NICK FURY, UNDELETED AGENT OF SHIELD

When I walked out of my screening of Iron Man (I swear to Christ that this review will get finished), I asked a Paramount rep if there was something after the credits. I thought it would be a sting that set up the villain for the sequel (a villain whose presence will be noticed only by the hardcore fans), but the rep told me there wasn’t anything once the credits ran.

Except there is!

It turns out that Australia, which is located in a time/space rift and thus in the future, is getting reports from the first public screenings of Iron Man that say Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury makes his long-rumored cameo after the credits. Moviehole got this from Aussie journalist Adam Richard:

‘Sam Jackson as Nick Fury is indeed in Iron Man. The final spool of the film was not screened to journos and reviewers as it only arrived in Australia yesterday ahead of premiere screenings. I saw the film a few weeks ago to prep for a Downey Jr interview, and went again last night (cos i loved it SOOOO much!) and at the end of the credits is an awesome 40 seconds or so with Stark and Nick Fury. I may have soiled myself slightly…’

Damn, I would have liked to have seen that. Is this Paramount’s way of bleeding a couple of extra bucks out of critics?

Now you’ve been warned: stick through the film all the way to the end.






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

YOU GOT IT ALL WRONG, DAY TWENTY-TWO

You and I and all those people out there with a vocal love of film have ruined it for everyone, pimping movies up, falling in love with mediocre films and championing them to near-legendary status. We’ve embraced turkeys, legitimized borderline movies, and elevated modest films in our favorite franchises above and beyond realistic standards. We’ve even embraced the films everyone likes, somehow adding a credibility to them that transcends the mainstream. Sacred cows, little flicks, and everything in between. It’s time we took a look inward and came clean with 25 movies we think need to be taken down a peg or two.

These are our four categories for this list:

OVERRATED
These guys have had it too easy. Far too easy. Don’t believe the insane hype.
OVERBLOWN
Good flicks that have gotten too damn big for their britches.
MISUNDERSTOOD
Asshole, you love this film for all the wrong reasons.
WHAT THE FUCK
Something went horribly wrong here and it’s carried over the the fans, who are blinded by shizer.


Why Dark City is What The Fuck?
Your guide: Russ Fischer

CHUD’s Logline: In a reality twisted by members of a pasty Goth club, all a guy wants to do is go to the beach.

Its Legacy: 
Established Jennifer Connelly’s relationship with piers; made pasty white men in hats unfashionable once again; rekindled genre fans’ love for Connelly; showed the Wachowskis what not to do; they listened…for a minute; projected the charms of Melissa George; made a poor case for exposition delivered in four-syllable gasps.

Why It’s Here: What was in the water in the late ’90s? Prefigured by movies like City of Lost Children, the decade’s last few years saw a handful of relatively high-profile releases that took movie science fiction to new places, or tried to: eXistenZ, The Matrix, Uzumaki and many more. Though I’d take eXistenZ over them all, the obvious culmination point is The Matrix, at least in pop culture. And then there’s Dark City, which prefigured several other films in the wave and drew the attention of Roger Ebert, who championed the film in several contexts. And with volume.

Whatever was in the water is concentrated heavily in Dark City. This amalgam of Fritz Lang and film noir, of late 1940s style and late 1990s effects, has an iconography that is seductive but scattershot and is as good a definition of our What the Fuck? tag as I can come up with. For every shot or setting that holds allure and mystique, there’s a block of dialogue that tries too hard and an alien race (of ‘ultimate technology’) that can traverse space and fabricate literal reality, but spends time bent over tables making personal artifacts like sweatshop workers. The movie is a blender of ideas with nothing to emulsify the mix. The somnambulent leads are without personality, the villains without menace. How can a shuffling, enslaved memory doctor bind it all together? He can’t.

My suspicions begin with the first frames, as Kiefer Sutherland haltingly speaks; his broken intonation melds Sutherland’s weird but effective Sam Stanley from Fire Walk With Me and Michael McKean’s sniveling scenes in Clue. This performance, which I can’t even qualify as ‘shaky’, points to the rest of the film, which is a mishmash of elements that purports to be science fiction and wants to meld a dystopian atmosphere with an inquest into the nature of conscience and humanity, but you’ll get more knowledge out of a cheap carnival fortune teller. Does it absolutely have to come together? Can the movie work even when it doesn’t work the way it wants to? Previously listed Donnie Darko says yes, but this flick has none of the extra stuff that salvages Donnie.

