'Tristram Shandy: A Cock & Bull Story' Review

Why film an unfilmable novel? Why not just dip into the Dickens back catalogue or something instead? Why? Because you’re Michael Winterbottom, and of course it’s filmable. It just hasn’t been approached from the right direction yet.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. This review has not yet been born. Based on Laurence Sterne’s classic novel, “The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman”- described in the film as a ‘post-modern novel before there was any modern to be post about’- Winterbottom and his brilliant cast tackle it with an appropriately post-modern point of view.

Steve Coogan (‘24 Hour Party People’) takes on the triple role of narrator Tristram Shandy, his father Walter Shandy- and himself, in a ‘behind-the-scenes’ framing story that actually takes up more screen time than the adaptation itself. The self-consciously insanely brilliant thing about the whole metafictional exercise is that there’s a distinct order and cohesiveness to the chaos, a connectivity that ensures every element of the film is servicing the themes of Sterne’s novel, even when it appears to be doing no such thing.

This is very much a take it or leave it affair, I guess. It’s clever, but it knows it- much like ‘Adaptation’- and will amaze some people as it bores others to tears, but I’d have to count myself among the amazed.

‘Tristram Shandy: A Cock & Bull Story’ is now showing.

'Superman Returns' Review

How do you describe perfection? How do you critique the realisation of a practically life-long dream while remaining an impartial reviewer?

It might be useful to start with a bit of background. Since the release of 'Superman IV' in 1987, our screens have been devoid of the Man of Steel. After countless scripts (from the likes of Kevin Smith and JJ Abrams), directors (Tim Burton, Brett Ratner, McG) and actors (Nicolas Cage, Ashton freaking Kutcher) had been attached to ill-advised proposals for a new installment in the franchise, it was Bryan Singer ('X2', 'The Usual Suspects') who finally got the ball rolling.

From there, you could move on to talk about the performances. Brandon Routh IS Superman and Clark Kent, despite many people's reservations about casting an unknown actor in such a large part. Because, you know, Christopher Reeve, Dean Cain and George Reeves were so well known before they played Superman. Kate Bosworth is exactly what I want Lois Lane to be- tough, savvy, courageous and caring. James Marsden makes up for his non-showing in 'X3' with a stellar turn as Lois' love interest, and Kevin Spacey is... interesting. His delivery is flatter than Gene Hackman's, but he makes up for that with a startling undertorrent of menace.

You could also attempt to establish your critical credentials by examing the story, rich as it is with subtext and pathos, even if Luthor's plan doesn't really make literal sense. Singer gives us a SuperMAN, one who yearns for the same things as the rest of us, even as all his power keeps him away from them. Never has a superhero film been so achingly poetic and beautiful, not that we don't get our fair share of iconic action as well. The effects are breath-taking, and it's easy to see where the film's record-breaking budget went.

But ultimately, you don't describe perfection, and you don't critique it. You just grin like a little kid and enjoy the movie you've been waiting for as long as you can remember. This is cinema, this is entertainment, at it's finest. It's been said that those who hate Donner's original 'Superman' film will hate this as well. That may be true... but I love Donner's film, I love the comics, I love the cartoons, I love the TV shows, and I can't imagine how anyone couldn't. Naturally, the same goes for the 'Return' of this beloved character.

Rohan's considered, analytical, scholarly review of 'Superman Returns'

ROCKSOME.

Seriously, this thing is neck-and-neck with 'Spider-Man 2' as my favourite movie ever. David Stratton and any other critics who didn't like it will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.

Couldn't have said it any better myself, King Superman.

'All-Star Superman' #4 Review

The internet well and truly has this one covered. Go here for a pretty great review.

Here, instead, is a quick summary of why you must buy this comic, which is both a stand-alone story and a crucial chapter in the title's overall arc:

-The colours. Kind of an odd place to start doling out praise, but really, the colours jump off the page in this book in a way I've never seen before. Major kudos to colorist Jamie Grant.

-Grant Morrison has a unique form of creative ADD. It's not that he doesn't give his ideas the attention they deserve- he seems to have thoroughly thought everything through- it's that once he starts putting them into the comic, he throws them out there at such a blinding pace that none of them have time to get stale. Incredible. For example, this issue, we're briefly introduced to the Electrokind, alien life forms who communicate optically ("some sentences in this greeting may cause instant blindness") and the Underverse, a "basement level" of "superheavy gravity"- "the dense foundations of reality, where time itself cools to a solid."
Believe it or not, this comic wasn't even the trippiest released last week (that would be Casanova #1) but it has to be right up there. Non-comics readers are missing out on one of the best writers of our time here, I swear to God.

-Frank Quitely's pencils. I admit, I hadn't seen a lot of Quitely's stuff before 'All-Star', but his work on the title so far has blown me away. His slightly off-beat style encapsulates a tremendous range of subtleties, while still finding time for superhero action writ large. Between Morrison's ideas and Quitely's execution, this is a comic worth many, many repeat readings.

Oh, and did I mention that this issue is all about Jimmy Olsen (in pretty much his most likable portrayal ever) tackling an evil Superman? Because it is, and that's awesome right there. To top it all off, we get a heartfelt nod to a Super-friendship that proves that whatever this comic is- kitsch, parody, satire, homage, reinvention or acid trip- it is definitely a masterpiece.

Here's a gorgeous preview of issue 6:

'The Death of Journalism' Take 3,465,078.

I noticed something in a newsagency the other day that I thought I should share, after my recent 'Smallville' bashing. Believe it or not, there is an official 'Smallville' magazine. And not just a one-off thing, but an honest-to-God, regularly published magazine (this was issue 10). Apparently they fill a magazine every two months with info about 'Smallville'.

How is that possible?

Don't get me wrong. As a journalism student, it's nice to know that the publishing industry is going well enough to support such a magazine. But seriously... how is that possible? A magazine devoted to Superman in general, sure, I could see that working for a little while. And hell, I'd be surprised if there weren't a bunch of regularly published 'Smallville' fanzines around. But for an official 'Smallville' publication to run into double digits is surely unusual.

Incidentally, I've decided my take-it-or-leave-it attitude to 'Smallville' is very much my own fault, not the shows. It means I've become one of those terrible fans who hopes and wishes and dreams that someone will make a television show or something about their favourite character, and then when someone does, greets it with a resounding 'meh'.

