MAUS: A Survivor's Tale

 

Maus is essential. While Writer/Artist Art Spiegelman may not have the same notoriety as the Frank Millers and Alan Moores of the industry, his intimate account of his Father's experience during the Holocaust is arguably more important than anything that those two titans have written. What's that? Watchmen made Time Magazine's Top 100 Novels in 2005? Maus bagged the Pulitzer in '92.

It is utterly essential.

The complete Maus is a compilation of two volumes, 'My Father Bleeds History' and 'And Here My Troubles Began' and charts first Vladek Spiegelman's time at the beginning of the war, dodging the Reich, and then the devastating account of the time he spent in Auschwitz. His tale is a story within a story with each chapter bookended by present day Vladek recounting his story to his increasingly horrified son.

You're unlikely to have read anything quite like this. It's dark, bleak, miserable and completely relentless. If you When you read it, try to experience it in one sitting but be sure to set aside a good hour after to recover. It's Vladek's disarmingly frank recounting of events that makes his experience so difficult to stomach. We are used to hearing about the holocaust through stories. True stories yes, but never as bare and exposed as this. To hear the holocaust retold in such an anecdotal fashion, and to read Vladek's words verbatim (Spiegelman used transcripts of his recorded interviews with his father) humanises the Holocaust in devastating fashion. 

Reading a book sub-titled 'A Survivor's Tale' you would imagine some light at the end of the tunnel but it never really lets up. Yes Vladek survived the Holocaust but, his journey followed him home. The damage was already done. Spiegelman makes no attempt to paint his father as an Oskar Schindler, Vladek's priority was himself and his wife and as the War raged on and their plight worsened Vladek had to make some awful decisions. He was a good man but his experiences hardened him, making him a stubborn and difficult individual is his later years. Present day Vladek's strained relationship with his second wife breaks the tension with some humour but after a while that "take my wife, please" comedy only highlights how socially detached and isolated Vladek became.

While the historical portions of Maus takes Vladek's view point, the present day bookends follow Spiegelman himself as he tries to make sense of his Father's ordeal. As much a part of the audience as the reader he acts as our stand in, vocalising our horror. You can sense the catharsis as he takes in Vladek's story. Obviously he knew Vladek was a Holocaust survivor but here he truly understands what happened to him and it helps him rebuild his relationship with his Father. It's fascinating seeing an artist/author experiencing something so personal while trying to write the very book you're reading. Mid way through Maus it begins to take it's toll and Spiegelman even questions whether he should finish it. That personal connection as he agonises over the book elevates Maus even further.

As a Graphic Novel, Spiegelman's book is as perfect an example as you can get of how to use illustration to enhance the story. Perhaps more so than any other, Maus could only work as well as it does in the Graphic medium.

Using animals (mice as Jews, cats as Nazis, pigs as Poles) to portray the various ethnicities and nationalities is a striking image decision and as you read the story that it's relevance becomes clear. Running far deeper than the obvious cat and mouse metaphor Spiegelman uses the animals to highlight the absurdity of what happened during those dark years. Spiegelman himself has said that the metaphor self destructs and that that was his intention. It's about exposing the idiocy and futility of racial segregation and persecution.

It's also about identity. In the book, when Vladek attempts to move around the Polish town of Sosnowiec, he literally places a pig mask over his face to pass as a Pole and hide the fact he is a Jew. It's a small detail but one that speaks volumes and emphasises how much these people lost even from the beginning. Not just their homes and belongings but their identity. That idea of identity reaches even further. Later in the book we see a prisoner in the camps pleading with the guards, insisting he is a German. His face changes from mouse to cat then back again as the guards decide what to do with him, further illustrating the absolute insanity.

You might assume that the animals lessen the impact of the holocaust and soften the barrage of emotional blows but it's far from true. Spiegelman's characters are presented as animals but they are very human, their suffering very real, and it's none more apparent than when Vladek is finally brought to Auschwitz.

There is imagery here that will never, ever be filmed. We were taught about the gas chambers and burnings in school but it's the smaller accounts of cruelty that will chill you. The horror (and there really is no other word to describe it) isn't held back. Spiegelman illustrates the camps as Vladek describes. A picture paints a thousand words but by marrying both (his pictures, his father's words) he presents an Auschwitz that is as nothing less than hell on earth. Maus doesn't hold your hand through Vladek's misery, it takes you by the back of the neck and forces you to examine and experience the nightmare that was Auschwitz. For that and countless other reasons it is an absolute masterpiece.