Where most of the films we’ve listed so far are ones we genuinely like, even love, Dark City is an experience I can appreciate only on the most basic, superficial level. I get a kick out of the true form of the Strangers — they appear to be cousins to Krull‘s Slayers — and the notion of a recombinant city is dreamlike and seductive.

This is one of the few films I would endorse as a video game with no reservations. It has beauty and style, and where many elements (the Strangers and their lair, the space view of the city, John Murdoch’s ability to tune) make no sense within the context of the film, even on the intuitive level that helps mesh Donnie Darko into some sort of whole, they would be perfectly at home in the subjective world of gaming.

EDIT: I’m adding this after the fact, because ‘Dre’s mention of Brazil reminded me that I’d meant to bring it up. One of the many, many things that makes Brazil work that is sorely lacking here is a sense of humor. (You might even substitute Blade Runner as an example, though it’s hardly a laugh riot.) Dark City is resolute in it’s shadowy grime, which contributes to the deadly serious and single-minded feeling of the film, which makes the thud resound more heavily when it fails. If I ever got the feeling that Alex Proyas wasn’t so bent on really making a significant point, even that he could be cracking a smile, I might be able to find some spirit that, as is, I can’t detect at all.

A Moment of Piss: As we see our first convocation of The Strangers, poetic dialogue is delivered. “No more Mr. Quick. Mr Quick dead.” “Poor, poor Mr. Quick.”  

These Ain’t Chopped Liver Alternatives: eXistenZ, The Matrix, Requiem For A Dream, Memento, Planescape: Torment.

Andre Dellamorte Agrees: When I saw Dark City, my reaction was: “Really, another distopian future?” Perhaps it was the Clintonian context, but the reason why Brazil is brilliant (even though I’m not fond of it) while most films like this fail is because the distopia is a straw dog, and when the hero rights the situation there’s not much weight to it. Where both Orwell and Huxley were trying to create a possilbe future, creating a non-believable one and then triumphing over it is silly… even if the set design or prop masters do an incredible job (other films not saved by this: Dune, The Matrix Sequels, Minority Report). The only weight a film like this can have is if the future is unstoppable, but the climax – which undoes he damage of the make-believe world – shows that we’ve just invested our time in a story that has nothing to say. Perhaps the director’s cut will give weight to the proceedings, but I just saw a lot of appropriated images, and nothing of any discernable merit. I like noir, and I like science-fiction, but I know Blade Runner, and Dark City, sir, is no Blade Runner.

Justin Waddell Disagrees: Finally, a movie that attempts to show us just how far aliens would branch out from their usual anal probing methods if given a bigger budget. Dark City is a movie that has grown on me over the years. When I first saw it, I thought Proyas was just taking bits from his first feature, The Crow, and mixing in sci-fi tropes. I also didn’t know what to make of Rufus Sewell’s performance, which seemed awkward, unsure. Still, I bought the DVD because I appreciated the craft of the thing, and I wanted to hear the infamous Ebert commentary (which I still haven’t listened to.) I’ve since come to really enjoy Sewell’s acting here (and his Joaquin Phoenix-sounding American accent), as well as the rest of the film. I love the world Proyas creates. And he establishes it with such confidence. I’m fascinated by amnesia-noir, that genre within a genre. And, like Memento, this is just an excellent recent example of it. Russ mentioned some great reference points above (The City of Lost Children, Fritz Lang), but I also see a lot of Gilliam’s Brazil in the ever-changing, floating space city (!). Of course, if Gilliam had been behind the wheel, the movie wouldn’t have been so humorless. But who has time for laughs when you have noir, Cenobite-alikes, a raspy, limping, lazy-eyed Kiefer, syringes, goldfish, and an accordion-hugging William Hurt drizzled across this widescreen concoction? The mind fight at the end goes a little long, but this is some really solid sci-fi. I simply can’t brand it our What the Fuck label. Go watch The Thirteenth Floor to see this same idea executed not nearly as cleverly. And to see the great Craig Bierko in a rare starring role.

