some of the artwork was quite good, too, even if I say so myself:

Anyway, after that was done, Heather and I spent a weekend down south catching up with her friends and folks and spreading a bit of the Christmas cheer. Now, I don't know if I've mentioned this, but my lovely girlfriend is crazy about Christmas. She absolutely loves it. Normally, I see Christmas as a royal pain in the arse. I hate standing in queues in department stores listening to endless repeats of Slade or that awful one Paul McCartney did that sounds like an intestinal disorder (I'm still wondering why I never heard 'Rock n' Roll Christmas' by Gary Glitter at all this year. Funny how some festive songs go out of fashion, isn't it?) and all the forced jollity (you should know enough about me by now to know that I don't really do 'jolly') and repetitive strain injury from writing out all the Christmas cards for colleagues who probably don't even like me that much.(Although this year, I didn't bother with cards for work. I'm glad we don't do Secret Santa at my work. God knows what I'd receive!).
However, my girlfriend's enthusiasm rubbed off on me a little bit, so we ended up getting a massive tree (eight feet tall! I spent all Saturday sawing the bastard up and putting it into bags. I only had a poxy little hacksaw so now my arms and back are sore. Poor me.) and it did look nice, I suppose.
Christmas itself was a strange one for me, as it was the first Christmas day I've spent without my kids being present (I got them the next day and we had a nice time) but Heather's parents spent Christmas with us and had dinner and a nice day was had by all. Although, Heather was a bit pissed off that her folks had bought me more presents than they did for her! I'm currently working on Heather's dad, trying to make him an Aston Villa fan. I did succeed in getting him to say 'Up the Villa' as a Christmas toast. Sounds great in an American accent. Sounds great in any accent, actually. Especially as the Villa are doing well at the moment. (When I was doing some shopping in Woking, I saw a young lad wearing a Villa shirt, so it looks like we're picking up some of the glory-hunting Southern support. It's a good sign. He was probably an ex-gooner.)
As I said, I got my girls on Boxing Day, so we got to have Christmas all over again, and my brothers and their spouses came over the day after that for a festive drink or three. The highlight of that was when we played 'Who's in the box?' a game where you take pieces of paper out of said box, and have to describe who's written on them to your partner. You have a minute and have to describe as many as possible. This game threw up some great descriptions and answers. My partner was my youngest daughter, and her description of Gandhi as 'some bloke from the past who wore glasses' didn't win me a point. My eldest daughter's description of Jimi Hendrix as a 'left-handed guitarist, brown' got some giggles as well. My youngest got my description of Paris Hilton as 'that slag from America with a dog', which is just as well, because when I read her name all I could think about was the video 'One Night In Paris', and I didn't really want to be describing that to my thirteen year-old daughter. Other descriptions of note were:
'Old Christian singer with a turkey's neck and a colostomy bag,' and 'Rasta frog who ruined Star Wars.'

The main reason Christmas was a good one this year, however, was that I managed to get ten days off work and Heather and I spent them doing nice holiday type stuff like not having to get up, or going to the lovely Electric Cinema ( a restored 1900's cinema here in Brum where you can book a sofa and watch old movies. they also have this great service where you text them what you want from the bar and they bring it to your sofa) and watching It's A Wonderful Life on New Year's Eve. It almost made me want to emulate Jimmy Stewart when I came out of the picture house and run down the street it's on shouting 'Merry Christmas Old Rep theatre! Merry Christmas old Midland Red bus depot! Merry Christmas Adultworld sex shop and porno cinema!' but I managed to keep myself in check. We also went to the Thinktank at the Millenium Point, where I showed Heather the Spitfires built here in Brum at Castle Bromwich, and we learned that most of the guns used in the American Civil War were also manufactured here in Birmingham's Gun Quarter. So, not only is Brum responsible for keeping Hitler at bay, we're also responsible for the freeing of America's slaves. We also went to the planetarium there, where we watched a film about what Ancient Egypt saw when they looked at the night sky. And we watched Villa score a flukey win against Hull in a packed boozer in Moseley, and another flukey win against Gillingham in the same pub. All in all, it was a fantastic Christmas and New Year, and I enjoyed it so much I might even do it next year.
Hope your Christmases and New years were good too.

The Dark Knight.

Yesterday, my girlfriend and I went to watch The Dark Knight, and it's as brilliant as you've heard it is. Generally, these films rarely live up to the hype, but this movie does. It's edgy, dark, exciting, intelligent and thought-provoking. That's right, thought-provoking! I can't ever remember coming out of any other comic book movie and having a lengthy discussion about the moral questions raised by the movie. It is a long movie, but thinking about it, I can't think what could've been cut out without ruining the film, as every scene is important to the plot or character development.