It's easy to fall head first into that kind of hyperbole with a book like Maus. Any account of the Holocaust packs a punch before a page is read but that familiarity is a double edged sword. That period in our history is so infamous and so well documented that we've become desensitised to it. We've seen the films and studied the history books. We think we know what happened during the Holocaust, but while we may be able to imagine what happened, we will never understand it. Maus maybe the closest thing you will get to actually spending an afternoon with a survivor. Spending it with Vladek Spiegelman is an extraordinary experience and it's what makes the book so important, so essential. With Maus, Art Spiegelman didn't reinvent a superhero or deconstruct a genre. He gave us his Father.

Got Me a Movie: The Podcast. Episode 3. The Falcon and the Winter Soldier

 

The Falcon and the Winter Soldier comes agonisingly close to being great. Dan and Mike discuss what worked, what didn't and what the rest of the MCU looks like.

Links below. 

Marvel Studios offers a glimpse at Phase 4 to remind us they still make movies.

Despite some bumps it looks, at least for now,  like Marvel's foray into television is off to a strong start. The Falcon and The Winter Soldier is reportedly Disney+'s biggest series yet and both it and Wandavision each received favourable reactions from critics and fans.

But they're still in the movie game! And have graced us with a sneak peak at the next phase of films including our first look at Eternals and the titles for the Black Panther and Captain Marvel sequels:

That's a lovely little reel, and some nice sentiments from Stan Lee. I really miss the cinema and if I see the inside of one in the next five years I'll be happy.

The Eternals footage looks nice. That's certainly the cast all stood together. 

The reveal of Black Panther: Wakanda Forever and The Marvel's is a pretty exciting thing to drop out of the blue. 'Wakanda Forever' gives very little clues about the story Ryan Coogler has come up with but it feels like a nice tip of the hat to the late Chadwick Boseman. 

The Marvel's suggests something of a buddy movie featuring Carol Danvers, Kamala Khan and possibly Monica Rambeau. We've seen Brie Larson and Teyonah Parris in action before and newcomer Iman Vellani will be debuting in Ms Marvel later this year. Kamala Khan is a fan favorite to say the least and her joining the film series is exciting.

The final image is another tease of the arrival of the Fantastic Four. We all got a little over excited about a potential Reed Richards cameo in Wandavision. In hindsight that "fourth time's the charm" entry is too far off for the principals to start popping up in things but with any luck there should be casting news in the next few months.

All in all a rather exciting drop for a bank holiday weekend.

How much steam does The Simpsons have left?

 

The Simpsons has had an odd few years. The consensus seems to be that it has "gotten better" (I'm a religiously season 1-8 man so I'll have to take everyone's word for it) but with that has come a pretty substantial cultural reckoning following complaints about non white characters being voiced by an exclusively white cast.

I will sit firmly on the fence on this one. I have neither the perspective nor the intellect to offer anything that hasn't been said already and better (from both sides of the discussion). Hari Kondabolu's The Problem with Apu makes the case against, and while I generally dislike contemporary audiences judging thirty year old TV shows by today's standards... this thirty year old TV show is still on. It's a very unique situation and Fox don't seem to really know what to do, with responses from the Simpsons camp ranging from admirable to very disappointing.

What I will say from my atop my fence is that simply yanking Apu from the show and recasting Carl Carlson isn't going to cut it. There has been much fanfare about the white cast stepping back from voicing the BAME characters, but while everyone has been nodding in woke approvement the number of black or asian characters in Springfield has increased by exactly zero. It doesn't really feel like anyone has won here.

Time will tell how Fox deal with this, but what is certain is that the show has been renewed for a 33rd and 34th season and there doesn't appear to be any signs it's wrapping up.

I lied earlier when I said I'm exclusively season 1-8. I recently watched the 15th episode of Season *sigh* 32. This wasn't by chance, it was following a text from a friend despondently informing me that the show has once again retconned how Homer and Marge met. In "Do PizzaBots Dream of Electric Guitars?" we learn that Homer was in fact a teenager during the early nineties. We know this because he has a Tone Loc poster and wears a TShirt that says "Hip Hop". It's just awful and not even the first time the show has done this. Season 19's "That 90s Show" had Homer and Marge in their late twenties meeting in the mid nineties. (I consider this a new episode and IT'S THIRTEEN YEARS OLD!)

