Messages

A lot of my opinions about the first Beetlejuice film are colored by the circumstances under which I saw it in theaters. And it would be fair to say that they were less than ideal.

Without turning this post into a blog, I'll say that I saw it with a friend, his brother and his mom. His mom absolutely hated my guts and only took me along to the movie reluctantly. In retrospect, I'm not 100% sure she didn't abuse me or her sons.

Actually seeing the movie was fine on its own merits. I enjoyed the production design and gothy Winona Ryder. But I always believed the first Ghostbusters film provided a far superior mix of authentic horror and genuine comedy than Beetlejuice. The characters never made a huge impression on me and I don't recall watching much of the animated series precisely because of the fact that I wasn't overly taken by the film.

I liked the mythology of the film. The rules the ghosts had to live by, the Handbook For The Recently Deceased and those things. But the movie didn't explore that stuff to the degree that I might've preferred.

All in all, I'll probably check out the sequel. Burton seems to be getting his old groove back, I don't know how many more films Keaton realistically has in him, Winona Ryder is back to her goth ways and I've always admired Gough & Millar's ability to drill down to the core truth of their characters.

But I don't seem to be experiencing the same level of anticipation that others are. And not for the first time, I've been wondering what those people see in the first film that I'm simply missing.

I suppose my way of seeing things is the original film is a classic of sci-fi. But aside from the pitch perfect Hero's Journey that Neo goes on, the first film incorporates a variety of influences. A general sci-fi genre, a cyberpunk style, occasional noir aesthetics, wire-fu and probably other cinematic influences that I'm forgetting. A bit of body horror too, I would suggest.

The second and third either work for you or they don't. But either way, there's no denying that they suffered for abandoning the mood and atmosphere of the original.

The fourth one... yeah.

So, what's left for a fifth one? Resurrection was somewhat a retread of the first one. But not totally. I suppose you could do a more nostalgia-minded film for those of us with fond memories of 1999. But this franchise seems to be creatively spent. And it's arguable how much of its potential was ever fully realized.

For comparison, say whatever you want about the Terminator franchise. But between various films, TV shows and comic books, that rather limited concept was FULLY explored. Perhaps to its own detriment. But fully explored nevertheless.

After all this time and only one bona fide classic movie, I think it's only fair to ask if the time for The Matrix has come and gone.

An interesting tidbit about Superman's return during/after the Reign Of The Supermen storyline was how his uniform was subtly different from what it was before.

First, arguably, the chest symbol was bigger than it had been before. This is a little subjective, granted. But it looked TO ME like the symbol was larger than it used to be.

Second, the cape seemed to get noticeably longer. Which, again, is kind of subjective. Different artists, different interpretations and so forth. But I always got the idea that the cape was longer, fuller and more "billowy".

Third, what's NOT subjective is the blue bodysuit shifting from a softer powder blue (which is what it had been up through the Doomsday storyline) over to more of a shade of navy blue. The bodysuit is undeniably darker than it had been before.

Fourth, there's obviously his long hair. Again, different artists interpreted "long hair" in different ways. Jackson Guice drew it as slightly mullety. Jon Bogdanove drew it like a rock star's hair. Finally, Tom Grummett and Dan Jurgens drew it as thick, flowing and just a bit longer than before.

Basically, after ROTS, Superman was drawn to more greatly resemble Dean Cain in the first few episodes of Lois & Clark. The larger chest symbol, the royal cape, the darker bodysuit and the hair were intended to match up with Dean Cain.

In the L&C pilot and in the first few episodes of L&C, Dean Cain had thick hair. And obviously, the various Superman artists interpreted "longer hair" in their own individual ways. And eventually, comic book Superman's hair looked not very much at all like Dean Cain's hair, esp after Cain got a haircut in the first season. But still, the intent seems to have been there.

For anyone who doubts this, keep in mind that the only reason that the Doomsday/Funeral For A Friend/Reign Of The Supermen trilogy ever existed in the first place is because Mike Carlin delayed Lois and Clark's wedding to (eventually) coincidence with Lois & Clark's eventual wedding. So, if Carlin was willing to throw out firmly laid plans for Lois and Clark to get married in the comics (and obviously, he was willing to do that), then why wouldn't he visually realign comic book Superman's appearance with TV Superman?

I can't prove any of the above about Superman's appearance. But the changes simply look too big and substantial AND TOO SIMILAR to L&C for me to think it was all just a big coincidence.

No, I think there was an editorial agenda going on with that stuff.

The timing sounds like that's when the Superman 2000 fiasco went down.

It's clear that Eddie Berganza maybe spoke a little out of turn when he offered the Superman titles to Waid, Peyer, Morrison and Millar. The story goes that when Mike Carlin came back from vacation and found out what Berganza had authorized, he personally cancelled the entire Superman 2000 program.