Message Board Discussion.






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

DVD REVIEW: RADIANT CITY

Fontstache.

BUY IT AT AMAZON: CLICK HERE!BUY ME!
STUDIO:
  Koch Lorber Films
MSRP: $26.98
RATED:  NOT RATED
RUNNING TIME:  85 Minutes
SPECIAL FEATURES:
– Theatrical Trailer

 

The Pitch

Like American Beauty without the gay body-building murderers and funny mid-life crises.

The Humans

Starring the Moss family and a host of neighbors and experts on urban development in the 21st century.

Grand Theft Auto: Shitty City

The Nutshell

The Moss family is not unlike many families in North America today; they’ve made the decision to move from the city for the relative safety and spacious luxury of the suburbs. However, little cracks in the façade of their ‘dream home’ appear as the film moves along and the talking heads and facts go to show that the luxury of the suburbs has a high environmental, social and psychological effect on the people contained therein.

“Sometimes at the night the roving hordes of the living dead amble their way up to the back porch, but that retaining wall and twelve gauge usually are enough to get through the night without any familial causalties.”

The Lowdown

Radiant City hit home especially hard for me, up until the last few years of my life I had lived mostly in the suburbs and had never really thought about my time spent there in a broader sense; I was born and raised in these communities so it never struck me as being unusual that people fence themselves off in little family compounds and avoid contact with others (not just limited to ‘white flight’, as I can distinctly recall nearly nothing about my next-door neighbors of nearly a decade) for the supposed comforts and safety of suburban living. However, the environmental destruction wrought by such ‘developments’ are impossible to deny (highways and obscene commute times leading to unfathomable levels of air pollution are just a couple of the golden nuggets created by the suburban explosion of recent years) and it’s becoming increasingly obvious that these housing developments are striving for an unobtainable ideal. What Radiant City does, oftentimes successfully, is outline the tenets of the anti-suburban sprawl argument by simply letting the landscapes and those who inhabit it speak for themselves. There’s also a smattering of facts as to the seemingly unchecked growth rate that we’re currently ensconced in to help support the dreary visual landscape the film creates, and the resultant argument is quite persuasive.

“And this is how we keep the black people out.”

It’s impossible for me to delve any further into the material without wading into deep spoiler territory, so be forewarned: read any further and have one of the film’s crucial facets spoiled for you. If you want a brief yay or nay on the movie, I’ll say this before going into detail: if you’re interested in the concept of suburban sprawl and the effect it has on people in these communities then I would definitely recommend the documentary. Interestingly enough, the movie absolutely nails the more abstract reasons suburban sprawl is a blight more so than even the impressive statistical information used to support their argument; these people are looking for an ideal that truly doesn’t exist, and in doing so they’re creating a society that is massively isolationist. Not to say that one should be forced to interact with those around them if they choose not to, but the suburban solution seems to suggest the answer is putting as much distance between you those around you as possible. The movie should also be commended for not vilifying the people who make the decision to leave the city for the supposed comforts of suburbia, allowing them to at least outline their rationale for how they choose to live which for the most part boils down to the suburbs being much more affordable than the city (relative to the somewhat unnecessary space they’re occupying, however).

Suzanne’s favorite store in the strip mall was Hollow Man’s House of Finery.

However, and its spoiler time, one of the biggest problems (besides a couple of ill-conceived camera set-ups) that this film suffers from is the revelation that the family we’ve been viewing throughout the film is composed of actors. At the point it’s revealed, I felt like a complete idiot for dismissing that possibility and giving myself to the narrative that the documentarians had created. I think perhaps the idea behind this is that you’re supposed to realize that the depressing existence these characters live is completely believable and that in and of itself is enough of a condemnation of the suburban family lifestyle. However, I think it has an unintended effect of making their thesis about the untenability of this way of living feel like a straw man argument. The purgatorial imagery they managed to capture and the facts speak for themselves; do they really feel that if we were given a family who argued that they were contented with their living space that we as viewers would’ve been persuaded to see suburban sprawl as not so bad? It’s a curious choice that doesn’t particularly payoff in any discernable way for the movie. The little coda where we see that all of the actors live in subdivisions and suburban areas themselves goes to show that they could’ve had a wealth of material without resorting to fiction to support their stance.