I realise complaining about a lack of narrative continuity in the Simpsons in 2021 is like complaining about the fly in my bowl of flies but for crying out loud. If the well is that dry just end it...

Or...

Tear up the script and take a chance on something new. In all likelihood the series won't last indefinitely, it feels like it's in its death throes so why not change the format and have the family age in real time? Bart has been ten years old for thirty two years! It's no wonder they have no idea what to do with them. It was in 2002 that South Park pointed out that The Simpsons had done everything. Isn't there more drama in seeing Bart and Lisa becoming teenagers? Seeing Maggie grow? How would the family deal with Grandpa passing away? Alright that last one might be a bit too far. 

I don't want the Simpsons to become a Terence Malick film but anything to drag the series away from "zanniest possible situation" and back to something resembling the funny, touching family drama that made the series the gold standard of TV has to be worth at least trying right? 

Or we could do an episode where it turns out Professor Frink is actually Lisa's grandson or something.

Got Me a Movie: The Podcast. Episode 2: Zach Snyder's Justice League

 

Dan and I watched Zach Snyder's Justice League in 48 ten minute sessions and give our thoughts on the film, Warner Bros handling of the franchise and whether or not fish need universal credit.

Spotify and YouTube links below!

Game of Thrones is ten years old. Hands up who cares...

Yesterday HBO announced the 'Iron Anniversary', a month long celebration commemorating the ten year anniversary of the Game of Thrones series premiere. 

“This April, to mark the 10th anniversary of the hit series’ premiere, HBO has launched The Iron Anniversary, a month-long celebration to commemorate the series, engage passionate fans, and ignite audiences’ excitement for the next iteration of the franchise, with “House of the Dragon” slated to begin production this year. A custom spotlight page on HBO Max with personalized curations, a binge-watching marathon, special-edition products, and more, will launch throughout the month,” HBO said in an official press release."

You have to admire their courage. Naturally the Internet hasn't quite gotten over that whole 'the last series was a dumpster fire' thing and like an angry crowd turning on a struggling comic Twitter had something to say.

It's not surprising that HBO would want to drum up a bit of buzz to celebrate their global phenomenon, and while I wasn't expecting a month long apology tour, I think "misreading the room" is the phrase that applies here.

It's pretty incredible just how definitively the last six episodes of Game of Thrones undid it's legacy. Not since Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings films had a fantasy series so dominated popular culture. Game of Thrones was everywhere. In the final years you'd have struggled to find someone who wasn't engrossed, and while it had its ups and downs the series had the kind of momentum and audience that most shows could only dream of.

During its run the show garnered a staggering one hundred and sixty Emmy nominations, taking home fifty nine, it's finale drew close to twenty million viewers and critics would regularly name it in the same breath as The Wire, Breaking Bad and The Sopranos.

But for all that acclaim and feverish devotion from legions of fans ... no one talks about it anymore. No one revisits it. No one dresses as dothraki. People have certainly stopped calling their daughter Khaleesi. My wife and I regularly try and decide if Dexter or GoT had the worst finale, but Dexter's decline was so protracted the finale barely registered, and frankly it was so bonkers it's at least good for a laugh. Even Lost, with its baffling final season still generates some discussion. Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof arguably face planted that finale but there was at least ambition there.

Game of Thrones by contrast shat the bed in the worst possible way. It's no secret that by the sixth series the show had surpassed the books, leaving show runners David Beniof and D.B. Weis to cobble together the last third of this epic saga from notes and half finished ideas scribbled down by George RR Martin. Rather abruptly all the character work and personal relationships took a back seat to the plot lurching forward at a breakneck speed culminating in a finale that felt rushed, truncated and deeply unsatisfying. 

Even the most forgiving fans would be hard pushed to defend it. 

At the time of writing there are currently four hundred and eighty two spin offs and prequels currently in development and I just can't see where the appetite for any of it is. Even decades long fans of George RR Martins A Song of Ice and Fire book series seem to have lost their enthusiasm for his remaining books with some wondering if he'll even bother finishing them at all now.