But seriously... An official 'Smallville' magazine?

'Superman III': Why?

'Superman III' is not a good movie. I think I can safely say that without fear of disagreement. However, it's been said that the best sort of criticism is constructive, and while it may be a little too late to offer constructive criticism of a movie that was released 23 years ago, I'm going to give it a shot.
Here, then, in the spirit of the upcoming 'Superman II Director's Cut', are five ways that Richard Lester's 'Superman III' could have been improved:

1. Bring back the classic opening credits
A major problem with this movie is that it gets off on such a bad foot with that abysmal, 'cheeky', 'comedic' montage set in the streets of Metropolis and only vaguely involving Superman. I say this is one instance where less is definitely more. Scrap that sequence altogether and go with the opening credits from the first two 'Superman' flicks- names appearing against a backdrop of space, with John Williams' rousing score (or at least a decent fascimile) playing over the top. Not only would it eliminate one of Lester's unbearable stylistic touches, it would help to more closely connect the movie to the first two.

2. Clark is not a yuppie
In keeping with the 'less is more' theme, the removal of one simple line of dialogue would help a lot: under no circumstances should Clark refer to himself as a 'Metropolis sophisticate', unsure if he could still fit in in Smallville. Just get rid of that one phrase- probably the only bum note Reeve plays in all four films- and even if the movie doesn't get any better, at least it won't bring down Clark's character.

3. Richard Pryor is not a General
This is short and sweet- instead of giving Superman the synthesised Kryptonite via the cringeworthy army general impersonation, why not just pretend to be in trouble and expose Superman to the rock when he comes to help?

4. Red Kryptonite
'Superman III' is frustratingly close to the comics at times, but proceeds to make pointless changes. Rather than 'synthesised' Kryptonite, why not just call it Red Kryptonite? Red K appeared in the comics (and eventually 'Smallville') and has pretty much the same effects.

5. Braniac
Ok, so this movie has an evil Super-Computer. Why not just go all the way, make its sentience more pronounced and call it Braniac? You could really run with the Cronenberg-esque possibilities of this evil techno-tyrant.

See? Those changes wouldn't have been that major, but they're just small things that would probably make a big difference. 'Superman III' isn't that far away from being a good movie. I mean, here's five things that were good about it:

1. Lana Lang
Annette O'Toole was perfectly cast as Clark's childhood sweetheart, and made a fine replacement for Lois Lane (Margot Kidder appeared in only two scenes, because she didn't want to work with Lester). Unlike Lois, Lana was more interested in Clark than Superman, which in turn gave Reeve's portrayal of Clark another chance to shine. Incidentally, thank God 'Smallville' isn't a prequel to these movies, or there'd be some serious Oedipal conflict going on there.

2. Evil Superman
A good concept buried in a shitty movie. I love that Superman's idea of being 'Evil' involves blowing out the Olympic Flame. You Super-Prankster, you. And the junkyard confrontation between the two halves of Superman's Kryptonite-affected psyche is brilliant.

3. Robert Vaughn
I know I'm going against critical opinion here, but c'mon- Vaughn was a fun Lex Luthor stand-in, in an incredibly cheesy, absurdist sort of way. There's a very thin line between Ross Webster and Vaughn's character in 'Baseketball', and I see that as a good thing.

4. Jimmy Olsen
Jimmy finally got a chance to do something... Jimmy-ish in this movie, as opposed to the first two. When Jimmy makes the ill-advised decision to run into the inferno and prove his worth as a photographer, the fact that Mark McLure was probably too old to play the part ceased to matter.

5. Ummmm....
Maybe five was a little bit optimistic, but you get the idea.

Just Like The First Time

'Superman Week' takes a lie-down for a minute to bring you this message...
With 'Over The Hedge' being released last week and featuring the voice talents of Steve Carell, this seemed like as good an excuse as any to drag this interview I did with Steve last year for 'The 40-Year-Old Virgin' out of mothballs.

‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin’ is Steve Carell’s first time. Yes, that’s right- it’s his first time headlining and co-writing a feature film. But the man known for short bursts of scene stealing brilliance in ‘Anchorman’ and the sublime ‘The Daily Show’ has proven he has the stamina to take on the challenge. He’s good… and I mean really good, although that hasn’t always been the case.

“My first time was not unlike, I would say, 99% of the world’s population’s first time. Which means it was terrible, and awkward, and unexciting”, says the poster boy for virginity. “It was probably the most unforgettable, and yet forgettable, experience I’ve ever had.”

Carell believes the story of ‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin’ has universal appeal because “everyone was at one point a virgin.” But his film is not a straightforward sex comedy, as Steve’s character Andy Stitzer turns out to be one of the sweetest characters to grace the silver screen.

“I would call it the raunchiest romantic comedy, or the most romantic raunchy comedy, of the year. We were trying to split the difference. We wanted to make a comedy that was sort of bawdy and ribald, if you will, but one that also had a heart.”

The sheer amount of heart on display in the film has led to a surprising amount of support for the film, even from the morally uptight groups that typically oppose R-rated comedies. “We’ve actually been receiving support from, as you put it, ‘morally uptight groups’, that weren’t the sort of groups generally that tend to like or support movies like this… Ultimately, the theme of the movie and moral is that true love conquers all and that sex itself isn’t that important, and isn’t the overriding concern to this character.”

Some of the things that are an overriding concern to Andy are the action figures, comic books and other collectibles filling up his apartment; an impressive, expensive and time-consuming bit of set design. And although Steve doesn’t share this concern- “The only action figure I ever had was a G.I. Joe… and I blew him up with a firecracker”- he believes Andy is a character that people can relate to and sympathise with, something that he and co-writer and director Judd Apatow believed was absolutely essential.

“We discussed tone a lot when we first started concocting the idea. We decided we wanted it to exist in more of a reality than a completely broad farce. We wanted this character to be more real than anything else. Because we felt that, if you put a real character in sort of an absurd situation, that would inherently be funnier than if it’s a broader character. We wanted people to identify with the characters.”

All this talk of realism is odd coming from Carell and Apatow, the co-star and producer, respectively, of ‘Anchorman’, not exactly a film know for a neo-realist approach to the art of cinema. But ‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin’ is an altogether different beast.