Most alarming fact: 1950’s houses were gay.



Even though I think one of the cruxes upon which the film rests is faulty, I still recommend checking this out.  All of the fact-based information about suburban communities and the sense of pervasive apathy one starts to feel as we view increasingly similar looking housing as far as the eye can see is far more persuasive than any straw man argument as to the social decay inherent in the concept of suburban sprawl. It’s a credit to co-director Gary Burns (a surrealist filmmaker) for making the most out of these haunting shots framing the protagonists as insignificant in the face of such concrete monstrosities. Suburban Sprawl is a topic that will only become more relevant with time, so why not get in on the argument now while it’s still fresh and we haven’t ravaged every last bit of open space in the name of ‘growth’. Deeply flawed, but recommended for the legitimate information conveyed about suburban sprawl.

“Usually at Halloween he’ll pull a quarter or a Tootsie Roll from behind our ears.  It’s not really worth the two mile walk up his driveway to get there honestly…”


The Package

The cover art is a little deceptively plain, and could’ve hinted at the depressingly vast visual tapestry woven throughout the picture, but the concept still comes across I think. The video quality is fine for the material and the audio is equally adequate. Unfortunately, all you get for extras on this disc is a theatrical trailer, which bumps it down quite a bit. A little extra footage or a commentary track giving the filmmakers the opportunity to acquit themselves or at least explain the rationale behind their choices in the film would’ve been appreciated.

6.0 out of 10      






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

DISTRACTIONS: GREMLINS AND TRANSLATIONS

We don’t post a lot of clips just for the sake of doing so, but I’ve got a couple that are cool and/or odd enough to make it worthwhile. Neither is news by a long shot, though.

The first is courtesy of Empire Online, and it’s a minor rebirth of a franchise a lot of people would be happy to see return: Gremlins. Unfortunately, they’re reborn as an ad for British communications company BT. Still, a bunch of Gremlins invading a modern office is fun enough to deserve a click.

Click the picture above to go to the hosted clip.

The second clip, embedded below, is harder to stomach, but fans of Lost In Translation might be…bemused. Maybe. It’s the first official video from Scarlett Johansson’s collection of Tom Waits covers. I’ve been fascinated by the very idea of this thing since it was first announced. And while there’s no way I’ll listen to any song more than once or twice, I get a kick out of seeing Johansson make her own version of Lost In Translation for the purpose of this video. Narcisissm unbridled! And is that Salman Rushdie? Waits fans might want to turn the sound down.

I’d love to have the talkbacks return for this article so I can hear how pointless it was. I looked for an excuse to post Scarlett’s video all day yesterday, and am using the Gremlins as a crutch today. My defense: could some of the Johansson video actually be behind the scenes on The Spirit? I’d swear I caught a flash of Sam Jackson in there.






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

SIMON PEGG GETS CLASSIC

This one’s going to be short, because there’s really not much detail available, but down at the bottom of the same Variety story discussing Karl Urban’s foray into 3D is a line about an upcoming adaptation of David Copperfield. And Pegg’s in it!

The same production shingle, Velvet Octopus, is responsible for both pictures. Peter Howitt will direct this fall. The cast also includes Rowan Atkinson, Julie Walters, Dominic Cooper and Colin Firth. A peek at the company’s own page also reveals…Hayden Christensen as David Copperfield? Whoa.

Simon Pegg will play Uriah Heep, the best Dickens character to ever lend his name to a rock band. I’ve dropped Velvet Octopus a line to see if we can gather some more info.






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

KARL URBAN IN 3-D!

Doom and Pathfinder were not good for Karl Urban’s career. That’s putting things mildly, but I don’t think I need any elaborate analogy to demonstrate how that one-two punch, followed now by working with Tony Kaye (Black Water Transit), might not make him an agent’s wet dream. Star Trek could turn things around, but by then he’ll be knee deep in Relentless, a 3D action flick directed by the guy who made 3000 Miles To Graceland.  