Maybe "House Stark: Ned's Revenge" or "Arya: Fury Road" will be runaway successes but the chances of lightning striking twice are slim to none. Game of Thrones was almost one of the best television shows of all time. Ten years later, no one cares.

Justice League: Bigger, Longer Uncut

 

Disclaimer: I intended to rewatch the 2017 theatrical cut of Justice League before watching Zack Snyder's Justice League but I have a three year old and my evenings are precious. Instead I watched the Snyder cut over two nights.

Call me Nostradamus, Zack Snyder's Justice League is indeed better than 2017's Justice League. It's more cohesive, tonally consistent, at times thrilling, and it's villain has some form of motivation and no longer looks like complete ass. 

It's also four hours long despite sharing the same basic, paper thin, plot that the theatrical version had. Unless Bruce Springsteen is involved nothing should be four hours long, and while the film is a significant improvement over the previous debacle, this is the 'everything but the sink' version and it predictably suffers for it.

With that said though I actually enjoyed Justice League 2021... for the most part. The general story beats are the same but I was taken aback by just how different the film is, having assumed I would just be watching longer versions of scenes I'd endured four years ago. Warner Brothers didn't just have Joss Whedon pop some gags in here and there; huge portions of the film are markedly different. In the main the scenes that are simply extensions are the action sequences. Here Zack Snyder is entirely unfiltered, taking advantage of the new R Rating by lopping off limbs and heads and living out some weird angsty teenage fantasy. It's spectacular and exhausting. Snyder can throw together an action sequence like no other but when every skirmish is presented like the Battle of Helm's Deep the effect is numbing. That's Snyder in a nutshell, in a vacuum the scenes are breathtaking but as part of a whole the entire thing collapses under it's own weight. 

Far more effective are the character beats peppered throughout the opening (sigh) two hours. None of the characters will be studied in literature classes but there are a number of nice additions that give our heroes some badly needed extra dimension.

No one benefits from this more than Ray Fisher's Cyborg. Even without the behind the scenes unpleasantness, I can't imagine Fisher would have been happy with how utterly gutted his role was in the theatrical cut. I would have been hard pressed to describe Victor Stone beyond 'the robot one' in 2017 but here he is close to being the heart of the picture. Following a car crash that killed his mother and nearly him, he is resurrected by his scientist father with the help of an alien artifact. But despite being able to talk to machines, fly and turn his body into any assortment of weapons he remains locked away and bitter at the man who did this to him. Joe Morton had little more than a cameo in the previous film as Victor's father Silas Stone but he is a main player here and the relationship between the two men is an emotional core the previous version simply didn't have.  

Poor old Ben Affleck continues to be decent in a very odd version of Batman. 2016's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice kneecapped this franchise from the off with a litany of bad decisions but they really wrote themselves into a corner by introducing a retired Dark Knight and presenting him as something of a dimwitted asshole. Granted both he and Superman were dimwitted assholes but having Bruce constantly calling Superman a beacon and the best thing since sliced bread when an hour before that same Superman died Bruce was smashing a sink over his head... it's just odd and try as it might the film doesn't really rehabilitate him by the end.   

Wonder Woman still gets the thankless task of explaining every aspect of the plot in long, painfully dry monologues. Gadot is a fine Wonder Woman but none of the warmth or charm of her solo outing is here, and apparently none of it was on the cutting room floor either. There is a glimmer in an early scene where she inspires a young admirer but for the rest of the film Diana scowls and frowns and gives history lessons. Snyder did however make damn certain to utilise Diana's battle prowess in the action sequences because of course he did. In fact her introductory action beat will have you questioning why the team even needs Superman, or the Flash for that matter.

Speaking of The Flash, both his and Aquaman's roles remain relatively unchanged. I had no issue with Ezra Miller's performance in the original cut. The film takes itself agonisingly seriously and any comic relief is welcome, there is a terrific scene where Barry Allen saves Iris West that should never have gone. It's all set up for his solo adventures but it's character work so I'll take it. And Jason Momoa is Jason Momoa. Big, handsome, charismatic and handsome. And handsome.

