Having never read the graphic novels, I just watched the Warner/DC animated movie All-Star Superman. Holy freakin' mother of god... this is one of the best Superman films ever made, and I include the Richard Donner movies in that assessment. My only complaint is that it felt like some of the events of the film were rushed. I believe this is because the graphic novels go into far more detail and everything got crammed into a 75-minute movie. I'm also somewhat embarassed to say that the final scenes really choked me up. The musical score is absolutely fantastic -- not as masterful and character-defining as John Williams' 1978 masterpiece, but I would say that Christopher Drake has eloquently captured the majesty of Superman. One of the final iconic images of the movie is Lois Lane, looking up in the sky with Superman's cape draped around her shoulders, as Perry White and Jimmy Olsen walk into the frame. I had no idea that Warner/DC direct-to-video animated movies could capture such beauty. I'm shocked that this film only scores a 6.8 on IMDb, although most of the criticism seems misdirected at comparisons between the animated film and graphic novels. Warner/DC needs to get Brandon Routh in a decent Supes costume, with a decent director and scriptwriter, and make a full-length live action version of this story. Now.
I really liked the portrayal of Luthor in this one. I will agree it's very rushed; they try to get A LOT of material from the comic into the film and--dare I say it?--the film would probably be better if they did a little less. It also needed a Superman/Batman farewell scene. The biggest, longest running bromance in comics needs to be recognized.
As much as ASS is good, I don't think it's the best and I don't think either the book or the cartoon is a patch on STM. ASS is a good story, which raises good issues. But nothing really more. I think what it highlights is the lack of good story telling that otherwise pervades comicbooks (Batman aside) and most modern superhero movies. I liked the thoughtfulness of ASS, but STM is epic, grand, well written, skillfully acted and directed and all round has still not been surpased at the superhero movie benchmark (and I include the much loved Nolan Batmans in that).
I love the Nolan Batman films story and direction wise, and Bale is okay,...but we have yet to see the Christopher Reeve of Batman. I think that ingredient would be the clincher.
Bale's good but, you're right, we haven't had THE Batman actor yet. Of course, it might depend on what your vision of the ideal Batman movie is. Mine would be darker, more psychological. It would center on Bruce Wayne and his obsession with going out into the night to pummel criminals. I'd want it to explore his difficulty having a normal relationship with a woman, his alienation of friends/loved ones, maybe even deal with painkiller addiction. The violence unleashed on street thugs would be excessive, and it would be Bruce's way of "getting his fix" for his inner turmoil.
'Bout what I'd do with it in the writing...straining to think of up-and-comers who could play that, and my head hurts...
Well, lessee . . . I never found Keaton believable as either Batman or Wayne. Val Kilmer was a decent Batman, but not Wayne. Clooney was a great Wayne and a shitty Batman. Christian Bale, I think, has been the best at both that we've yet seen. I can't really think of a current actor who would be better, but that's probably because we haven't seen anyone else play the part. Oh, and if back in the day it'd been played straight and not for camp, Adam West would have been a totally great Bruce Wayne. Not so much for Batman, tho. I still think he should have played Commissioner Gordon in the Keaton Batman movies.
I liked the interactions between Luthor and Clark Kent in this movie. They almost spoke to each other like they were friends.
I've shared this belief for a few years now, but strangely enough, I got there by way of George Pal's Doc Savage: The Man of Bronze. That movie had all the elements to make a good, solid pulp adventure story, a good cast, great production design (aside from the '70s Doc logo plastered on all of Doc's stuff / vehicles). The changes? Number one, start with the script, clean it up and tone down the camp, but keep the fun, just like the original story. Change two, hire a more talented director of photography, the movie looks like a cheap TV movie (no shame especially in that, Duke Wayne's Chisum shares both this shortcoming as well the next one), Dean Cundey would have been absolutely dirt-cheap back then, and his stuff always looks like a million bucks. Change three, ditch the soundtrack and get a decent score for the flick (see Chisum again). Presto! Completely different, and I believe, better flick. Apply these changes to Batman? There's a good start (although in fairness, the camera work on the first season is pretty good as is). Do the Neal Adams, Denny O'Neil trick where all of Batman's scenes occur after dark, take the shiny fabric out of the Bat-suit, tweak the cowl a bit, lose the yellow oval around the bat, make the grey darker, and you've got the Batman: Year One suit. Keep the Robin suit pretty much the same, except give him a better quality mask, and for God's sake, give him a tunic that fits. Take all the over-the-top signage off of everytning in the Bat Cave and the Batmobile, lose the red/orange stripes / accents on the car. The lighting in the cave and Bruce's study should be darker, moodier. Give Gordon a moustache, dye Alfred's hair (and ditch his glasses to keep him from looking like Gordon). Make the special guest-villian's outfits a tad darker, keep that cast, they were great. The main change-up here is in the writing, play it straight (maybe not Hawaii 5-O straight, but at least as straight as say, the Big Valley). Are those the sort of changes you had in mind Lanz?
As far as Batmans (Batmen?), after Burton hit gold, someone cranked out a "The Shadow" movie with Alec Baldwin as the lead. Discussing the pros and cons of that thread is another thing altogether, but it raises the point that an young Baldwin could've worked as Bats. My other choice would be a late '90s Adrian (Highlander: The Series) Paul.
The Shadow made the same mistake that many superhero movies make: not enough camera time for the main character! Alec Baldwin wants his face on the screen, so The Shadow appears only very briefly. It's like Stallone's version of Judge Dredd . . . he's Dredd for five minutes and then it becomes a generic "torn t-shirt" movie for the next hour and a half. Or that God-awful version of Captain America from a couple years ago, where the producer or director actually said "We can't have him in the Captain America suit too much because then all you can do is have him running around being Captain America." Well, duh!! That's kinda the point of doing the movie, genius!
How did a thread about the greatest superhero ever devolve into a conversation about a black-clad homo with mommy and daddy issues?
Didn't find this at Blockbuster a minute ago. I realize now that it came out in February, and probably wouldn't be in the new releases section. Did rent Hanna, Super, and X-Men First Class, though.
^Heard some good things about Hanna, X-Men: First Class was pretty good, and I enjoyed Super (though it gets much harsher in tone near the end).
Oh, they're vanishing around here, too. Fortunately, that's the sort of things in a city that I memorize. I did have to mentally scratch off two or three known locations before I found one that still existed, but I got my fix. Funny thing I've observed. As the options shrink, the remaining Blockbusters are getting busy. I wonder if it's possible they won't die off entirely. Surely there's gonna be one or two store owners out there thinking "Close down? Fuck that! My only worry is finding places to store all this money!"
I was walking with a friend in Japantown in San Jose yesterday and we came across a Blockbuster. We both expressed surprise at finding one still open. They're getting kinda scarce...