The script is fantastic. It looks and sounds amazing, the production design, stunts and effects are all top notch. Even the music is fantastic. (No Prince songs to announce the Joker's arrival in this film!) The performances are nearly all spot on. Everyone is banging on about Heath Ledger's Joker, and he is good, although probably not the Oscar-worthy performance some people are calling it, but he does blow away Jack Nicholson's pantomime act in the 1989 Batman. Ledger's Joker is a vicious psychopath, not doing it for money (which he proves in one fire-raising scene) but because his nihilistic antics amuse him. Ledger's performance in this movie, however, is not as good as Gary Oldman's as Jim Gordon. It's less showy, certainly, but Oldman is, for me, the standout in this film, and the best Commissioner Gordon ever (that said, the others weren't much competition, really.) Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne/Batman isn't lost in all the acting showboating, he more than holds his own, and is a more convincing Wayne than he was last time around. Aaron Eckhart's Harvey Dent is also good, but he does just degenerate to thug mode when he becomes Two-Face. Still better than Tommy Lee Jones' hammy turn in Batman Forever, though. In fact, this is a good ensemble piece with all of the performers doing their jobs superbly.

This movie is amazing. This is how you should do sequels. I'm just hoping the director Christopher Nolan sticks around to do the inevitable third movie (seeing as it has had the biggest opening of any movie ever) because this franchise is, so far, something special, and finally the character of Batman is getting the movies it deserves.

One thing I will complain about however, is its rating. It's been given a 12A, which means young kids can go and see it with their folks, but this is not a kids film. It's violent and scary, and any six-year old youngster who is going to see it because he loves Batman is going to be absolutely freaked out (and not in a good way) by the movie. Although the violence isn't that bloody or graphic, it's still too nasty for young children to watch. Also, given the knife-crime epidemic that this country is undergoing at the moment, I don't think kids need to see the scene in which the Joker explains why he loves stabbing people. I can also imagine young children getting frightened by Two-Face (although it's fantastic FX work combining prosthetics and CGI, but it's too gruesome for small kids to see.)

That said, this 34 year-old loved it, and I want to see it again, a film this layered and intelligent needs multiple viewings, I reckon. The best movie of the year so far and probably the best comic-book movie ever. Awesome.

Horse-faced Lies.

I have to get something off my chest. It's been bugging me for a while now. The other day, whilst at the cinema, I was watching the trailers. As you do. One was for Hancock, a Will Smith movie. Now, Will might be a good actor, but I reckon he'll just look stupid in the black coat and homburg, and he'll have to go some to get the timing right of the classic line: 'A Pint? That's very nearly an armful!' Who have they got to play Sid James? Will Ferrell?
That wasn't what was bothering me, though. The next trailer was for the Sex And The City movie. Aaaaaarrrrggghhhh!!! I'm sick of seeing ads for this film. I'm sick of hearing about it, and I'm sick of flicking past articles about it in newspapers and magazines. They go on about this movie like it's the Second Coming. It's not. It's just a film about a horsey-faced skeleton and her four ropey mates sitting around a table and talking about men's cocks.
Now, I'm not claiming to have seen a lot of the original TV show. I did see a few episodes, though (the reasons why escape me, now) and they were all basically the same. Shergar or one of her mates gets a new boyfriend, or has problems with an old one. One of their boyfriends has a weird sexual kink, which they all have a good laugh about in a coffee shop.(They are all supposed to be successful career women, yet they all have employers that don't mind them fucking off for three-hour lunches every day.) They all buy shoes. Desert Orchid wears something that makes her look bleedin' ridiculous, the old one has a sex scene, and Red Rum sums it all up in a voiceover at the end.
This is not the great leap forward for feminism it thinks it is. I'm not claiming to be an expert on feminism either, but I have had my ear bent by a few of them in my time. SATC claims it shows modern women and relationships as they really are, but it basically tells us all women are interested in is shopping for shoes and big cocks. I suppose some are, but not the ones I know. (Just as well, really, considering my knowledge of shoes begins and ends with Doctor Marten. Can't really say I have a massive cock, either!) Also, in the episodes I saw, the men in it were either perverted or just useless. Or both. I find this offensive. Every bloke they met had something weird about them sexually, be it foul-tasting semen, or a prediliction for analingus or calling someone a bitch when they reached climax. And the four gorgons all found it a big laugh to share this intimate info about their boyfriends with their mates in a restaurant. I'd hate to be on the next table to them, about to tuck into a chocolate mousse when Trigger starts banging on about rimming. Lovely.
Can you imagine the furore if there was a TV show about four blokes sitting around a table in a cafe talking about how their girlfriend's fanny tasted disgusting? It would be criticised for being sexist. And so it should. Also, it should be noted that the SATC movie is written and directed by a man. Girl Power!
Maybe it's just me. Maybe I don't get it because I have a 'Y' chromosome. Maybe women like being stereotyped as cock-hungry fashion victims on telly and films. Or maybe it's because I've (hopefully) got a bit of intelligence and see this shit for what it is.