“We didn’t want this character to exist in some sort of fantasy world, we wanted him to be a relatable guy and a person that could conceivably exist in the world. So we read a bunch of case-studies on middle-aged virginity and we went into chat rooms online, and talked to people who were virgins, and we found that the people were all like this character, Andy Stitzer. They had, for one reason or another, just not had sex. They’d missed out on some opportunities, and they weren’t weird, or damaged, or odd in any way, they were just normal people who were going about their lives, who had this one aspect missing. And that’s how we wanted to portray the character Andy, as not some sort of creep, and not a stereotype, but just a real guy who sort of missed out.”

Andy’s secret is exposed during a poker game with his workmates, played by Seth Rogen, Romany Malco and fellow ‘Anchorman’ alum Paul Rudd. Considering these actor’s familiarity and improvisational backgrounds, it’s easy to assume that the atmosphere on the set was one of four friends, laughing, having a good time.

“Well, I think the danger is that if you put four friends in a room and improvise, that you end up with an absolute mess of a movie… That being said, we allowed for a lot of improvisation within the scripted pieces. It was all very well-structured, but we allowed the actors, and encouraged the actors, to put things in their own words, and make it more conversational. We didn’t want any part of it to sound like dialogue; we wanted it to sound real and organic.”

Though ‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin’ was Steve’s original idea, he’s not averse to starring in the odd remake, as his roles in ‘The Office’, ‘Bewitched’, and the upcoming ‘Get Smart’ prove. When asked which sort of work he prefers- creating an original character or re-imagining an older one- he answers in his best ‘Daily Show’ deadpan tone: “I prefer working when I’m being paid. That’s really what it comes down to. I will clearly do anything for money. And I’m very good that way.”

That can only be seen as good news for Carell fans left wanting more, in the best possible way; who hope that ‘The 40-Year-Old Virgin’ represents Steve’s first, but certainly not last, step into Hollywood superstardom.

Super-Monkey Business

Firstly, I apologise for the title of this post. Secondly, this is the synopsis on the DVD box for the fifth episode of 'Adventures of Superman- The First Season', the 1950s George Reeves TV show:

"Searching for stolen defense secrets, Clark Kent encounters a brutalised woman, a slain organ-grinder- and a monkey dressed as Superman."

That, my friends, is the definition of 'awesome'. In fact, I don't think I could associate with anyone who didn't think so. From now on, when I meet people, rather than introduce myself by name, I will simply shake their hand and declare, apropos of nothing, "While searching for stolen defense secrets, Clark Kent encounters a brutalised woman, a slain organ-grinder- (dramatic pause) and a monkey dressed as Superman."

If their reaction is something akin to "DUDE, THAT IS AWESOME!", then we will be friends. If they stare blankly, then I will have to learn to coexist with them in this crazy mixed-up world of ours, but secretly... secretly, I will despise them.

The episode itself? Well, it delivers, of course. If anything, it's even more awesome than that description implies, because Jimmy 'semi-functional retard' Olsen throws down with a gangster while trying to rescue said monkey. Oh, and did I mention there were Eastern-European Communists involved? Because there are.

The series has been stellar so far, although I seem to be stuck on this episode- I've watched it a couple of times already, although episode six, 'A Night of Terror', does beckon loudly with it's promise of Jimmy Olsen being exectued by a sadistic criminal. Now, I know he won't be executed, but I can dream, can't I?

Just kidding, Jim. I could never stay mad at you.

Images taken from the awesome Superman Homepage.

Super Vision

'Superman Week' continues!
I've been hearing vague whispers about a Superman DVD box set coming out at the end of this year. I've looked around the interwebs, but so far it still seems reasonably hush-hush.

For starters, Warner Bros. seems to be getting into the spirit of 'Superman Returns'. This site provides information about their plethora of Super-related releases for 2006, including a 'Superman Collection' and something called 'The Superman Ultimate Collector's Edition.'
Superman? Ultimate? Collector's? I'm in.

The Warner's site also speaks of a 'Superman II: TVYNS (The Richard Donner Cut)'. I think the 'TVYNS' stands for 'The Version You Never Saw'. This DVD will give us the long-awaited Director's Cut of Superman II, by its real director. Richard Lester replaced Richard Donner (the director of 'Superman: The Movie') as the director of 'Superman II' towards the end of filming, and ended up releasing a vastly different film than Donner intended. Basically, anything dodgy about 'Superman II' is generally put down to Lester's fault, whether it's true or not.

You didn't like the occasionally awkward attempts at humour? That was Lester. You didn't like the whole thing in the Fortress with the cellaphane 'S' Shield and the teleporting? That was Lester. You didn't like Lois' cringe-worthy poem or Luthor's bumbling goons in the first Superman movie? That was Lester.
"But Rohan, Lester wasn't involved in the firs..."
Shut up. It was Lester's fault.

Little known fact: Richard Donner was also the original director of 'A Hard Day's Night', a neo-realist biopic about a weary concert promoter. Lester replaced him and added in some lads from Liverpool with unusual hair, completely destroying Donner's vision.

So, basically, the Superman II director's cut is the Holy Grail for fans of the Superman films. Warner Bros' site also mentions a new DVD release of 'Supergirl', which I'll probably end up buying as well for the sake of completism, and 'Superboy Season One', which I'll get (if it ever comes out in Australia) because that show was awesome.

Still, none of this tells us what's actually in this 'Ultimate Collector's Dream Box'. But this looks interesting. According to Warner Bros. DVD Release Preview, the box will contain all four movies, as well as Donner's director's cut (made up of 20-40% new footage!) and 'Supergirl'. Hmmmm.....

But, ah-hah! According to Superman Cinema, and I have no idea what their qualifications are, it will be a 14-disc behemoth, including all-new commentaries, three discs each for the first two movies and two discs each for the last two (including deleted scenes for the last one), a two-disc Special Edition of 'Superman Returns', all 17 Fleischer Superman cartoons (remastered!), and a feature-length documentary about the history of Superman directed by Bryan Singer and Kevin (not Ken) Burns.

Sweeeeeeeeeet. Those Fleischer cartoons are pretty much the best version of the character outside the comics, so it'll be worth it for remasters of those alone, even though I've already got them all in a pretty decent package. Of course, they're not even mentioned in the Warner preview, which lists 'Supergirl' instead, so that may be inaccurate. There's a lot of stuff in the 14-disc set I've already got, actually, but also a lot that I haven't, so... Ultimate Collector's Edition it is!

