Overwhelming numbers or not, the Persiansgot nuthin' on the abs of Sparta.
Now, before you chastise and berate me, yeah, I get it, it's a graphic novel. Yeah, I know this is a sophisticated, adult genre that isn't accurately conveyed with the childish connotations of comic book. But whether it's Frank Miller or Stan Lee, I'm just not that excited about it any more. I guess this is what happened when Hollywood ran out of Henry James and Jane Austen novels to adapt. Or in slightly less literary terms, the comic book bananza also reminds me of the '90s disaster films: Twister and Independence Day were pretty entertaining, but by the time we got to Brosnan's Dante's Peak and Stallone's Daylight, the fad had run its course. So don't get me wrong on the comic book thing: it's not that I universally dislike the genre. I really liked the first Spiderman. The X-Men films where really fanastic until they got Ratnered. But how long before this trend of comic book adaptations gets old? If you ask me, it was yesterday.
I admit that I haven't seen Sin City, and I'm not going to see 300, so I'm not saying these are bad movies. Clearly I have no idea. The point I'm making is that the very concept of these movies is so boring to me that I'm in no way moved to check them out. I'm sure that the films are really well done and have a fantastic appeal to certain audiences, but I guess that I'm offended at the idea that a little computer graphics and some fiddling with the negatives makes it "new". I dislike films that sell themselves as all style, whether or not (and it's usually not) that's all they actually are. We're hip, graphic novels are hip, come be hip with us. I'm just over it.
5 comments:
You just created THE movie word of '07...ratnered! love.it.
Oh man, you are missing out on 300. I would say it's quite accurate that the production and advertising of it really turned me towards it. Despite the predictable blue-screen scenery and excessive violence, I had a lot of fun watching it, especially in a packed IMAX theatre that cheered and booed at climaxes.
If you're only interested in seeing an intense romance or twisting plot, this probably won't wet your whistle. If you can stomach some rather breathtaking cinematography (I'm quit watching American movies for good if this isn't nominated for an Oscar in that category) and comical yet beautiful action, you'll really enjoy this.
Also, I'm bringing Sin City to class Tuesday, watch it!
I completely agree with Brett - missing out on movies like 300 and Sin City just because they're "graphic novel" movies is really selling yourself short. And there is big difference between movies like Spider-Man, X-Men, Fantastic Four (which ARE based on comic books), and these films which are based on completely different kinds of literature. They also utilize a much less realistic and more stylistic approach to cinematography. If anything, I don't even compare comic book movies to graphic novel movies. They're for different audiences, and they are VERY different kinds of movies.
So watch Sin City, and watch 300. And just enjoy them - I know you will :)
-Seth
Dear Leslie -
I agree with what you've said, but for different reasons. You see, it's clear to me that only a real masochist would expose themselves to films such as Sin City and 300. For one thing, film adaptations of graphic novels are relatively uncharted waters and why by the grace if God would any of us choose to sail into these stormy seas on a vessel captained by the likes of no-talent no-names such as this "Roberto Rodriguez" and his "Quentin Tarantino???" I mean, who are those guys anyways?! As for 300, SURE. . . the basis of this film might be one of the most consistently captivating and compelling stories across thousands of years, but that's just as far as ancient, recorded history is concerned. Why would anyone want to endanger the quality of their hard-earned free time with this sort of nonsense when we KNOW we could just as easily curl up in the safety of a mind-altering vision from a proven artistic genius like Brett Ratner (or, The Great Ratner as I call him). In contrast to those up-and-coming fly-by-nighters [Rodriguez, Tarantino, Miller, and Recorded History], Ratner brings us a solid new chapter in the already firmly pedigreed genre of comic book films. Is it so wrong of us to prefer something with a little proven history behind it? A little class? I think not. Plus, that 300 movie is totally racist.
Anyways, I've drawn my line in the sand. These are my reasons for having watched X-men 3 but refusing to watch Sin City or 300. I know yours may be slightly different but, as old friends, I'm glad to see that we're standing together on this one.
Oh John, you and your sarcasm. Tsk, tsk. Didn't your mother (or wife) ever teach you the key to emotional health is directness? Don't you know all that bile will kill you? Don't they teach that in medical school?
Well, judging by the comments here it seems I've figured out how to piss of any man who may come across this blog. I'll have to write this down for future reference. I could use this strategy on Bulgarians who can't take a hint.
Post a Comment