There's not much more to say about Henry Cavill. He once again does his best with a really poorly written role that Snyder and co just can't seem to crack/understand (say what you want about Whedon but he at least understands what it is about Superman that has resonated for nearly 80 years). The resurrection of The Man of Steel is still absolutely absurd. There is a scene where the team work out they may be able to bring Supes back that borders on parody and when they do formulate a plan it's the same barely coherent guesswork as before (only this time there is more time to stress how incredibly risky the plan is). I'm not sure what the answer is here. Realistically you have to take Superman out of the game because he can punch people into the sun. I'm not sure killing him only to immediately bring him back is the way to go but there must have been something less ridiculous. It's the same issue the Russo's tried (and arguably failed) to tackle with Captain Marvel in Avengers Endgame, how do you create tension when your character can split a mountain in half?

On the villain side of things the only way was up for Steppenwolf, the film's central baddie. He's had a visual upgrade and benefits from a significantly beefed up backstory. Here, rather than the mastermind, he is a follower of Darkseid, DC's ultimate big bad, and is trying to win back the favour of his master. He's not giving Darth Vader or Hannibal Lecter a run for their money but the difference here is night and day. There is an almost pathetic desperation to his assault on Earth and in an extended attack on Themyscira he is a genuinely threatening presence. It's frankly bizarre how neutered he became under Whedon's direction given how well he seems to understand villains. There is plenty that could go from this version (we didn't really that ten minute Jason Momoa Davidoff advert) but everything about Steppenwolf is great and the improvement it makes to the film can't be overstated. 

So it's a ludicrously bloated, at times enjoyable and very silly film, but more than that it's a fascinating look at what an 'assembly cut' of these kind of enormous pictures are. We often hear directors describe initial cuts of films being four or five hours long before they are edited and cut down to a sane runtime. Well this is what that looks like. This is what  Zack Snyder's Justice League looks like when no one says "Zack that shot of Lois in the rain doesn't need to be forty minutes long". 

There is a decent, entertaining and very dopey two and half hour version of this film. If Warner had just held their nerve and hired someone to just finish what Snyder was doing they would have had a success... and saved $100 million dollars. People would have wanted that Cyborg movie, they would have been invested in Snyder's plan for a Justice League trilogy, they wouldn't had to have seen that insane moustache-less Henry Cavill. I don't think any version would have washed the stink of Batman v Superman off the franchise but it could have righted the ship instead of leaving the studio scrabbling to relaunch it.

To my surprise my overwhelming feeling after this, apart from exhaustion, was disappointment that the whole thing had been cut short. Snyder's proposed post apocalyptic final chapter is a bit much for my taste (there is a tease at the end of this that looks like a fan film) but it would have least been something different. As much as I heap praise on Marvel, they rarely, if ever, swing for the fences like this.

Through sheer willpower fans got Warner Brothers to #releasethesnyder cut. With Snyder done with the series the likely success of #restorethesnyderverse is slim and honestly, thinking about it, that's a bit of a shame.

Introducing Got Me A Movie: The Podcast - Episode 1 Wandavision

Apparently everyone started a podcast during lockdown, so we thought we'd start one while the market is nice and saturated. 

This week we introduce ourselves, discuss Marvel's Wandavision and try not to mention the fact that this was our third attempt. 

Hats off to Dan and his technical wizardry. If not for him this podcast would be on an old cassette.

Spotify and Youtube links below. Enjoy!

Preview

Has time run out for Marvel's Avengers?

2020, miserable though it was, was nevertheless an impressive year for gaming. The Last of Us 2 and Ghosts of Tsushima provided an appropriately bold send off for the PS4, Fall Guys taught my wife the horrors of online gamers, Half Life: Alyx proved that VR might not be a fad after all and Microsoft apparently reached ten years into the future to give us Flight Simulator 2000.

But despite those heavy hitters, for sheer pants shitting excitement, two titles stood above all for me. One was the long over due AAA treatment for a certain superhero team and the other was a Keanu Reeves starring Sci-Fi RPG from the team that gave us The Witcher 3. Both releases resulted in near immediate formal apologies from the creative directors. Sucks to be me.

In many ways Cyberpunk 2077's disastrous launch was the best thing that could have happened to Marvel's Avengers (yes that's what it's called and I'm nothing if not consistent). At the very least Crystal Dynamics can hold their heads up high, safe in the knowledge that their game wasn't literally pulled from the Playstation store. As of the time of writing no one is actively suing Crystal Dynamics over the state of the game. 

For the record I don't hate Marvel's Avengers. It has a solid campaign, top notch production values and fantastic character kits. When it does work, it's everything you would want from an Avengers game, and there is no end of satisfaction to maxing out your favourite Avenger and truly unleashing their power set.