Was there a point to this? No. Not really. But if they don't bring this out in Australia, I will not be happy.

Is 'Smallville' Not 'Super' Enough?

The first few seasons of 'Smallville' are ridiculously cheap on DVD at the moment here, but I won't be getting them. Not because I don't like 'Smallville'... I do... but because it just doesn't feel like an essential part of any 'Superman' collection.

I realise Superman is a pop folk tale; a modern-day myth. It's one of the main reasons I love the character. But for me, 'Smallville' just strays way too far outside that myth to still be 'Superman', and I don't mean that as a negative. I like that it dares to be different, that it takes the basic building blocks of the Superman concept and comes up with a new construction. But I don't love it enough to want to re-watch any of the episodes, or for it to feel like a compulsory purchase.

Of course, here in Australia, we're a fair way behind in the 'Smallville' stakes, and to properly explain why I don't think 'Smallville' is an essential part of the Superman myth, I'm going to refer to events that haven't aired here yet. So consider this a...

SPOILER WARNING! BIG, FUCKING, MASSIVE SPOILER WARNING!!!!!
DO NOT READ DOWN IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW STUFF! SERIOUSLY!
YOU'LL BE ALL LIKE "WHY WOULD YOU TELL ME THAT???!!! I HATE YOU!!!!", AND I'LL BE ALL LIKE, "I WARNED YOU! HONESTLY!"
SPOILER WARNING!

Ooookay. Basically, 'Smallville' is Superboy without the tights, right? Well, that's my first issue with it right there. That's a concept that makes a lot of sense, although I do love the goofiness of Superboy.

I did get sick of the 'Kryptonite Freak' formula, but that kinda was the hook of the show... 'not only did Clark come to Smallville, but so did Kryptonite! Lots of it! And it turned everybody into SuperFreaks, bitch!'... so it made sense that they stuck with it, and they seem to have moved away from that towards Lexcorp experiments gone awry anyway, which helps to give the show a gimmicky, Silver-Agey feel.

So, in a lot of ways, I'm a big fan of the show. 'Smallville' also did what any good 'Superman' spinoof should: it introduced new elements to the mythology. Lionel Luther is a great new addition to the Superman Saga, and John Glover is generally the highlight of the show. Incidentally, if you're an actor, you pretty much want to play a Luthor if you're gonna be in 'Superman'. John Glover, Gene Hackman, John Shea and now Kevin Spacey consistently come away from these things with the best scenes and lines.

And the idea of Superman's dad being a Duke of Hazzard is pretty sweet, too. In fact, I'd say 'Smallville' gives us the best on-screen representation of Superman's parents yet.

You know, as a matter of fact, I may buy those DVDs eventually.

But my point is this... the show doesn't seem to know where it's going, or how it fits into the 'Superman' framework, which is crucial.

I mean, is he supposed to become Superman? Is he not? If he isn't, then why do they keep foreshadowing it? And if he is, then why have Clark Kent and Lois Lane shown such little interest in being reporters? Chloe seems a lot more like Lois than Lois does, which I'm sure is deliberate, I just don't get why.

And if he is supposed to become Superman, how the hell is Lex not going to recognise him? 'Smallville's Lex has been hanging out with an 'unmasked' Clark for years now, so won't he know who Superman is the second he meets him?

Then there's the whole 'Cave of Krypton' thing. What the fuck is that about? I've missed the episodes that explained it (at least I assume I missed them... maybe it just doesn't make any sense, even if you watch the episodes). I understand what the purpose seems to be: there's a pretty huge disconnect between what we know about the character's futures and what they know, so the idea of the cave, which hints at the coming of Superman and his rivalry with Lex, gives the writers a useful foreshadowing tool.

Which would be great, if any of it made any sense at all. Honestly, I pretty much tune out as soon as the great mystical cave is mentioned. And how the hell was Christopher Reeve's character an expert on Kryptonian culture? Have I missed something there? Every time he appeared, I'd be all like, "yes! Christopher Reeve! WOOO-HOOO!" and then proceed to have no idea what his character was talking about. Am I stupid? Did I miss some crucial explanatory episodes? Am I alone in wondering what mystical caves have to do with Superman? I always thought Superman was heroic because he chose to do good with his powers, I don't like to think he's heroic because an ill-defined source of Kyrptonian history says so.

Speaking of Krypton, there's evil Jor-El. I mean, I'm slowly gathering that he's not actually evil, but come on, he's played by Terrance Stamp ("kneel before Zod!") and he's done some pretty shadowy things. Again, I get this is just a different version of the Superman story, and Jor-El was pretty wierd in the comics after John Byrne's 1986 revamp, but I'm just not feeling this part of the show.

But Jor-El is not the father I'm worried about. Here's the big spoiler, if there's any fans of the show here in Australia who don't know this yet: Jonathon Kent dies. And this is huge for me, because if 'Smallville' is all about Superboy, then Jonathon Kent is a crucial part of that story. I mean, no Jonathon Kent = no Smallville. It's a well-established part of the Superman story that after Jonathon Kent dies, Clark goes out on his own into the world and becomes Superman.

Most of my gripes with the show are fairly minor, and there's obvious counterpoints to all of them, even this one. Again, the fact that it doesn't match up with what we know about the character is interesting, because for all we know, Lex might end up being the good guy and Clark might go mad with power, but at what point does that stop being 'Superman'?

Superboy is all about young Kal-El truly becoming Clark Kent, learning from his father to use his powers for good. If there is no Jonathon, then there's not much reason for Clark to hang around, and so 'Smallville' really shouldn't still be going, which is what makes me think the show's producers don't really have a finish line in sight.
And I think a coming-of-age show like 'Smallville' really needs a finish line.

Images taken from the ridiculously awesome Superman Homepage.

Reel Music

Back to 'Superman Week' soon. In the meantime, here's a quick piece about the St. Kilda Film Festival tour.

Have you ever heard a song and thought, “man, that would make a great movie?”
I know I have. It was ‘Who Let The Dogs Out’ by the Baha Men. There’s a rich tapestry of intrigue there just waiting to be unfurled. Who did let the dogs out? And why? Such questions can only be answered by the power of movie magic.