Indy Movie.

Yesterday, it was a Bank Holiday Monday, and it was pissing down with rain (as is usual for Bank Holiday Mondays) so my girlfriend and I decided to go and watch the new Indiana Jones movie.
Now, even though most of the people who want to see it have done so, I'll try and keep spoilers to a minimum, but in my opinion, it's not as good as the previous three, but it's a worthy addition to the canon, and it's good to have Dr. Henry Jones Jr. back.
The most notable change (to me, anyway) is the addition of CGI FX, which, for me, made the action sequences less exciting than before. In the previous instalments, every time someone was dragged under a lorry or hung off a tank or something, you were aware that a stuntman actually did do those things, and this adds to the excitement. This time, you're not so sure someone did do it. That's not to say it isn't entertaining, just less so. This is also evident in the 'icky animals' scene, in the previous instalments we had snakes, bugs and rats, which were mostly done for real, but in this one there are some very CGI fire ants, and while the scenes are cool, just not as cool as before.
Also, there's certain scenes featuring monkeys and fridges which stretch credulity just a little bit, but this is an Indiana Jones movie, for heaven's sake!
The cast are mostly excellent. Harrison Ford looks like he's actually enjoying being in a movie for the first time in a long time, Cate Blanchett is cartoonishly evil, and Shia LaBeouf is as good as he's been in everything else I've seen him in.
The English members of the cast fare less well. Ray Winstone and Jim Broadbent are good, but just seem to be there to spout exposition. John Hurt just gibbers like a lunatic, mostly, but, to be fair, he is actually playing a loon, so fair do's.
The climax has come under criticism in a lot of the online reviews I've read for being too unrealistic. So, in the previous instalments we've had an ark full of face-melting ghosts, holy stones that spontaneously combust, and a cup that made someone age rapidly and heal bullet wounds. Hardly gritty realism. The climax isn't faith-based, like the last three, it's more SF, but, in my opinion, this fits the fifties era it's set in. The original trilogy were homages to the old Republic serials of the Thirties, whereas this one is more of an homage to the 'Reds-under-the bed' SF movies of the Fifties.
What sets this movie apart from all the other rehashes we've had lately (Die Hard, Rambo, the Star Wars prequels) is that this feels like it belongs to the franchise that came before it.
So, in summary then, I liked it. It's a big, dumb, enjoyable action movie, pure Spielberg, and I liked it.

What I'll probably be watching this summer.

This summer is going to be exciting for a nerd like me. There are a few comics-based movies out I'm desperate to see. Saying that, though, I need to curb this sort of behaviour as more than a few comics-based movies have left me bitterly disappointed in the past. I'll live, though. (Actually,that sounded a bit dramatic.Don't be too concerned. I'm not going to slash my wrists because of the treatment Galactus got in that last Fantastic Four movie.)

Anyway, I'm a sharing, caring kinda guy, so I thought I'd put some of the trailers up so you can get excited about them too.

First up is Iron Man. This is Marvel's first self-financed film, and that makes me hopeful that the source material will be treated respectfully. I hope so, because I love Iron Man. The old Iron Man, anyway, before he got turned into basically a villain in Civil War. I've got a load of '70s Gene Colan Iron Man (when his helmet had a nose on it) comics that I love to bits. The trailer looks great, anyway. Robert Downey Jr. looks just the part as Tony Stark (not so sure about Gwyneth Paltrow as 'Pepper' Potts, though. I'm allergic to Ms. Paltrow and her whingey husband, and all) and having Brummie metal legends Black Sabbath on the soundtrack is both bleedin' obvious and utterly fantastic. The Audioslave and AC/DC songs used are alright, as well:


Right. The second in my trailer roundup is Guillermo Del Toro's follow up to the generally well-received by everyone Pan's Labyrinth. Yep, it's Hellboy 2. This film looks great. I'm a big fan of Del Toro anyway, and I liked the first one, but this one looks like it might be a cracker, a giant monster mash-up, with Lovecraftian tentacled creatures and Luke Goss' bad guy looking a lot like Moorcroft's Elric.
Also, there's a nice bit of Rammstein on the soundtrack at the end. What is it with heavy metal and comic-book movie trailers? I seem to remember Dimmu Borgir being on the trailer for the first Hellboy movie. God, I am such a geek, remembering stuff like that! Anyway, have a butchers:


Next up is Marvel's second self-financed movie, a reboot of the Hulk. Ang Lee's version of the Green Goliath has its fans, but I'm not one of them. It was an interesting attempt, but ultimately flawed. This new one has a great cast, and looks like there might be a bit more 'Hulk Smash!' than the Ang Lee one. Also, there's rumours of a crossover with the Iron Man film, creating a silver screen mini-Marvel Universe. However, I'm disappointed that there's no heavy metal in this trailer, and I'm also disappointed that Ed Norton doesn't seem to wear the purple trousers that the comics Bruce Banner is fond of wearing. (While I'm on the subject of the Hulk's pants, I hate it when people who think they're being clever ask 'How come the Hulk's trousers never rip ?' when the answer is bloody obvious: You can't have the Hulk's big green cock swinging about in a kid's comic, or for that matter, in a movie. It gives a new meaning to the term 'tentpole blockbuster', though.)



Next up is the one I'm probably looking forward to the most. It's a small independent film based on a little known character called 'Batman'. Yes, it's The Dark Knight, In which Christian Bale's funny jaw will be overshadowed by the tragic untimely death of his co-star. Besides Heath Ledger's Joker, the Scarecrow makes a comeback, and Two-Face also turns up (his appearance is still a mystery at the moment) and usually, lots of villains makes a rubbish movie (Spider-man 3, both of the Schumacher Batman movies) but I loved Batman Begins, and I reckon Christopher Nolan knows what he's doing. And, also, Katie Holmes is gone! In my opinion, she was the weak link in the first one, Maggie Gyllenhaal can only be an improvement. No metal on the soundtrack of this one either. Don't these people know that you need heavy metal to sell you a comic book movie?! Honestly!


And last, but not least, is a bit of a Secret Identity exclusive. It's the first look at Matthew Vaughn's upcoming Thor movie:

(Not really. It's an old Thor cartoon from the '60s dubbed with Derek and Clive. I felt the need to tell you this because I've found out recently that a few people who read this blog do so at work, and this clip has VERY strong language and I wouldn't want any of you to get into trouble. So, I can sleep easy now, because I did warn you!)

Also must-see this year, from my nerd's point of view, anyway, are Indy 4 (the trailer for that can be found elsewhere on this blog) , and Bond 22 , but those aren't comicky enough to be included, and besides, Quantum Of Solace hasn't got a trailer out yet.

Thank you for watching.

Still here!!

Hiya. It's been a while since I last posted, I know. But, I've got a perfectly valid excuse in that I've been distracted by my lovely new girlfriend and I've been busy either at work or travelling to historical cities in the south of England (which I may blog about in the near future).

This post is about other people's blogs, basically. Over at Andy Winter's blog, he's been saying lovely things about the artwork I did for his fantastically scripted Septic Isle book, a book which is getting ever-nearer to being unleashed on an unsuspecting world. I do love blowing my own trumpet, but it's even better having someone else blow one for you. I'm very proud of this book, and I'm hoping it goes down well with readers. I might post some images soon, but I want all seven of my readers to buy a copy, and if I post a lot of my art, it may deter people from doing so! Watch this space.

Also, at Madeley's fantastic Fractal Hall he posts about one of my favourite topics ie. Movie posters, so, in response, I'd thought I'd post a favourite of mine:

Anyway, I promise to update a bit more often in future, but I'm going away now.

Roll on May 22nd!!

I know today is V.D. day (Valentine's day), but my letterbox was hardly overflowing with cards from sex-starved secret admirers, so I'm going to go off-tangent. Well kind of, because this is sort of about something I love, the Indiana Jones movies. I remember first seeing Raiders Of The Lost Ark at junior school, it was an end of term treat. We all packed into a classroom, sat on desks as well as the chairs, and the blinds closed out the encroaching summer, and we watched the film on one of them new fangled top-loading betamax video recorders. It blew my mind then as an eight year-old, I remember that day very fondly, and now, when I'm well into my thirties, I still love that movie, because it still entertains me as much now as it did then.

(There are things now, though, that mildly bother the thirty-three year old me after repeated viewings- Like, how does Indy know that to avoid being melted by the ghosty/angel/demon things at the end you just have to avoid looking at it? You assume he's read it somewhere, but it's not explained. And when those blokes from the government come to see Indy about a top-secret mission, Dr. Jones just happens to have a big antique book about the Ark of the Covenant under his arm? Or when they decipher the markings on the headpiece to the staff of Ra, we're told that the staff should be 72" tall, yet when Indy uses it, it's at least 18" taller than he is, which means they've bollocksed it up or Harrison Ford isn't much taller than Kenny Baker. I'm letting these things go, though. I don't want to sound too much like a net nerd!)