But beyond that the game is still, seven months later, woefully lacking in any meaningful content following that initial campaign. The so called 'endgame' is a never-ending succession of 

robots in corridors or deserted streets. It ultimately exposes the game for what it is, a single player RPG with a looter/grinder game awkwardly shoe horned in far too late in the development, pushed out the door unfinished with the hopes that the Marvel brand would save it. It's a naked attempt to ape the Destiny model and cash cows like Fortnite. The difference is there simply isn't enough here to support that model.

Compounding the frustration was the near silence from the developers following a pretty crummy launch. While not as Youtube friendly as Cyberpunks hilarious/horrifying glitches Marvels Avenger’s launch was full of bugs and crashes, it often struggled to hit 30fps and generally pissed off everyone who had been following the project for four years. Even stranger was the things that did seem to get attention. The game now has three 'Hub' areas that all serve the same, very limited purpose, the costumes are horrendous and hilariously overpriced, and just this week CD announced they would be adjusting the XP levelling to make it take longer to fully level up your character. There is still no roadmap, no substantial indication of what can be expected and no confirmation of the additional heroes we could look forward to. Expansions and content all took a back seat to hot fixes and patches and a patient fan base started to dwindle. 

But that was then, this now. After seven months the game is in a better shape. The framerate is stable, crashes are rare and Captain America's forehead doesn’t disappear during cut scenes. But aside from an, admittedly fun, Kate Bishop update we are still fighting robots in corridors and deserted streets.

Going forward all we have are rumours and hearsay. Dataminers have discovered what appears to be a list of upcoming heroes but only Hawkeye as been officially announced (Spider-man is coming as a Playstation exclusive but that’s a PR disaster for another day).There are rumblings that Black Panther will bring a substantial update but I would still bet my mortgage that we are fighting AIM robots in Wakanda.

What we do have is footage of an upcoming customisable H.A.R.M. room (think the holographic Danger Room from X Men). The footage is to promote Intel's processing power but it hopefully gives an idea of what the long awaited next gen update of Avengers will play like...

It's undoubtedly impressive but it does kill me that CD seems to think the problem is 'Not enough robots'.

Bioware just cancelled the long gestating Anthem 2.0 which is something of a canary in the coal mine for Avengers. The Marvel IP is strong, arguably the strongest pop culture IP in the world right now, but more of the same isn't going to cut it here. If this is it then the game will be canned in 12 months. Yes I want to play as Doctor Strange or Scarlet Witch, but if it their campaign can be completed and 

their kits maxed out in a weekend then I, nor anyone else, will stick around to fight robots in Asgard.

Is Avengers the next Anthem? Is there any chance of a No Man's Sky rebirth? Time will tell. I was optimistic, there is an astonishing amount of potential here, but it's looking increasingly likely that nothing short of a complete overhaul (an Avengers 2.0 if you will) and relaunch will do the job. Until there is some comprehensive vision of what Crystal Dynamics realistically thinks it can deliver then Earth's Mightiest Heroes will have been defeated by good old fashioned corporate meddling. And that breaks my heart.

Review: Wandavision is bold, ambitious and deeply frustrating

 

Spoilers for the entirety of Wandavision

This week saw the season finale of Wandavision, the first installment in Marvel Studios' ambitious new foray into television and Disney's next step toward world domination.

It's telling how much the landscape of television has changed when 'Direct to TV' is no longer an embarrassing admission of dismal quality but a viable and exciting business model that behemoths like Disney and Warner Brothers are pursuing. Marvel is going all in with these projects, calling in their A list stars and creatives and throwing Hollywood money into the mix to expand their 'Cinematic Universe'. ABC's Inhumans is a distant, awful memory.

The upcoming The Falcon and The Winter Soldier was initially set to kick this off but Covid forced a reshuffle and so the far more intriguing Wandavision was bumped up. I say far more intriguing because this looked weird. Wanda was living it up in what appeared to be series of TV sitcoms with a very alive Vision. How Vision had been resurrected post Infinity War and why they were in a TV show was a mystery. Everything pointed to Marvel using this new format to give us a mind bending and riskier new installment in this thirteen(!) year old franchise.

So did the show the deliver? Yes and No.

What happens if Zack Snyder's Justice League is good?

