October 2008
| mon | tue | wed | thu | fri | sat | sun |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
- Name: Adrian DeHerrera
- Location: Albuquerque
- Favorite Game(s): Final Fantasy VII, Metal Gear, Resident Evil 2, Castlevania: SOTN, Goonies II, SSB:M
- Favorite Developer(s): Capcom
- Favorite Film(s): Halloween, Aliens, Dawn of the Dead, Shaolin Soccer, Brokeback Mountain (woo!)
Blog
Jun 5th, 2006V for Vendetta vs. X-Men 3
There were two big movies I was looking forward to this summer - the first was X-Men 3, and the 2nd Superman Returns with V for Vendetta a curiosity on the outside edges of my memory. I mean, we all know what happens when comic books get turned into celluloid: You hire a dumb pretty moron (Jessica Alba) or a big-name actor not right for the part (George Clooney, Ben Affleck) or a director who has no idea what to do with the source material (Ang Lee) - mix in a cup of horrible CGI with a ho-yum story that may or may not even reflect its comic roots and you have 80% of American comic book movies (thank God for Sin City).
With the X-Men franchise though, I had yet to be let down. In fact, Bryan Singer turned our merry mutants into a stylish, action filled series that was on track to something epic with the Phoenix Saga. Now, V for Vendetta, when I first saw the ads, looked to me like a re-visitation of The Phantom starring D-List celebrity Billy Zane, except this time with Natalie Portman who comes off of the prequel to Star Wars which by all rights SHOULD have made her a D-List celebrity.
So I finally got to watch both my favorite mutants and my favorite masked terrorist in their respective films and decided to do a versus of both films - I wonder how many of you felt the same way I did?
+++++++++
____________
Just to prelude this review, I have to say that I have no shame in saying I'm a total X-Men fanatic. Alright, there's some shame, like the shame I feel when I admit I paid money to join the Janet Jackson fan club in 1989, but therapy really can work wonders for these kinds of things. I spent hundreds and hundreds of dollars on back issues, special covers, novels, posters, rolling papers, breast pumps – anything that had the X-Men logo on it, I bought. So I think it's fair that I have a vested interest in wanting the property to be turned into a film that retains the "feel" of what makes the X-Men so great while minimizing any crappiness that may taint it, such as involving Resident Evil director Paul W.S. Anderson in any capacity whatsoever.
I'm also a huge fan of Alan Moore (V for Vendetta and The Watchmen writer), and I know his work is outstanding. As to whether his source material has been done justice, one should look at the films From Hell or League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and make their own decision, but for the most part, Mr. Moore has distanced himself from Hollywood adaptations, and for good reason. I love me some X-Men and I love me some Alan Moore, but although Moore's writing may have a more adult or sophisticated tone than what the X-Men have to offer, how did they compare after being taken to the silver screen?
In previous incarnations, the X-Men series has proven competent. Sure the first one had parts that dragged and Storm's weave was horrific and Cyclops was a neutered wuss, but overall, Bryan Singer set the tone for the next installment. X-Men 2: X-Men United provided excellent action scenes with fun dialogue and sure Storm's weave was horrific and Cyclops was a crybaby wuss, but that ending left fanboys drooling for more, myself included.
"What in the hell am I doing with a neutered wuss like you?"
V for Vendetta, on the other hand, is the first in what one can only hope is a singular installment (if only because the movie doesn't exactly leave you even needing one). Its source material was a lauded comic book series written by a surly old Brit that was never as popular or perhaps mainstream as our favorite band of angsty mutants, but whose themes aren't any less important. I think it's safe to say that expectations for V weren't close to being on par with what we may have been expecting with X-3, and maybe that is what made the film even better.
Thematically, both films present relevant social issues with Last Stand tackling bigotry and ethical questions of changing innate parts of ourselves while Vendetta deals with fascism and subsequent anarchy or revolution. Last Stand on one hand is a fantastical ride that tries to parallel the social issues revolving around discrimination of homosexuals, minorities and the disabled – in fact, all the series' films have maintained that one point and how we, as a society, deal with those issues. In X-3, the beginning of the movie (look away if you don't want spoilers) introduces us to Warren Worthington, a young man desperate to remove the budding pair of wings that have sprouted out of his back, but what is fascinating is that in wanting to appease his father, he has gone so far as to use knives and cutting utensils to try and saw them off regardless of the pain it might cause him. As the film progresses, the human community has seemingly found a "cure" that would somehow remove the "renegade" mutant gene and change mutants back to their "natural" selves. After resident drama queen Storm gives a hearted speech about why there is no need to be "cured", a war erupts between those who consider the "cure" a prelude to genocide and those who choose to fight for peace a.k.a. those looking for more screen time.