Anyway, I only bring this up because I saw the trailer for the fourth instalment, I'm excited, now (even though it's got Ray Winstone in it. Kinda sick of looking at his mush for some weird reason, but I'll get over it!) and it's coming out on my Birthday! I just hope George Lucas hasn't brought his 'fix it 'til it's fucked' philosophy to this franchise like he did with Star Wars . Have a butcher's yourself and see what you think:

Pow!Biff! Part 9 update.

This is an update on my last-but-one post (the one about Watchmen and the Caped Crustacean, as The Joker calls him). Above, is the first proper poster for 'The Dark Knight' and it's a nice, clever, simple and effective design.

Here are photos of the protagonist and antagonist. Apparently, This is the first Batman movie where our hero can move his head in all directions. Progress, eh?(Well, not exactly in all directions as that would make him Owlman. But not the Owl, that fat flying bloke from the Daredevil comics. God, I sound more like a nerd every day!) They've still got his pointy ears wrong. (I remember talking to John McCrea, {you know that bloke who draws Hitman?}about Batman Begins once, and he hated it. He's allergic to Liam Neeson anyway, but he hates that movie because he said, and I'm paraphrasing: "Batman looks like a sex toy, so he does")

The Joker looks genuinely creepy, and probably looks like the Joker would do, if he was real. He's not tubby either, like the Jack Nicholson incarnation. Everyone knows the Joker is built like a gypsy's dog. Anyway, I thought Batman Begins was brilliant, and I'm really looking forward to part two.

Pow! Biff! (part 9)

Hello again! It's another of my intermittent posts on stuff I find interesting in the strange world of comic books. A world I visit every now and again for a holiday, and sometimes I work there, too. Kinda like a MeatLoaf tribute singer in Tenerife.

Anyway, the reason I'm posting is to show you some interesting pics I've seen on the internet. At the top, there, is one of the first pics of Heath Ledger as the Joker from the upcoming The Dark Knight. Apparently, there is going to be an unveiling of the first 'proper' picture of him on the Empire Online site soon. It looks like they're going for something rather different from what's gone before, which is a good thing, as Cesar Romero with thick white greasepaint over his moustache wouldn't work these days!

The most interesting comics-related film stuff I've seen this week comes from the dreaded (by me, anyway!) Watchmen adaptation, directed by Zack Snyder, who directed the film of Frank Miller's 300. ( an interesting film, although it's politically a bit suspect, in my book, especially in its portrayal of women, and its portrayal of Persians, {persia is now Iraq; Do you see the clever, subtle allegory with the modern-day situation? Not that subtle, is it? Or that clever, really.} as either subhuman freaks, grotesques and/or bloodthirsty immoral devils leaves a bad taste in the mouth. But hey, it's Frank Miller! That kinda thing's expected!)

Anyway, these pictures are from the set of Watchmen. The first one is of the newsstand. You know, the one where that young kid (usually smoking) sits and reads Tales From The Black Freighter without actually paying for it? (Also, in the book, these bits are really cool as you can see an unmasked Rorschach with his sandwich board, something I didn't realise until the second time I read it.)You can click on these pictures to make them bigger.

And speaking of Rorschach:

Again, if you touch it , it will get bigger. (I keep telling myself, and others, that, but I'm kidding myself. Boo hoo!) He doesn't seem to have any of the inkblots on his mask that give him his name, but maybe they're CGI'd on afterwards. It was interesting on the recent Comics Britannia listening to Alan Moore read this book out loud, as he did a very stop-start strange whispering voice when he was doing Rorschach. I wonder if this has been taken on board by the actor playing him?
Anyway, it looks like the movie looks right, I'm just hoping the plot and script are up to snuff, which it probably won't be, as, in my opinion, you'd need to do it in a lot more time than a movie'll give you. Maybe they should've done it like Heroes, only not so slow moving or wanky.

Shut Up And Get Me a Macchiato! Pronto!

I have to share this with you all. (Apologies to those of you I interfere with on Facebook and have already seen it because I sent it you). Maybe it's because I'm a comics geek, maybe it's because I've seen loads of the type of films this is spoofing, maybe it's because I'm a Londoner (although I'm patently not!) that I love this clip and haven't yet got tired of it!


Right. Hope you liked it. My next post will be a proper one, no football or anything (even though we did beat the scum on Sunday-still chuffed!), honest!

It's Been a While!