Demian Lichtenstein has, according to Variety, been ‘shadowing’ James Cameron during Avatar’s birthing process, and has been brought up to speed on current 3D tech by the folks at DreamWorks as well.

So far, 3D has been a big-budget affair, but Relentless is just a $25 million dollar flick. Sayeth the trade, “It’s the story of four extreme sports professionals who survive a plane crash in the Amazon jungle, and must use all their survival instincts as they are hunted by a group of homicidal natives.” Sounds ridiculous, but a down and dirty 3D action flick is something I think a lot of people can latch onto. Throw Kurt Russell in there somewhere and I think we’re all sold.






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

MATTHEW VAUGHN GOES INTO DEBT

The first thing a lot of people might hone in on in Variety’s article about Matthew Vaughn’s new scriptwriting deal is the lack of mention about Thor. No surprise there, really; the picture isn’t going to move at least until Iron Man‘s returns are in, and possibly not until the Hulk has had time to simmer down.

For now, though, this is interesting news. Vaughn has signed on to produce (through his shingle Marv Films) and co-write (with Stardust partner Jane Goldman) a remake of the Israeli film Ha-hov. The general title translation is The Debt, which will also be the name of Vaughn’s version. The pic follows a trio of Mossad agents on the trail of a Nazi war criminal that escaped them thirty years before.  

A director has yet to be announced. Despite Marv’s first-look deal with Sony, Miramax will distribute worldwide next year. Take that as an indication of the scale we can expect from the picture. Think just slightly smaller than Munich. OK, a lot smaller.






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

THE HULK IDENTITY

Wonder where those new Hulk images Devin posted earlier came from? Well, they’re all from the new trailer, which you can see in tasty HD over at Apple.

In my eyes this is a big improvement over the flat first trailer, but that’s not saying a lot. The first third here pulls way too much from the vibe of the Bourne series, and it doesn’t have the same punch. But once we start to see some Roth and a bit of Hulkamania, even with the Hulk’s shiny CGI skin, it picks up. This clip finally demonstrates the root of the movie’s Hulk vs Abomination setup, for one. And I definitely dig seeing the green guy wielding pieces of military vehicles as weapons, though in some ways that just makes me want to play the Hulk Ultimate Destruction again. Finally check the King Kong moment at about 2:15. Yow.






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

TRAILERHEAD

Alan Ball’s adaptation of the novel Towelhead is a searingly funny look at sexuality and race in America, and it kicked my ass at Sundance (read the review here). It’s the kind of movie I’m shocked anybody makes in this country, since it is so uninterested in pointing fingers and making people bad guys. And while I know this is going to get seen as a swipe at The Dark Knight, Towelhead might have Aaron Eckhardt’s career best performance as a patriotic Texan who gets to like his 13 year old neighbor just a little too much. And Summer Bishil – who is of legal age, by the way – is magnificent as that 13 year old girl.

The trailer is finally here for the film, and I think it’s pretty good, capturing the film’s humor and Ball’s lovely direction. Towelhead hits August 8th; make some room in your summer for a real movie.






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email

THE WOLVERINE BULLSHIT

Why they gotta make Wolverine an emo pussy? That’s what Hugh Jackman intimates in an interview with MTV where he discusses X-Men Origins: Wolverine’s tone, which he likens to Batman Begins. You can imagine how happy that makes me.

“We are dealing with a character who is probably one of the darker comic book characters ever created,” Jackman said. “The movie has a lot of fun elements, but there are layers of pain and darkness to this character.”

Well, yes and no. The thing I always liked about Wolverine is how he carried the pain, never showing it. Jackman’s making it sound like he’s going to be doing the action movie version of stepping to the edge of the stage and singing a sad song.

He also reveals a shocking truth to fans: there could be more films in the Wolverine series! “There are two conditions for me doing any more: One is will anybody want to see it, and the second is: Will I still have the passion for it?” he explained. “I really wanted to do this spin-off movie, because I felt we hadn’t truly found who this character was… Right now I feel like I could do another ten or eleven.”






Author Links: Author's Page · AIM · Twitter · Facebook · Twitter · Email