"BY THE GODDESS!! KEEP THE PAYCHECKS COMING!"
I applaud that Singer's films have never thrown the underlying issues in your face. It was a subtler attempt to bring attention to the plight of those who are different and the problems they face from society and from themselves. Unlike the "aren't-we-all-a-little-downright-racist?" social sledgehammer to the face that was Crash, X-3 shows multiple viewpoints from Professor X's dream for peace and equality through diplomacy (and optic blasts) to Magneto's dream of cucaracha-like humans being crushed beneath homo superior's feet to even the humans just doing what they do best: paving roads with good intentions that end in explosions and faceless soldiers used as target practice. V for Vendetta is a bit more pointed, on the other hand.
Imagine a world where leaders have used propaganda, fear mongering and force to hold its citizens captive not only by guns and authority but through the media. There are no superpowered mutant teams (some with horrible hairpieces) to stand up to dictators; there is only obedience or death. This is the dystopian future where government rules with an iron fist and you'd better not be Muslim, gay, slightly retarded or lazy-eyed because the government can and will be dropping by to kill you.
Sure, there's a parallel to the ultra-conservative propagandistic leaders today driving the United States and Great Britain to war with terror alerts and anthrax scares and wiretapping, but throughout history, peoples have always dealt with these issues everywhere in the world. Taking a cue from today's headlines, the Wachowski brothers (The Matrix) have created a screenplay that is brave and hard-hitting, especially in an atmosphere where questioning authority in itself can be considered treasonous, and never shies away from the main subject of the story: the battle against tyranny through anarchy and deliciously flamboyant capes and masks.
I thought both films did a superb job of tackling their respective matters. Vendetta may have veered into more modern liberal-scented territories, but it handles the story with gusto as does X-3, albeit without the Singer-inspired style we are accustomed to. So now that we've seen what both movies had in store for us thematically, how did they do otherwise?
Visually, V for Vendetta is striking. It's gripping and it's visceral and at points, even beautiful. Although "V" (our freedom fighting anarchist) wears a mask, the actor beneath (Hugo Weaving) is perfect for the role, using body language and voicework with finesse giving us a character we can relate to as well as be disgusted by. Natalie Portman crawls out of the Sarlacc pit that was her stint on Star Wars by actually being an actress; unlike her Padme counterpart, Evey has more than two emotions. After Garden State, Vendetta is a slingshot upward for her and all I can say is that if George Lucas asks you to do anything ever again, just mace him and don't look back until you reach a police station. You're on a roll.
"... and this is for Episode I."
Fascist-controlled London is dark, yet somehow sterile, crippled by Orwellian surveillance watching peoples' every move. This doesn't differ much from current-day London except that perhaps dictators have forced restaurant owners to provide food that doesn't taste like cardboard. Regardless, the set pieces are memorable and when V decides to bust heads, it's graceful while menacing and in the end it all comes together beautifully and although I watched the movie almost six weeks after its original debut, the crowd in my theater gave it loud applause.
X-Men 3: The Last Stand, while impressive considering all of the technical problems producers had during its filming, didn't deserve the same reception. Don't get me wrong, the special effects in this film are amazing. When Phoenix goes ape-shit (which she does a lot), the carnage is gorgeous. Magneto, like Homey, don't play dat and when he gets pissed off, you'd better pray he doesn't pull your pacemaker out of your ass because this guy is ruthless. Cars explode left and right, mutants display all sorts of inventive powers and Rebecca Romijn gets naked, satisfying the audience to the point where some end up satisfying themselves while watching.
Still, even though the special effects look great (look for an effective de-aging of Magneto and Professor X scene), there is just something missing. Perhaps it's that Ratner is no Bryan Singer and it shows or that the wire-work in the fight scenes isn't all that believable, but the whole production just seemed rushed. When Ratner took over the series, he was left with all sorts of baggage to clean up, all while being pushed to release the film before Singer's own future summer blockbuster Superman which may have been detrimental to creating the epic film he had been hoping for. Unfortunately, it turns out simply to be a fun popcorn flick, and maybe that's all that should have been expected.