How do. I know it's been a while since my last post, but I've been busy, ain't I?! Anyway, I'll tell those of you still with me what I've been up to.
Firstly, my brother Marc's wedding went brilliantly, and kinda weird as it's probably the first properly grown-up thing any of us have done! Also weird was seeing my mom and dad in the same room for the first time in what must be at least twelve years. And not scratching or biting each other. Or swearing. Or breaking furniture. Like I said, weird. Also weird was the photographer. I won't tell you why, just imagine! My other brother, Matthew (notice the 'M' motif with our names? Clever, eh? Not so clever when the post used to arrive with just 'M. Trimble' on it. I think our Dad planned it years in advance just so he could 'accidentally' read our mail! Only joking...) who was Best Man (I, apparently, was Head Usher, as I am so brilliant at ushing. One of my duties was walking the bride's mother down the aisle, a ritual I've never heard of or seen before) where was I? Oh yes, anyway, Matthew. He brought a piece of paper along that he thought was his speech, but it turned out to be the paperwork from the hotel we stayed at the week before in Cardiff. He had to make his speech unaided, and he nailed it. It was a brilliant speech, but that doesn't surprise me as he's always had the gift of the gab, the silver-tongued little git. All of us Trimbles have the talent for talking endless bollocks. Anyway, the couple looked great (If you're reading this, Marc, this is the only compliment you're getting out of me!) the weather was lovely and a good time was had by (mostly) all. I can't wait til Marc's next wedding!

Other stuff that has happened in the last couple of weeks: I've found out I'm allergic to my friends' cat, despite having no other allergies in my life before. Having a swollen face, itchy eyes and a runny nose is really horrible. Now I know why I'm a dog person.

I've been to see Nine Inch Nails (absolutely awesome) and Chris Cornell (good, but not awesome, and no support act either-boo!) in the last couple of weeks. Both were in the Carling Academy Birmingham which really is a terrible venue. Trent Reznor of NIN criticised it on stage calling it 'a shitty club'. He should've seen it when it was the Hummingbird all those years ago.


Also, a young lady and I went to see The Bourne Ultimatum, which is an excellent movie, but a couple of things bug me about it. One is the fact that he seems to have an endless supply of money. With the CIA watching his every move, he can't really have a bank account, nor does he seem to have a job or any income, but if he wants to fly to Moscow, or New York, or get a boat to Tangier, or get the train to Waterloo, he has no trouble paying for it. The other thing was he bought a mobile phone from Carphone Warehouse which was seemingly fully charged when it was taken out of the box. But then, The Bourne waiting for two hours while his mobile charges up is less of a catchy title, I suppose. It's worth watching for the way Bourne uses a hardback book during a fight. Made me wince, anyway.

And finally, today was the day my youngest daughter started secondary school, and she looked very smart in her new uniform. She looked all grown up yet small (if you know what I mean) and I hope she does alright. Man, I feel old. And skint, after forking out for all the ephemera that kids need for school these days.

I'm sure there's loads of other stuff I wanted to tell you about, but I can't remember it right now, and you're probably not interested anyway, I was going to make a flippant comment about a washed-up has been pop star, but I get loads of comments telling me off when I do that, so I won't. See you soon.

Clobberin' Time!

On Saturday night, I went to see the new Fantastic Four movie with my new lady friend. Wasn't that bothered about seeing it, because the first one was a pile of shit, but seeing as this was supposed to be a date, the other films on (Hostel 2, Captivity, Vacancy and some film about Edith Piaf) weren't exactly suitable, we plumped for the Silver Surfer. I have a very deep fondness for the 60s FF (It was Kirby at his zenith, even more amazing when you consider the amount of books he was churning out month after month at the time), and I wasn't keen on seeing it bollocksed up for the second time.

Now, my new lady friend knows I'm a comics geek, but I think she's unaware how deep my sickness is. When I watch films based on comics I love, I have to split my brain into two halves; the nerd half and the normal half. The normal half thought the film was 'alright', it passed an hour and half amiably enough. The nerd half of my brain was going 'Hate it! Hate it! Make it stop!'

Now if you've not seen it and want to, there will be spoilers so stop reading now. What is the point of adapting a popular comic into a film, then taking out most of what makes the comic popular in the first place? as I said before, I love the old Lee/Kirby Fantastic Four stuff. A highlight of their epic collaboration was 'The Coming Of Galactus!", which the new film is based on. Now, I'm not expecting a totally faithful adaptation, certain aspects of the story, like Uatu the watcher's intervention, (told you this nerdiness was a sickness!) just wouldn't work on screen. But to have a film which spends most of its time building up to a showdown with Galactus, who devours planets, only to have it not happen, is rubbish. And turning Galactus from a giant man with a tuning fork helmet into a big dust cloud with fingers is even more rubbish! The picture above shows you what Galactus looks like, in no way does he even remotely resemble a cloud. A cloud that sticks its fingers into the holes in the earth that the Silver Surfer has made like some giant cosmic bowling ball. After the film finished I was thinking, "who's going to fill them holes in? That's going to take some work." Not out loud, obviously. Like I said, she doesn't know how geeky I really am ! One of Jack Kirby's great talents was his character designs (Along with the FF, and myriad others, he's also responsible for Hulk, Captain America, Thor, X-Men, along with their most memorable villains) and his design for the Thing is great. I love Ben Grimm, he's not your usual tights and cape superhero, he's a big talking turd. The film takes this great design and makes it look rubbish. It's got to be one of the cheapest-looking make up jobs I've seen for ages. Also, when you have such a striking-looking character like Galactus, who was designed by a genius, it seems odd that Hollywood thinks it can do better, and that a big dust cloud is superior. Well it's not.