For Anthony Woodcock, it was the Pete Murray tune ‘Ten Feet Tall’. After being inspired by hearing Murray tell the story behind the music, Woodcock set about creating a short film, ‘Ten Feet Tall’, which was selected as one of the best films at the St. Kilda Film Festival. Murray himself provided the score for the film.

“The best thing about short film is that it gives people an opportunity to try something new, to be experimental and creative,” says producer Katrina Fleming. “Pete had never worked on a score before, and there was no better opportunity for him than to score a film based on one of his own songs. So he was really excited about doing it, because it was something new, within the safety of what he already knew.”

If you want to try something new, head to the Dendy to check out the best of the St. Kilda Film Festival. Unfortunately, ‘Baha: The Movie’ will not be screening, but ‘Ten Feet Tall’ will.

The Best of the St. Kilda Film Festival is showing at the Dendy Brisbane on June 23 & 24.

'Superman Week' Begins!

With 'Superman Returns' just one week away, 'Superman Week' begins here at Everybody's A Critic! Yes, I am a geek. Not everything posted here over the next week or so will be Superman related, but most of it will, so 'Superman Week' it is.
To kick things off, here's my brief Superman retrospective that'll be running next week in Scene Magazine:

Look, up in the sky! It’s a movie! It’s a comic book! It’s a TV show! It’s… all of those things, actually. The name’s Superman, and you may remember him from such mediums as…

Comics
Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster introduced Superman in 1938, creating an entire genre of fiction in the process. Springing forth from a volatile mix of social justice and wish fulfilment, Superman comics have gone through many changes over the years (including serious changes in the character’s personality and origins) but it was here that Superman and the core elements of his mythos- Lois Lane, The Daily Planet and Lex Luthor- were formed.

Radio
The Superman radio serial that first aired in 1940 was crucial- it was there that Jimmy Olsen, Perry White and Kryptonite were introduced. Providing the voice of the Man of Steel was a job for Bud Collyer, who reprised his role in a series of acclaimed 1940s cartoons.

Animation
Superman burst onto the big screen for the first time in 1941, in a series of Fleischer Studios animated shorts rumoured to have cost $100,000 each to produce. The acclaimed cartoons featured groundbreaking special effects worthy of a live-action blockbuster and are still highly regarded today. They also introduced an extremely important new power to Superman’s arsenal- flight- and are now in the public domain, so you can pick them up on DVD for about three bucks. The next Superman cartoon was produced by Filmation in 1966, and he also featured in Hanna-Barbera’s ‘Super-Friends’, before re-emerging in 1996 with a series that was heavily influenced by the Fleischer shorts.

Television
The 1951 debut of ‘The Adventures of Superman’ exposed the character to a wide audience of television viewers, and for many of them, George Reeves remains the definitive version of the character. The superhero soap opera of ‘Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman’ debuted in 1993, but the show ran out of steam after the wedding of Dean Cain’s Clark Kent to Teri Hatcher’s Lois Lane. Tom Welling took up the baton from 2001 onwards in ‘Smallville’, a show more about Superboy than Superman.

Film
Technically, Superman made his live-action big screen debut in a pair of movie serials starring Kirk Alyn in 1948 and 1950. These serials introduced the concept of the Phantom Zone, a plot device later employed in Richard Donner’s ‘Superman’ (1978) and ‘Superman II’ (1980), flawed masterpieces which are best remembered for Christopher Reeve’s note-perfect portrayal of a bumbling Clark Kent and a heroic Superman.
Bryan Singer’s ‘Superman Returns’ picks up where ‘Superman II’ left off, wisely ignoring the third and fourth films in the franchise. The latest man to don the tights, unknown actor Brandon Routh, will be channelling the spirit of Christopher Reeve while digital trickery will enable Marlon Brando to take one last bow. Rumoured to be the most expensive movie ever made, it’s sure to be… well… super.

Check out the latest trailer here.

'5x2' DVD Review

An intimate look at five moments (‘5’…) in the life of a couple (…‘x2’, ya dig?) from French director Francois Ozon (‘Swimming Pool’), ‘5x2’ is both touchingly simple and interestingly complex. And very, very French.

The film is basically a series of cinematic snapshots shown in reverse order; like Tarantino without the pop-culture overload, ‘Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind’ without the Charlie Kaufman head-trip, or your parent’s photo album on Bizarro World. Starting with Gilles (Stephane Freiss) and Marion’s (Valeria Bruni Tedeschi) divorce and ending with their first close encounter, Ozon skilfully chooses which moments to show- and which moments not to show- the audience. The result is much like Lisa Simpson’s description of jazz: It’s the notes Ozon doesn’t play that build tension and intrigue.

Freiss and Tedeschi- whom Australian audiences may kinda sorta vaguely recognise from their minor roles in Steven Spielberg’s ‘Munich’- excel with the spotlight placed on them here. Both manage to de-age believably, and maintain our interest throughout their marital bliss and disorder and their unusual extra-marital (and post-marital) dalliances. In a classic dinner party conversation, for example, Freiss casually recalls a debauched incident that few actors could describe as convincingly.

Essentially, ‘5x2’ seems to see the world of sexual politics as a kind of imperfect Mobius strip with a revolving cast of characters, as key incidents and lines of dialogue subtly repeat themselves over the course of the film’s descending timeline. Rarely has one film so thoroughly mapped the peaks and chasms, and (particularly) everything in between, of love.

'Everybody's A Critic' is the new Beat

Don't ask me how or why Annabel found this out, but she did... type in 'hotspot gay innuendo' into google, and see what you find. Yes, kids, that's how I'll be remembered. To celebrate this dubious occasion, I give you this (taken once again from superdickery.com).

Seriously, I don't want to know how Annabel found that out. She is officially the most bored person ever, apparently.

Tokyo Drifter

Nathalie Kelly does a great Alabama accent. The 21 year old NIDA graduate, making her feature film debut opposite the all-American Lucas Black in ‘The Fast and the Furious 3: Tokyo Drift’, overcomes her natural Aussie lilt to deliver a pitch perfect impersonation of her co-star. “All mah life ah never fit in…”

Kelly had to break down more than a few international boundaries for the role, because “they were kind of going for an international feel, since the movie is set in an international school in Tokyo. And I kind of fit into that, looking ethnically ambiguous… I get so many things like ‘are you British? Indian? South African?’ American people don’t really look at the Atlas a lot. But it’s exciting to be put on the map with a movie like this.”