"It ain't nobody's business but ours."
In the end, both films succeed in all categories: Storylines, visuals, sound and lack of any involvement of Paul W.S. Anderson, but which one trumps the other? The answer is V for Vendetta by a mile. X-3 may have awesome special effects and a naked Rebecca Romijn, but V runs circles around the X-Men faster than Callisto, which doesn't make much sense since in the comic book Callisto doesn't have super running abilities – stupid Ratner! So, if you're waiting for great films to see before Superman, you'll find that both of these films are both worth the money.
With the X-Men franchise though, I had yet to be let down. In fact, Bryan Singer turned our merry mutants into a stylish, action filled series that was on track to something epic with the Phoenix Saga. Now, V for Vendetta, when I first saw the ads, looked to me like a re-visitation of The Phantom starring D-List celebrity Billy Zane, except this time with Natalie Portman who comes off of the prequel to Star Wars which by all rights SHOULD have made her a D-List celebrity.
So I finally got to watch both my favorite mutants and my favorite masked terrorist in their respective films and decided to do a versus of both films - I wonder how many of you felt the same way I did?
+++++++++
____________
Just to prelude this review, I have to say that I have no shame in saying I'm a total X-Men fanatic. Alright, there's some shame, like the shame I feel when I admit I paid money to join the Janet Jackson fan club in 1989, but therapy really can work wonders for these kinds of things. I spent hundreds and hundreds of dollars on back issues, special covers, novels, posters, rolling papers, breast pumps – anything that had the X-Men logo on it, I bought. So I think it's fair that I have a vested interest in wanting the property to be turned into a film that retains the "feel" of what makes the X-Men so great while minimizing any crappiness that may taint it, such as involving Resident Evil director Paul W.S. Anderson in any capacity whatsoever.
I'm also a huge fan of Alan Moore (V for Vendetta and The Watchmen writer), and I know his work is outstanding. As to whether his source material has been done justice, one should look at the films From Hell or League of Extraordinary Gentlemen and make their own decision, but for the most part, Mr. Moore has distanced himself from Hollywood adaptations, and for good reason. I love me some X-Men and I love me some Alan Moore, but although Moore's writing may have a more adult or sophisticated tone than what the X-Men have to offer, how did they compare after being taken to the silver screen?
In previous incarnations, the X-Men series has proven competent. Sure the first one had parts that dragged and Storm's weave was horrific and Cyclops was a neutered wuss, but overall, Bryan Singer set the tone for the next installment. X-Men 2: X-Men United provided excellent action scenes with fun dialogue and sure Storm's weave was horrific and Cyclops was a crybaby wuss, but that ending left fanboys drooling for more, myself included.
"What in the hell am I doing with a neutered wuss like you?"
V for Vendetta, on the other hand, is the first in what one can only hope is a singular installment (if only because the movie doesn't exactly leave you even needing one). Its source material was a lauded comic book series written by a surly old Brit that was never as popular or perhaps mainstream as our favorite band of angsty mutants, but whose themes aren't any less important. I think it's safe to say that expectations for V weren't close to being on par with what we may have been expecting with X-3, and maybe that is what made the film even better.
Thematically, both films present relevant social issues with Last Stand tackling bigotry and ethical questions of changing innate parts of ourselves while Vendetta deals with fascism and subsequent anarchy or revolution. Last Stand on one hand is a fantastical ride that tries to parallel the social issues revolving around discrimination of homosexuals, minorities and the disabled – in fact, all the series' films have maintained that one point and how we, as a society, deal with those issues. In X-3, the beginning of the movie (look away if you don't want spoilers) introduces us to Warren Worthington, a young man desperate to remove the budding pair of wings that have sprouted out of his back, but what is fascinating is that in wanting to appease his father, he has gone so far as to use knives and cutting utensils to try and saw them off regardless of the pain it might cause him. As the film progresses, the human community has seemingly found a "cure" that would somehow remove the "renegade" mutant gene and change mutants back to their "natural" selves. After resident drama queen Storm gives a hearted speech about why there is no need to be "cured", a war erupts between those who consider the "cure" a prelude to genocide and those who choose to fight for peace a.k.a. those looking for more screen time.
"BY THE GODDESS!! KEEP THE PAYCHECKS COMING!"