The film seems designed to do two things. One, it seems to be designed to launch the Silver Surfer into his own film franchise, which might be good. He's a great character and the films based on the comics could be interesting, but Hollywood will mess it up. They've taken liberties with him in this film already. He's gained the ability to phase through stuff, like Kitty Pryde (Nerdy comics reference again!), which, I don't remember him doing in the comics. Generally, though, I thought ol' Norrin Radd looked cool in this film, they obviously spent more money on him than they did on poor old Ben Grimm.

The second thing this film is designed to do is to advertise stuff. the product placement in this film is astonishing. Even the fucking Fantasticar has a Dodge logo on its bonnet!

Also, Jessica Alba is a rubbish actress. She looks nice enough, but she's the weakest link of the FF. They make her wear really unconvincing blue contact lenses and blonde wig, which makes me wonder why they didn't cast someone more talented who is actually blonde with blue eyes. Maybe they should've cast a real talking turd as Ben Grimm, as well. While we're on the subject of rubbish acting, Julian McMahon is terrible as Doctor Doom. Doom is the baddest bastard in the Marvel Universe, but in the movie he's some wooden girly bloke who spends his time smirking and trying to look evil and failing. Thank the Broccolis he didn't get the Bond gig. I did enjoy the bit when he pinched Norrin's surfboard, but it's still not as good as when it happened in the comic. And as for turning Johnny into a type of Super-Skrull at the end- meh!

At least the film only lasted an hour and half, a pleasant change from all the bum-numbing threequels I've been sitting through lately, and it's not all bad. Despite his shitty costume, Michael Chiklis' performance as the Thing is spot-on, and Chris Evans (not the ginger ex-Billie shagger) is great as Johnny, although him walking around with his shirt off makes me feel inadequate, especially when I'm with a lady. My physique is bound to look rubbish in comparison! Saying that though, my physique looks rubbish when compared to most people!

Also, this was the first time in years I've been to a cinema of an evening and without kids in tow. I nearly fainted when they charged eleven quid for two tickets! Bloody Hell! Considering the fact that a new DVD costs about £14 these days, cinemas better stop ripping people off or they will find themselves obsolete. It's got HD and Blu-Ray and surround sound 50" plasma screens to compete with these days, so it better buck its ideas up. Eleven quid!! It's not as if the film was worth it! Basically. If you're not a comics nerd, you might like it, if you are, just re-read the original comic strips. I think they're in the collection Essential Fantastic Four vol.3, which you can get for a tenner, a whole quid cheaper than the pictures, and about thirty times more rewarding!

Spidey 3

I took my daughters to see Spider-man 3 today. It's worth watching, but it suffers from 'third movie syndrome'. It's a bit bloated, with each of the bad guys (there's three-Sandman, Venom and Goblin,Jr.- called 'New Goblin' in this apparently, according to the action figures I've seen) each having their own story arc, but none of them have enough screen time to develop properly, and because there are so many villains , and villain's origin sequences, this means the film goes on at least a half hour too long.

Since the Bourne Identity came out, most fight scenes I've seen since in big action films have copied its close-up shaky camera fighting scenes. Batman Begins, Casino Royale and now Spidey 3 have this similar technique. It doesn't work in this film, a lot of the time it was hard to follow what was happening. With the earlier Spidey movies, most of the fight scenes happened in daylight, in this one, they all happen at night, except for one, which ends up underground (ie. dark) making it even harder to follow, especially when Spidey has the black outfit on.

I did enjoy it, though, the scene with Flint Marko trying to pull himself back together after first being made into sand to grab a locket which has a picture of his dying daughter was a great one. after this, though, he hardly says anything and spends most of his screen time either being a dust cloud or a giant sand monster, the type of monster we've seen before in the Mummy movies. It's a shame, I've always liked Sandman as a character, it's a pity he wasn't given more to do.

