Happy Canada Day and Fourth of July
Posted on | July 1, 2009 | Comments Off
To all my fellow Canadian ex-patriates, have a fantastic Canada Day! Drink some Molson, eat some poutine, and follow the NHL free agency updates.
And for everyone here in the USA, have a safe and fun Independence Day! May you drink plenty of Coors Lite, eat apple pie and follow bevy of MLB games.
Best Movies of 2009 … So Far
Posted on | June 12, 2009 | 1 Comment
Well, we’re nearly half-way through the year. (Man, is it me or is it true that the older you get, the faster time flies?)
So I figure it’d be an appropriate time to post half of my Best Produced Screenplays of 2009 list. Of course, it’ll change and grow through the coming months, but I think the following movies are the few true film gems found in a mountain of cinematic sludge.
1. Up
Rating: 4.9 out of 5
A CGI cartoon about an old man who tries to float his house to South America using balloons? Seriously? Who woulda thunk such an obscure, impossible premise could have spawned the most amazing movie of 2009 to date. Its key (aside from the amazing visuals) is the screenplay.
Filled with genius comedy, heartbreaking plotpoints, surprisingly thrilling action scenes, and flawed but likable characters, the script by Bob Peterson and director Pete Docter is a classic example of how to tell a sophisticated, emotional story for adults based on a decidedly simple structure –- and mask it all as a kid’s movie. But then again, why should I have been so surprised? Up is yet another classic crafted by Pixar, the studio that brought us Wall-E, Toy Story and The Incredibles.
2. Star Trek
Rating: 4.5 out of 5
Yet again, here’s a movie I resisted at first but fell totally in love with.
I am a mild Star Trek fan, having regularly watched The Next Generation and infrequently watched re-runs of the original series. But then producers Rick Berman and Brannon Braga flushed Gene Roddenberry’s vision down the black hole of horrible sequels and TV spin-offs. If that weren’t enough, I heard the pair wanted to draw from the well they’d already sucked dry by doing a TV series on Kirk and Spock during their Star Fleet Academy days.
So when this new Star Trek movie went into production with their “Early Adventures of Kirk and Spock” premise, I just shuddered. I hate when Hollywood issues horrible remakes (see 1998’s Godzilla … or rather don’t!) or tries to rewrite its own history (Star Wars prequels) because it only devalues the original property. It just shows how unimaginative the studio executives are and how hackneyed their hired screenwriters can be.
But then a few silver linings started to shine through the gloomy moribund mass of mediocre ideas. Firstly, Berman and Braga were out and J.J. Abrams was in. Abrams is the king of “geek coolness.” He created TV’s Alias, mindf*cked audiences with Lost and directed Mission: Impossible III.
Then word of the casting leaked out. An unknown Chris Pine as Kirk (smart move). Heroes’ Zachary Quinto as Kirk (brilliant). John Cho (of Harold & Kumar fame) as Sulu (spot on). And others like character actors Bruce Greenwood and Clifton Collins Jr. rounded out the solid cast. With Eric Bana as the main villain Nero, Star Trek started looking more like a a space stud than a Terran dud.
Having watched it, I gotta say, it’s pretty damn good.
The screenplay — by “it” writing duo of and Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci — contain a constant clip of levity, witty dialogue, suspense, sexiness, emotion, and (most importantly in my book) action. It honors the traditions of the Star Trek canon but isn’t bound by it.
Star Trek’s only flaw that prevents a perfect score is … well, I don’t wait to be a spoiler, but let’s just say Kirk moves up the chain of command pretty damn fast. A minor complaint about a lack of realism, but then again, I should realize that this is a movie about an intergalactic spaceship, after all.
3. Taken
Rating: 4 out of 5
Another stellar example of how a script with a simple premise – Liam Neeson plays an ex-CIA agent who must find the bastards who kidnapped his daughter in France — can result in a tight, suspenseful thriller so long as the execution is right.
This is the good that can come out of Luc Besson and Robert Mark Kamen’s partnership, instead of the usual popcorn crap of late (The Transporter franchise). This is much closer to their cinematic classics, such as The Karate Kid and The Professional.