So, how the hell does a 21 year old girl from Sydney with no filmography to speak of land a lead role in a franchise like this?

“I’d actually only been in America for three months, it all happened very fast. I wasn’t expecting to book something until about a year… but yeah, really, I just kind of fell into it. I had the studio on my side, but the director (Justin Lin) had to be talked into liking me at first, he had to be convinced that I could play this racer/tough girl role, when I’m not really like that character at all… I failed my driving test two times before I passed in September 2005. There wasn’t a lot of time in between for me to get excited about cars! Before that I was doing the whole bus and rail thing in Sydney. So they really had to give me a crash course in driving in general, I mean, I had to learn how to drive manual in half an hour, and then I had to learn how to drift in two days. By the end I was actually doing pretty good… I was better than the boys at times, because I’d listened to all the instructions! But I didn’t do any of my own stunts… we’re living in the 21st century, they can do a lot of stuff on computers!”

Between doing the hard yards in preparation for the role and on the set, you might think Kelly had no time to enjoy Tokyo’s nightlife, but “I made time, I made time, don’t worry. But you know, I prefer the shopping over going out. Shopping was ridiculous. But I’ll tell you what we did do… we all went out one night and got silly and did karaoke. It was the craziest night of my life. We went out and just had a ball, and Japanese people know how to do karaoke. I have footage that I might have to sneak to the DVD people, for a ‘Behind The Scenes- What You Didn’t See’ thing.”

She also had a chance to experience Japan through the eyes of cinematic royalty: her co-star, the legendary Sonny Chiba (‘Street Fighter’, ‘Kill Bill’, ‘Karate Bear Fighter’) “invited me out on this date in Japan. He was like, ‘you have to try blowfish, I take you to Japan to eat blowfish’, and I was like, ‘okay, Sonny!’ He was just so much fun, man. He’s a great actor. I didn’t even realise what a legend he was, which is probably a good thing because I might have acted a bit different. But I was just me with him, you know.

“Actually, there were other Aussies on set as well. And we would have this ongoing joke, like, in the middle of really crazy serious scenes, one of us would try to sing Australian jingles. We did ‘Chicken Tonight’, ‘Cottees’, ‘Vegemite’… think how many jingles there are, just from Australia! We must be the jingle capital.”

So, what about the movie itself? According to Kelly, “it’s like one crazy long visually stimulating music video… there were a lot of cuts, you know, we cut out a whole bunch of stuff. The storyline just barely survived, but you know, we did what we needed to do for this kind of movie and I think we pulled it off.”

Now, about those accents...

“Lucas is just like, straight up Alabama, I’ve got my Aussie accent, and (co-star) Bow Wow’s got his Atlanta accent… it was a total accent battle! We laughed about it the whole way, like, ‘this movie’s gonna sound hilarious!’ I was in the car driving, and I heard an ad for it on the radio. It’s like a freakshow or something!”

‘The Fast & The Furious 3: Tokyo Drift’ is Now Showing.

The Closeted Crusader

Now for something completely different... is Superman gay?

Those of you who aren't complete geeks like me may not realise this, but the topic of gay superheroes has been hot lately. That came out sounding really wrong, by the way. Oh god, now I've said 'came out'. This blog is just a hotspot of gay innuendo.

Basically, this all got started when DC Comics announced that they were re-introducing an old character, Batwoman, and that this time, she would come with new gay hotness, as a "lipstick lesbian". Yes, folks, DC is showing their socially conscious, sensitive side...

...hardcore DC fanboys are really going to have a tough time accepting an attractive lesbian male fantasy.

But the controversy over Batwoman is nothing compared to the storm brewing at the moment. As far as I know, The Advocate got the ball rolling with their cover story designed to tie in with 'Superman Returns': "Is Superman gay?"

This article has gradually snowballed into a bizarre PR nightmare/dream for Warner Bros, which has reportedly been left wondering how the gay appeal of Superman will help or hurt the film.

But those close to the film, and the character, have been quick to offer up denials. In the Reuters article I just linked to, DC President Paul Levitz insists that "he's not a gay character", while director Brian Singer notes that he is "probably the most heterosexual character in any movie I've ever made". Singer, who is gay himself, strongly relates to the character, but not because of a mutual sexuality- Singer was adopted, as was Superman.

I suppose the obvious metaphor that leads people to make these assumptions is the motif of the secret identity, which came up in the Advocate article. Superheroes hide their true selves in dull business suits, before coming out in garish tights and embracing their true calling. But there's a difference between people being able to relate to the character, and the character literally being gay. Superman is a fictional character, so if the writers say he's straight, then he's straight.

Just as comic book fans were shocked at accusations from Dr Frederic Wertham in the 1950s that Batman and Robin had a secret homosexual relationship...

...the fans are obviously fairly distraught by all this. I guess they'd never considered how their spandex-wearing male power fantasies could ever be seen as gay, and who can blame them?

Although incidents like this don't help.

(Cultural) Identity Crisis

Edit: To my immense disappointment, it turns out the list was just meant to be the top 100 albums of all time, as voted by British people; not the 100 Best British Albums. Mark from the Rock and Roll Report was good enough to drop by and tell me he'd updated his post to reflect that, so I figured I should follow suit. But for posterity's sake, the original article (in which I make an idiot of myself) remains.

Earlier this year, NME's writers got together and compiled a list of the top 100 British albums of all time. In the most glaring example yet of the magazine's slavish devotion to the youth; the Arctic freaking Monkeys came in at number 5. Ahead of 'Revolver', for memory. Hilarity ensued.

Well, I only just found, via The Rock and Roll Report, that the mag has since followed up that list with their list of the top 100 British Albums, as voted by readers! Luckily, the mag's readers wised up to the whole 'The Arctic Monkeys are bigger than the Beatles' thing, but their list of the top 100 British albums is not without difficulties. Take a gander at the top ten...

1. "Definitely Maybe," Oasis.
2. "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band," The Beatles.
3. "Revolver," The Beatles.
4. "OK Computer," Radiohead.
5. "(What's the Story) Morning Glory?" Oasis.
6. "Nevermind," Nirvana.
7. "The Stone Roses," The Stone Roses.
8. "Dark Side of the Moon," Pink Floyd.
9. "The Queen Is Dead," The Smiths.
10. "The Bends," Radiohead.