Tobey Maguire was great, though, especially when the black suit turns him a little bit bad. Like Superman III , our hero goes off the rails. When Christopher Reeve went bad, he just grew a five o'clock shadow and wore burgundy boots, but when Tobey goes bad, he combs his fringe down and wears eyeliner. Apparently, being bonded with an evil alien symbiote turns you into a member of My Chemical Romance! Also, I thought Harry Osborn's story in this film was great, and maybe should've been the film's only antagonist. It's just a shame they didn't give him (or his dad) the stripey hair he has in the comics. That's a great look(See picture) .Also, Bruce Campbell is great in his cameo, taking his frenglish accent from Peter Sellers and/or 'Allo 'Allo!

Venom, when he turns up, was a bit of a disappointment. he's only in it for about fifteen minutes, but the climactic fight at the end is exciting, except for Mary Jane being kidnapped and held hostage to get Spidey to come and fight them. Again! This happened at the end of the last two movies as well. Also marring this sequence is a really annoying British news reporter who gives an ongoing commentary to the action.

Gwen Stacy (Played by Ron Howard's daughter Bryce Dallas Howard. She has red hair in real life, yet she plays a blonde. Kirsten Dunst, who is Blonde, plays a ginge. Seems strange to me.) is introduced, then forgotten about, total waste of time. Implicating Flint Marko as Uncle Ben's killer also wasn't really needed either, in my opinion. Topher Grace is good as Eddie Brock, but again, not given enough screen time.

Generally, though, it's an entertaining movie, not as bad as I'd feared it was going to be. The kids loved it, they're not encumbered with thirty-odd years of comic nerdiness like I am.

The Magic Number?

I love watching films. I like reading about them. I'm the type of bloke who will watch a DVD extra-documentary about editing, because I find the whole process of film-making fascinating. (Except for those people who go around weddings, christenings, or any big family party with camcorders, as they piss me off. If they didn't have a camera and just stuck their nose in to people's conversations the partygoers would consider them just plain fucking rude. In my family, which is mainly Irish in origin, anyone sticking their nose in would get it punched and broken, and rightly so. Nosey fuckers.)
I sometimes buy Empire magazine, as it gives me something to read whilst having a dump, and they have this habit of 'bigging up' forthcoming major releases. This year, the films coming out leave me dismayed at the lack of originality and imagination amongst Hollywood's creators. Despite films like Hot Fuzz, Sunshine, Grindhouse and Stardust (films I'm particularly looking forward to.), this summer's big releases are all sequels. There are films like Die Hard 4, Harry Potter 5, National Treasure 2, Saw4, Fantastic Four 2 (loving the Silver Surfer in the trailer, even if he's gained the superpower of being able to phase through stuff, like X-Men's Kitty Pryde, despite no precursor in the comics.)and remakes of The Hitcher, Halloween and Hairspray (all beginning with 'H'. Coincidence?).
These all illustrate the dearth of original thoughts in Hollywood, but most of the tentpole blockbusters are what are known as 'Threequels', ie. second sequels, ie. films ending in '3'. There's Rush Hour 3, Pirates Of The Caribbean 3, Bourne 3 (Isn't it weird how the new Amarican 21st century superspies Jason Bourne and Jack Bauer have the same initials as the 1950's British superspy James Bond?), Shrek 3, Resident Evil 3, and finally, Spider-Man 3. Everyone knows that most film franchises go off the rails at the third movie. Just remember the third films in the Superman, Blade, Rocky, Alien, Lethal Weapon, Terminator, X-Men, Batman, Jurassic Park, Hellraiser, and the Godfather franchises. All rubbish. (There are good third films, including The Return Of The King, Army Of Darkness, The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly, Goldfinger and Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade, although, maybe those last two are due to the fact that Sir Sean Connery is in both of them, and he makes even a shit film watchable. I was going to include Return Of The Jedi as well, but compared to the first two it is an overblown rubbish compilation of the best bits of its predecessors with added dwarves in furry suits.)
I hope Spider-Man 3 bucks the trend. The first two are excellent, maybe because they only had one villain in them. The second one was better (maybe because I've always loved Doc Ock as a super-villain.), but judging by the trailer of the third one, it has at least three villains. Sandman, Venom, and a new Green Goblin all appear, and I'm hoping it doesn't follow the precursor set by the Batman films, ie. the more villains there are, the shitter the movie. Batman just had the Joker, Batman Returns had Catwoman and the Penguin, Batman Forever had Two-face and the Riddler, and Batman And Robin had Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze and Bane. Loads of villains lead to a lack of focus and therefore a crapper film. X-Men 3, for example, had two plots, the mutant cure and the Phoenix storylines, and if the film focused on either plot and not both, it would've been a much better film.
It's about time Hollywood started making original films.I'm fed up with sequels, remakes, spoofs and video game and comics adaptations. With the competition movies now have with satellite TV, video games and the internet, it's got to get better or it will find itself obsolete.