4. The Hangover
Rating: 4 out of 5
I thought this was going to be a disappointment. It wasn’t. Thankfully, Jon Lucas and Scott Moore twist the tired “bachelor party in Vegas” subgenre into a very funny comedy with a Memento-like thriller aspect.
Three friends wake up after a debauchery-filled bachelor party only to find a tiger in their hotel bathroom, a baby in their closet and their groom missing — and no memory of what happened. Bitingly funny broad comedy + realistic dialogue + flawed yet strong characters + unique script structure = a damn good movie.
5. I Love You Man
Rating: 4 out of 5
I have to admit, I thought this was going to be an instant classic. It’s not. Too high an expectation? Yeah, probably. So I didn’t bust my gut laughing every two minutes. It’s still a good movie –- one of the better ones so far of 2009 — and you know why? Director John Hamburg and co-writer Larry Levin pen a heart-warming script that’s based on real emotions and characters. From human frailty and flaws come great opportunities for hilarity! It’s a “bromantic” comedy at its finest.
We’ll have to see if the next six months will give us five more enjoyably enjoyable movies based on strong screenplays.
Oh, and a side note, here are my list of honorable mentions. They’re movies I liked but know will never make this list.
Honorable Mentions:
Watchmen
Entertaining, never boring, but ultimately, an unfulfilled vision of Alan Moore’s epic comic miniseries.
The International
A little slow in places, but features one of the best set pieces ever filmed (a gunfight in the Guggenheim).
Terminator Salvation
Plenty of fun explosions and CGI spectacle. The script sets up the pins beautifully but fails to knock down all the targets. With numerous writers brought on to rework the movie (and even The Dark Knight scribe Jonathan Nolan writing on set during filming!), I have a strong suspicious everything good about the screenplay and movie had little to do with what credited writers John D. Brancato and Michael Ferris originally brought to the table. I mean, they did write such “awesome” fare as Catwoman and T3. Oh, and with director McG on board, all I gotta say is, “See, I told you he was a hack.”
Tags: Alan Moore > Best Movies of 2009 > Best Screenplays of 2009 > I love You man > Star Trek > Taken > Terminator Salvation > The Hangover > The International > Up > Watchmen
Frank Miller’s The Spirit is Soulless
Posted on | May 15, 2009 | No Comments
I loved Frank Miller.
He’s a brilliant comic book writer/artist and one of the most celebrated creators living today. Sin City, 300, The Dark Knight Returns, Ronin, and various character-defining runs on titles such as Daredevil – all birthed from this man’s wildly imagination.
So when I heard he was helming the movie adaptation of The Spirit, I was pumped. I was really optimistic that he could bring some intelligence and style to this iconic series by the legendary Will Eisner, and with good reasons. Miller co-directed the Sin City movie with Robert Rodriquez, and Miller had complained bitterly in the past that his scripts for Robocop 2 and 3 were butchered by the studio. I was certain Miller’s cinematic version of The Spirit would be full of his trademark machismo and sophistication, after he had gone through those three movie-related experiences.
Instead, The Spirit is an absolutely soulless, steaming pile of [insert disgusting noun here], due largely in part to his mindless script and horrible directing choices. I’m sad to say it could be one of the worst movies to come out in 2008.
I just watched the DVD and it was so bad in fact that I didn’t even sit to watch it through. (And I never walk out on movies.) By the end of the first act, I got so sick of it that I actually fast-forwarded to the climatic battle between the Spirit and his archenemy, the Octopus. And not only had I predicted the outcome 30 minutes previously, but I felt like I hadn’t missed anything by not watching the middle 70-minutes worth that I had skipped over!
One of Miller’s biggest screenwriting mistakes was giving the Spirit healing powers. In the comics, the Spirit was a cop who was murdered and resurrected. Aside from his Lazarus-like reappearance, he had no superpowers — think Batman without the million-dollar gadgets. Yet, for some strange reason, Miller felt compelled to give the Spirit some Wolverine-like regeneration skills. This instantly weakens the character from a storyteller’s perspective.
Why?