One of these albums is not like the others...

Shark Sandwich

As we all know, it is said that when something great passes its prime, it jumps the shark. Television shows, actors, directors, writers, artists, politicians, countries... they all jump the shark eventually.
But in the wake of the brilliance that is 'Lookwell', and his regular role on 'Family Guy', one question must be asked: how has Adam West avoided jumping the shark? While other pop culture icons have come and gone like so much disposable filler, why does Adam West remain at the peak of his powers?
A deal with the devil, perhaps? How else could West have kept that inevitable shark-jumping moment at bay?
No, my friends. That is not the answer. Adam West avoided jumping the shark... by beating the crap out of it.

Wishin' and Hopin'

“The inspiration came from a dream years ago. It was this story, this dream about a girl taking photographs. And that was really when the spark of an image came to mind, and that kind of evoked a story about identity, and what was she photographing, and you know… it started to steamroll after that”.

The dreamer was writer and director Sandra Sciberras, and the dream became ‘The Caterpillar Wish’- the latest in a recent string of high-quality Australian films. Sciberras’ high-class melodrama required uniformly excellent performances to make her dream a cinematic reality, and the woman sitting next to her- 27 year old Victoria Thaine- was up to the task in the lead role of 17 year old Emily.

“I think it was about trying to find parallels between Emily’s emotional life and experiences that I may have had. I mean, you know, you do a bit of homework, you know, drama school textbook stuff about thinking about your character’s history and all that, but really, for me, most of the preparation comes when we’re on location. I love shooting on location, because you’re away from all your day-to-day stuff, and you can just sink into the role and kind of stay there… I think, also, that all teenagers have really interesting private lives, and moments of meditation and solitude. Like, for me, when I was 17 and growing up in Coffs Harbour, it was listening to the Pixies or the Smashing Pumpkins on my Walkman and just trying really hard to be oblivious to all the surfers checking out the waves. And for Emily, it’s obviously taking photos and riding her bike and spending time alone”.

So, what next for these two talented women? Thaine flashes her movie star grin and says she’s “just happy to keep working”, whether it’s on film or television, here or overseas- before noting that she’d “love to be on ‘Love My Way’”. Sciberras looks forward to creating more of her beautifully lyrical visions here, but also harbours a wish to work overseas, like so many of our brightest talents before her. Whatever the future holds for these cinematic butterflies, their larval stage has produced a tremendous Australian film.

‘The Caterpillar Wish’ is released on June 15.

'Wah-Wah' Review

Richard E. Grant has amassed a great deal of respect as an actor, but like so many thespians before him, what he really wants to do is direct. And direct he does with ‘Wah-Wah’, a brilliant coming-of-age tale.

A deeply personal film in the truest possible scene, it begins with a recreation of the moment young Richard witnessed his mother (Miranda Richardson) shagging a friend of his father (Gabriel Byrne). In the front seat of a car. While he was in the back. Personal enough for ya? The names have all been changed to protect the innocent, of course, but there is no doubt about whose story is being told.

At times, it can get too personal, like when a friend makes you look at their photo album, and all you can muster up is a disinterested yawn. Luckily, for the most part, Grant shows serious directorial chops in making the photo album come to life in a downright engrossing manner.

The performances are great across the board- Gabriel Byrne is scarily convincing as a violent alcoholic one second, and a loving father the next. Miranda Richardson plays an impeccably bitchy mother/ex-wife (god knows what Grant’s real mum will make of the film), and Emily Watson is as classy as ever as the American who wins Byrne’s heart.

But the star of the show is Nicholas Hoult- the kid from ‘About A Boy’- as Grant’s surrogate self. He shows here that he’s rapidly growing into a charismatic leading man, and captures his character so perfectly that Grant must have felt like he was looking into a Dorian Grey-esque mirror.

If you’re a Richard E. Grant fan, then this is must-see stuff. But even if you’re not, Grant manages to make his personal story universal enough to keep everyone entertained.

‘Wah-Wah’ is released on June 22.

'The Child' ('L'enfant') Review

A good blockbuster is better than a bad art film. With the lamentably imminent closure of the Schonell, it seems that more and more indie snobs are realising this, and films like the Dardenne brothers’ Palme d’Or winning ‘The Child’ play a crucial role in that process.

The story of Bruno (Jeremie Renier) and Sonia (Deborah Francois) and their newborn child, the film meanders along before coming to an abrupt halt without accomplishing much of anything. Simply put, Bruno is one of the most unlikable characters in the history of cinema. Certainly, that is a deliberate stratagem on the Dardenne brothers part, but knowing that doesn’t make the film any more watchable.

At this point, the ‘intelligent’ cinephile is sitting back and thinking, “well, you just didn’t get it”. No. I got it. Bruno (not the newborn baby) is ‘The Child’, bereft of any morals or sense of responsibility, getting by purely with a child’s innate sense of self-preservation. Wow. How clever. But despite solid acting and fine direction, I am ultimately left wondering why I should care.

This is a morality play. At least it’s not a social problem film (cinema’s version of the party-killing wallflower), because Bruno has a chance to work. It is not society’s fault that Bruno believes “only fuckers work”, so there is no larger culture that is being wittily lampooned.

If the idea of watching the world’s worst parents on screen for two hours titillates you, then by all means, rush out and see this. It’s the sort of film that critics go crazy over, while audiences are left scratching their heads. Apparently, those audiences have realised scratching will only make the itch worse, and have given up altogether.

‘The Child’ is now showing.

Summers School

I've had a request in the comments section to expand on my cryptic complaint about 'X3', now that the movie's well and truly out and everybody who wants to has seen it. I swear to God, it's true! Check the review! So if this discussion gets heated, you can blame Stacey McInnes, but I'll try to keep it short and civil.

As everyone on the interwebs has noted by now... CYCLOPS.
Cyclops is not going out like that. Cyclops is Jean Grey's true love, going all the way back to the early Stan and Jack issues of the X-Men. Over the years, Wolvie may have thrown his animal magnetism her way, and even Professor X had a thing for her at one point (oh yes, there are some things the movies chose very wisely to leave out) but Cyclops was always The Man.