I applaud that Singer's films have never thrown the underlying issues in your face. It was a subtler attempt to bring attention to the plight of those who are different and the problems they face from society and from themselves. Unlike the "aren't-we-all-a-little-downright-racist?" social sledgehammer to the face that was Crash, X-3 shows multiple viewpoints from Professor X's dream for peace and equality through diplomacy (and optic blasts) to Magneto's dream of cucaracha-like humans being crushed beneath homo superior's feet to even the humans just doing what they do best: paving roads with good intentions that end in explosions and faceless soldiers used as target practice. V for Vendetta is a bit more pointed, on the other hand.
Imagine a world where leaders have used propaganda, fear mongering and force to hold its citizens captive not only by guns and authority but through the media. There are no superpowered mutant teams (some with horrible hairpieces) to stand up to dictators; there is only obedience or death. This is the dystopian future where government rules with an iron fist and you'd better not be Muslim, gay, slightly retarded or lazy-eyed because the government can and will be dropping by to kill you.
Sure, there's a parallel to the ultra-conservative propagandistic leaders today driving the United States and Great Britain to war with terror alerts and anthrax scares and wiretapping, but throughout history, peoples have always dealt with these issues everywhere in the world. Taking a cue from today's headlines, the Wachowski brothers (The Matrix) have created a screenplay that is brave and hard-hitting, especially in an atmosphere where questioning authority in itself can be considered treasonous, and never shies away from the main subject of the story: the battle against tyranny through anarchy and deliciously flamboyant capes and masks.
I thought both films did a superb job of tackling their respective matters. Vendetta may have veered into more modern liberal-scented territories, but it handles the story with gusto as does X-3, albeit without the Singer-inspired style we are accustomed to. So now that we've seen what both movies had in store for us thematically, how did they do otherwise?
Visually, V for Vendetta is striking. It's gripping and it's visceral and at points, even beautiful. Although "V" (our freedom fighting anarchist) wears a mask, the actor beneath (Hugo Weaving) is perfect for the role, using body language and voicework with finesse giving us a character we can relate to as well as be disgusted by. Natalie Portman crawls out of the Sarlacc pit that was her stint on Star Wars by actually being an actress; unlike her Padme counterpart, Evey has more than two emotions. After Garden State, Vendetta is a slingshot upward for her and all I can say is that if George Lucas asks you to do anything ever again, just mace him and don't look back until you reach a police station. You're on a roll.
"... and this is for Episode I."
Fascist-controlled London is dark, yet somehow sterile, crippled by Orwellian surveillance watching peoples' every move. This doesn't differ much from current-day London except that perhaps dictators have forced restaurant owners to provide food that doesn't taste like cardboard. Regardless, the set pieces are memorable and when V decides to bust heads, it's graceful while menacing and in the end it all comes together beautifully and although I watched the movie almost six weeks after its original debut, the crowd in my theater gave it loud applause.
X-Men 3: The Last Stand, while impressive considering all of the technical problems producers had during its filming, didn't deserve the same reception. Don't get me wrong, the special effects in this film are amazing. When Phoenix goes ape-shit (which she does a lot), the carnage is gorgeous. Magneto, like Homey, don't play dat and when he gets pissed off, you'd better pray he doesn't pull your pacemaker out of your ass because this guy is ruthless. Cars explode left and right, mutants display all sorts of inventive powers and Rebecca Romijn gets naked, satisfying the audience to the point where some end up satisfying themselves while watching.
Still, even though the special effects look great (look for an effective de-aging of Magneto and Professor X scene), there is just something missing. Perhaps it's that Ratner is no Bryan Singer and it shows or that the wire-work in the fight scenes isn't all that believable, but the whole production just seemed rushed. When Ratner took over the series, he was left with all sorts of baggage to clean up, all while being pushed to release the film before Singer's own future summer blockbuster Superman which may have been detrimental to creating the epic film he had been hoping for. Unfortunately, it turns out simply to be a fun popcorn flick, and maybe that's all that should have been expected.
"It ain't nobody's business but ours."
In the end, both films succeed in all categories: Storylines, visuals, sound and lack of any involvement of Paul W.S. Anderson, but which one trumps the other? The answer is V for Vendetta by a mile. X-3 may have awesome special effects and a naked Rebecca Romijn, but V runs circles around the X-Men faster than Callisto, which doesn't make much sense since in the comic book Callisto doesn't have super running abilities – stupid Ratner! So, if you're waiting for great films to see before Superman, you'll find that both of these films are both worth the money.