If the main hero can heal despite getting a toilet dropped on his head (this actually happens in the movie, ridiculously and metaphorically enough), the audience will never feel like he’s in any danger and therefore will never really care much for what happens to him. And if the audience doesn’t care what happens to the main character, they won’t care what happens to the story because there’s no longer an emotional investment in the story … which is the exact opposite of what you want as a storyteller. It’s this very same reason why Superman will never be as interesting as Batman. If Superman is invulnerable, why should we care how Lex Luthor tries to kill him? That’s why the writers invented kryptonite.
But in The Spirit, there is no logic, let alone any kryptonite-like plot device. There are, however, many other screenwriting mistakes, but I won’t belabor the fact that Miller should have taken a different approach with the script.
As for his biggest directing mistakes … wow, there are too many to list and would fill a week’s worth of blogs. But let’s just say that emulating Rodriquez’s CGI-heavy visual style from Sin City definitely didn’t do him any favors.
Suffice to say, The Spirit sucked massive donkey balls. The sweaty, hairy kind.
I’m disappointed, Frank. I used to love your work. Now I’m just heart broken.
Tags: Batman > Frank Miller > Robocop 2 > Screenwriting > Sin City > Superman > The Spirit
X-Men Origins: Wolverine — Will It Suck?
Posted on | April 29, 2009 | No Comments
I have a prediction. If X-Men Origins: Wolverine sucks, it’s because of two factors:
- a crappy screenplay,
- a director who doesn’t understand the source material enough to recognize that he got a crappy script handed to him.
On paper, screenwriters David Benioff and Skip Woods and director Gavin Hood look good together. I’m a fan of Benioff thanks to his work on Spike Lee’s 25th Hour and Hood did wonders on Tsotsi. (I’m not as crazy about Woods, who wrote Swordfish and Hitman.) Both of them are capable of amazingly intelligent yet heart-pounding thrillers. Will they bring that same “thinking man’s” action aesthetic to the most popular Marvel Comics character and the best thing to come out of Canada since hockey and maple syrup?
As a Canadian-born comic lover, I haven’t been impressed by the trailers. They look horribly cheesy. I’m talking besides the ridiculously fake CGI- and stuntwire-aided sequences. I’m thinking about the story (as every scribe should). Let’s look at the things that irk me or raise my eyebrow:
- A teenage Cyclops makes an appearance: When did Wolverine’s origin ever have anything to do with Cyclops??
- A buttload of minor Marvel characters seem to have supporting roles, including Deadpool, Gambit, and the Blob: Why pack in a bunch of characters that should be saved for an X-Men sequel into a solo origin story? To me, too many characters always spells “warning!” Plus, in the comics, those three have little or nothing to do with Wolvie’s origin.
- Sabretooth charges at Wolvie on all fours: He is a mutant whose handle is Sabretooth; that doesn’t make him an actual four-legged feline!
Wolverine is one of my favorite comic characters. What makes him so special to me (aside from him also being Canadian) is that he’s the ultimate anti-hero, who could be 200 years old and has a mysterious, convulted past. He is just one hair-trigger away from being like the very evil-doers he stabs and slashes without remorse. He and this movie should be portrayed as extremely dark (I’m talking beyond Dark Knight dark) and as a real tragic figure who is more afraid of what’s inside of his head than the villains he has to slay.
So far the trailers don’t lead me to believe that X-Men Origins: Wolverine will do that, that the action won’t be as campy and the character development so off the mark as, say, Daredevil.
I am hoping and praying that I’m totally wrong and that this won’t be the case.
Tags: David Benioff > Gavin Hood > Hugh Jackman > screenplay > Wolverine > X-Men
Screenwriting Tip of the Month: April
Posted on | April 17, 2009 | No Comments
It’s almost always better to have a character do something rather than say it. Why?
True, humans love to talk, but all (good) psychologists will tell you that the majority of human communication is nonverbal. We gather far more information from a person through his body language than by what he says.
For example, lets say you have an older teen as your main character. Let’s call him Timmy. He happens across a gorgeous young woman in her 20s. Let’s call her Betty. Our Timmy decides to ask this beauty out on a date and her response is simply “No thanks.” Not practicularly dramatic and fairly predictable right?
Well, let’s add in three different nonverbal cues to Betty’s single-line response and see how it plays:
keep looking »