In retrospect, I see this as a great tragedy. Considering how mediocre to awful the Superman line of comics were in the early to mid 2000's, it's hard to imagine that the Superman 2000 relaunch would've somehow been worse.

"The things we could've done together..."

They're going hard on black American Gordon. The Lego movie, The Batman and now this.

Canonically, Babs is supposed to be a redhead. We know how well redheaded characters do when adapted into other media these days. How else can you have POC Babs unless her old man has been race swapped too?

I would imagine that the principal cast will consist of Serkis, Mortensen and McKellan.

Tyler and Weaving might be tougher. Tyler because she's looking a little matronly these days. And Weaving because I swear to think he announced his retirement from Hollywood. Then again, they're such obvious candidates for inclusion that I find it hard to imagine that the movie trilogy gets announced before they have the main cast locked up. I always got the idea that Weaving had a special affection for Elrond. But maybe I'm wrong.

Lee's passing will certainly complicate matters. I'm not super comfortable with the idea of using CGI to copy him and AI to give him a voice. But if you're going to include Saruman in the movies, then I don't know what the alternative is. Because recasting the character is out of the question in my mind. So, either you use technological trickery to digitally resurrect Lee or else you write the Saruman character out entirely. But I'm unable to see a third choice.

As to what material you could adapt into a film, there's some stuff going on in Appendix B/The Tale Of Years. Tolkien provided some technical details. I would like to think that writers of Jackson, Boyens and Walsh's caliber can craft something using these items. Plus, they've got lead time with this that they didn't have with The Hobbit. So, right there, I think this trilogy is already off to a good start. There's no need to rush the films through production to meet a release date.

2980
Aragorn enters Lórien, and there meets again Arwen Undómiel. Aragorn gives her the ring of Barahir, and they plight their troth upon the hill of Cerin Amroth. About this time Gollum reaches the confines of Mordor and becomes acquainted with Shelob. Théoden becomes King of Rohan. Birth of Samwise.

3000
The shadow of Mordor lengthens. Saruman dares to use the palantír of Orthanc, but becomes ensnared by Sauron, who has the Ithil-stone. He becomes a traitor to the Council. His spies report that the Shire is being closely guarded by the Rangers.

3009
Gandalf and Aragorn renew their hunt for Gollum at intervals during the next eight years, searching in the vales of Anduin, Mirkwood, and Rhovanion to the confines of Mordor. At some time during these years Gollum himself ventured into Mordor, and was captured by Sauron. Elrond sends for Arwen, and she returns to Imladris; the Mountains and all lands eastward are becoming dangerous.

3017
Gollum is released from Mordor. He is taken by Aragorn in the Dead Marshes, and brought to Thranduil in Mirkwood. Gandalf visits Minas Tirith and reads the scroll of Isildur.

I'm calling it now. If this trilogy actually gets made, then I'm betting one of the movies will be titled The Shadow Of Mordor (or something similar).

I'm pretty optimistic about this. A lot more optimistic than I ever was about TROP.

^ I remind myself that it could ALWAYS be worse. For example...

Not digging that Harley outfit. Is there something wrong with sticking to her original red/black outfit?

AM digging that Catwoman outfit tho. Fifties chic, I like it!

All in all, this isn't shaping up too badly at all. I regret Jar Jar Abrams's involvement. But aside from him (and that wonky Harley outfit), this series looks pretty good.

The first African American police commissioner was appointed in 1984, and this show is supposed to be early 40s?

We're not allowed to see the past as it actually was, didn't you know?

Jackson, Walsh, Boyens and Serkis are coming back to the Middle-earth!

This could be awesome. It's not guaranteed. But if nothing else, they now have a template to work from. TROP is a very good example of how NOT to handle things.

I'm optimistic about this, frankly. I might end up eating my words later on. But I think there's a lot of potential with this.

Now that I think about it, I probably ought to comment on Corenswet himself. He certainly looks the part. I'm not predicting anything. But if this film's legacy is that Corenswet is the best part of it, that wouldn't be a big surprise at this stage in the game. He looks powerful. If you ask me, Superman should always look large and in charge. And Corenswet is definitely on the right track as far as appearances are concerned.

Which fits with everything else, frankly. Gunn does seem to have assembled a great cast. I was battening down the hatches for what casting a Superman film in the modern era might lead to. But for the most part, the casting choices for this film have been very high quality.

If I had to guess, it'll probably be six or eight months before we see a teaser for the film. But I am very curious to see how this film will depict Superman flying.

I don't have the same buzz about Gunn's Superman that I had about The Batman and, to a greater extent, JOKER. But I am allowing for the possibility of this film winning me over.

Still not digging that Superman uniform tho, no doubts there.