Now, I'm not a sad fanboy who insists that the movies be just like the comics. I am a sad fanboy; just not on that particular issue. I don't care if most stuff is different, as long as it makes sense within the movie. But come on... you can't have a Phoenix Saga without Cyclops. It's one of the greatest love stories in comics, and that needs to come through at least a little bit in the movies.

But Wolverine is the star of the movies. Fine. Okay. Makes sense, I suppose. Still, even if Cyclops wasn't able to play exactly the same role in the movie as he did in the comics, he does need to be recognised as an important character. Cyclops was the team leader from practically the beginning, he is (or was, in the comics) the one X-Man who has suffered most for the good of the team. One of my all-time favourite issues of any comics series is Uncanny X-Men #138. It came straight after the Dark Phoenix Saga, and recapped the history of the team from Cyclops' point of view.

And you know what? From that point of view, the most aloof character in the series suddenly became a hell of a lot more likable. It turns out, Cyclops actually thought Xavier was kind of a dick. Because, seriously, Xavier was kind of a dick. And while the others were mucking around, Scott Summers (Cyclops, for the non-comics readers) never slacked a minute. He was isolated and aloof because he had to be, and he never openly questioned Xavier because he knew Xavier wanted what was best for them. And then, in a moment of clarity, he left the team and became his own man. And, honestly, that's how they should have left him.

But, nope. Cyke came back and continues to be a crucial character to this very day. Except for in the movies, where he kinda sorta gets killed by the love of his life. Not that we see it on-screen, not that anyone really goes to any effort to find him, and not that he's given a decent funeral. No, instead we get a big grand funeral for that dick Xavier, and an obligatory headstone for Scott at the end. See, if they actually killed him, and he wasn't going to come back for the grand finale battle royale on Alcatraz, they should have just made it clearer that he was definitely dead.
Instead, a valuable character is thrown away in an awkward scene with zero emotional impact.

Still, I loved the film. Just wanted to get that off my chest. You have fans, Cyclops!

Edit: I should mention, I brazenly stole all the pics in this article from uncannyxmen.net. I figure they stole them from Marvel anyway, meh.

"Maybe if you watched more television, you'd be better at your job..."

I'm not a huge Richard E. Grant fan right now. I was supposed to interview him tomorrow about this movie that he directed called 'Wah Wah', but now he's decided he's not coming to Queensland.
But it's okay! I have another, equally good, assignment! Instead of talking to an internationally respected actor-turned-director, I'll be talking to...
The lead actress from 'Tokyo Drift'. I didn't even know '3 Fast 3 Furious' had a lead actress. Yikes. And yes, this will involve watching the film.
Maybe it'll surprise everyone and be good... ok, no, it won't.

Anyway, the purpose of this post is not to complain, but to contribute: if you have a lot of time on your hands (it goes for 22 minutes) and a fascination with Adam West, then you must see this video.
It's the one (and only) episode of 'Lookwell', a show starring West as an actor who used to play a detective, and mistakenly believes that his crime-solving skills are needed in the real world. It's sublime, but somehow didn't get picked up by a network.



"The working class mind is strange and unpredictable".

07-06-06

So, it was the Day of the Beast yesterday... I know it still is in America, but we're one day ahead of you! So if anyone who reads this is American, I'm speaking to you... FROM THE FUTURE! WHOA!
We also write our days and months the other way around here. We're awesome.

Ahem. So. It was the Day of the Beast yesterday, and I don't think I did anything cool and Demonic. In fact, nothing cool or Demonic was done to me either, except for not being able to find a copy of 'The Five Fists of Science'.

I didn't bathe in anyone's blood, or even swear at an old person. Am I the only one who feels like they missed a tremendous opportunity?

I also didn't go and see the remake of 'The Omen', but I don't think I missed anything there.

I did, at least, get to make the most out of the historic date when I handed an assignment in that required me to write the date at least three times. So that was cool, I guess. It would have sucked if the whole day had gone past and I hadn't even written the damn thing.

Did anyone do anything cool on this historic day? Something a little bit demon-ish? Did anyone you know give birth to the Devil's Spawn? That kind of thing? No? Ok.

Anyway, to commemorate the Day of the Beast, I leave you with this image.

The Parable of the Dude Who Should Have Pre-Ordered Stuff

So, there's this 'graphic novel' called 'The Five Fists of Science', right? It's about the heroic Nikola Tesla and Mark Twain as they fight with the evil Thomas Edison and J.P. Morgan for control of a catostophic device Tesla has built that Twain thinks can bring about world peace. Sounds awesome, right? You know it does. Now, you may ask yourself, why is it called 'The Five Fists of Science'? Tesla, Twain, Edison, Morgan... that's only four. Well, writer Matt Fraction had the answer in this interview:

"No, no, you're thinking of it wrong. Each man has two fists, right and left. That's eight fists up there... Nobody would want to read about the Eight Fists of Science. That'd just be dumb.So: Every man has two fists. Except when they don't."

Upon reading that interview, I knew I must have this comic. So, since it came out last week, I figured I'd wait until after I handed in my goddamned Journalism assignment today. You know, as a present for myself for actually writing the stupid thing. So, I rock up in the city looking to buy this sure-to-be-a-masterpiece, and instead, I find that every store has sold out.

Damn.

The lesson? Had I simply asked my favourite store to put the title aside in my box, I could be reading it right now. Always think ahead, kids. Or something.

Links Ahoy!

Quickly, because I should be doing an assignment...
A surprise finding in Entertainment Weekly's look at Hollywood's top franchise characters sees Wolverine take the top spot. Does anybody else remember, pre-X-Men, when Hugh Jackman was the host of one of the Christmas Carols shows here? When I heard he'd been cast as Wolverine, my brain nearly exploded with thoughts of an all-singing, all-dancing berserker, but it turns out they were right after all.

The new Chili Peppers album, against all odds, has attracted good reviews, but I'm still not buyin' it.

Courtesy of Internet Jesus (aka Warren Ellis- I'll have to post something later about why everyone capable of reading words or looking at pretty pictures should be buying Ellis' Nextwave) we have this little story about an Indian woman who married a snake. I wish they were kidding.

And finally, blogger supremo BeucoupKevin gives us the cover of Daedelus' new album, featuring the work of legendary cartoonist Winsor McKay.
Pretty sweet, no?

"...And if you don't, you'll get arrested!"

There are no words.