I'm currently downloading Hudson Hawk or, as I like to think of it, the Hickman's S.H.I.E.L.D.-themed heist musical comedy that Bruce Willis starred in.

As far as I'm concerned, the triptych Hudson Hawk/Moonlighting/Die Hard is what Bruce Willis' career was all about (along similar lines, Tom Hanks is, to me, the actor of the stirring inspirational movie Joe Versus the Volcano and the terrifyingly understated psychosexual nightmare that was Big).

( Spoilery knee-jerk reactions behind the cut.Collapse )

Which leads me to another question: why make an origin movie? If the problem is finding drama, do something with the first Superman/Batman storyline — make Luthor win the US Presidency, set up the moral and political issues, and go with that! Caesar's Ghost, it's not as if there's anybody out there who doesn't know the characters!

It was about this guy and the love of his life, who was marrying a woman of all people, so he talks/kidnaps him into one last romp of cross-dressed, alcohol- and drugs-fueled, violent cavorting through Europe. There are wild dances, phallic stuff everywhere, naked and dress-wearing men, much throwing aside of women, hurt/comfort, and *coughs* performance-enhancing drugs.

There was also some bits about a "game of shadows" and some detecting, but that was probably the C-plot.

If the protagonist of the movie version of Wanted was a hero, and RED was adapted like it was, we can't really expect a faithful movie adaptation of Irredeemable and Incorruptible, can we? For all their reputation, Hollywood is essentially a moralistic place. I wonder if, well, not Bollywood, but maybe Nigeria (note that Nigeria is poised to join the BRIC team in the not too far future, so that it's a moviemaking player it's not as weird as it seems) or somewhere else could carve a niche for itself as a purveyor of impossible-to-make-in-America movies.

In an unrelated musing, the fact that they chose Ryan Reynolds to portray Hal Jordan says quite a bit about... something. No wonder they basically chose to not make Superman a character in the last Superman movie — he's an essentially serious character, and somewhere deep in Hollywood analytical bowels, they have decided that comic book movie audiences don't want and/or can't relate to serious characters (obsessed is different).

Aaaand now I facepalm, remember the upcoming DC reboot (we need to start numbering them or something), and suddenly it makes a whole lot of sense. It's not about comic readers. It's about aligning DC "properties" with Hollywood (which is where the money is) scripting parameters, so the Superman movie after the next one can have a young "hip" Superman that "follows faithfully the comic, honest!"

I'm not sure I'm happy about the prospect of Hollywood targeting executives influencing the long-term development of comic book characters. To put it mildly.

Priest is to alt-history alt-religious vampire hunting as airport internal decoration is to internal decoration.

Kung Fu Panda 2 is to Kung Fu Panda as chocolate-flavored pasta is to chocolate.

Green Lantern: Emerald Knights (the animated one) is to, say, Crisis on Two Earths as a bad, mediocre things is to an awesome thing.

Hanna is to the Hanna in my head as a random ninja is to Cassandra Cain.

There are no fantasies, no levels of reality, no metaphors in Sucker Punch. It's the straightforward story of heroes in Hell, and the external shape of that Hell has no relevance to the meaning of heroism. But sometimes we forget it — sometimes we forget that we don't role play or fantasize about or are inspired by heroes, we are heroes — and then the visuals, the soundtrack, and the trappings of the story help us remember.

The images weren't there to help Babydoll (in whatever universe she was, her strength was exactly the same, and whatever reality was, she was always all too conscious of it). The images are here to help us.

Its title is very, very appropriate. It'll kick you in the gut and it'll lift you up, sometimes at the same time. Do watch it. (My only caveat: it can be triggery as hell.)

Movies seen so far this year:

• All-Star Superman: Very few modifications from the comic, but not uninteresting ones. The relative dearth of Jimmy Olsen goodness [1] is regrettable, but Luthor gets a more nuanced treatment at the end.


• Drive Angry: Ye gods, what an awful movie: an unholy breed of Supernatural and Dukes of Hazzard, but with few if any of the interesting qualities of either.


• Chaos: This watch a rewatch, and a non-unenjoyable one. It's not Revolver, but what the hell.

[1] I know, Jimmy Olsen goodness sounds silly. But trust me, All-Star Superman's Jimmy Olsen is a one-man show of awesome.