 

It's still something of a surreal miracle that the online #releasethesnydercut campaign even garnered a response from Warner Brothers, let alone an $80 million cash injection to get the film through post production. 

We're about a week out from finally seeing what Justice League would have looked like had Zack Snyder been in a position to complete the film in 2017. 'Curious' would be the word I think most people would use to describe their enthusiasm about the project. 

By all accounts the production of Justice League was a nightmare. Snyder left production following the tragic death of his daughter and Joss Whedon was brought in by Warner Bros. to finalise some of the shooting and get the film over the finish line.

So, how was your 2020?

In two weeks time it will be a year since the UK entered it's first COVID lockdown. It's somehow both a lifetime ago and five minutes ago. It was a time of immense uncertainty. We were suspicious of each other, terrified of our groceries and all wondered if we could go on holiday in June *Ron Howard voiceover* "They couldn't". 

Here we are, a year and a mild mental breakdown later, in what feels like a never ending 'final' sprint in a marathon. The vaccine is being rolled out, hospital admissions keep decreasing and the number of people dying per day has reduced to 'horrifying' rather than 'dystopian'. Despite all the false starts, setbacks and spikes, 'Normal' might actually be on the cards this year. 

If I had any sense I would have tried to resurrect this blog at the beginning of lockdown to document this extraordinary moment in history, like a 21st Century Samuel Pepys (If Samuel Pepys spent his time playing Spider-Man and yelling at people on The Chase). I was initially just looking for something to read but to my surprise the last post was ten years ago; a review of the Keanu Reeves comedy Henry's Crime. Henry's Crime, if you haven't seen it, is the most forgettable film ever made. It's tedious, predictable and Keanu doesn't even kick anyone. Ten years ago I threw some snark at it trying to sound clever. 

Today I would give my left bollock to watch Henry's Crime in the cinema. 

I'm aware and ashamed of how trivial 'Not going to the cinema' is when weighed against the unspeakable grief being felt around the world, but for those who (mercifully) haven't been physically, mentally or financially struck there seems to have been a communal shift in perspective. I'm not quite ready to join a monastery but it's the trivial things, taken for granted in the before times, that seem so extravagant and exciting now. These days a session in Wetherspoons might as well be a weekend in Vegas. The overriding feeling I get from friends, family and online discussion is that when this surreal mess is behind us most of us will be evaluating our lives. Not to upend them, but just to enjoy those trivial things, to check in on friends we haven't seen in a while, to catch up with extended family instead of waiting for the next wedding, to take risks, seize opportunites and to figure out what we love doing... and just doing it more.

So in that spirit I've dusted off Got Me A Movie, cringed through the old articles and will try and offer something entertaining, hopefully insightful and undoubtedly very, very nerdy. I'm going to seize the day, and enjoy the trivial things. But I'm not going to watch Henry's Crime again. It was shit.

Review: Henry's Crime

There is a moment in Henry's Crime when Vera Farmiga is teaching Keanu Reeves how to act. He delivers a line from Chekhov's The Cherry Orchard, terribly, and after some gentle coaching from her repeats the line... with exactly the same delivery. A smile breaks out over Famigo's face as she realises that her struggling play has found it's lead. "Wow" she gasps "You're a natural" leaving Keanu smiling and the audience puzzled over what exactly happened.

This may give you an idea of why Henry's Crime doesn't work.

The premise of this baffling mess is that Henry (Reeves), having been sent to prison for a bank robbery he didn't commit, decides that if he "did the time he may as well do the crime". After discovering an old tunnel running from the bank to the next door playhouse, he enlists the help of fellow jailbird Max (James Caan) and the two decide the only way to access this tunnel is to get Henry the lead in The Cherry Orchard. I'm sure you can see the cracks in this already and the cracks start and stop with Reeves.

Review: 127 Hours

In May of 2003, while on a hiking trip in Canyonlands, Utah, 28 year old mountain climber Aron Ralston slipped into a canyon and found his arm stuck beneath a boulder. Ralston spent five days with his arm trapped, trying every possible way to move the giant rock. On the fifth day, when it became clear that it wasn't going anywhere Ralston made a life changing decision and amputated his arm with the blunt pocket knife he had been using to chip away at the boulder.

That a film was made of Ralston's horrific tale is a given, that it is possibly the best film of last year is utterly remarkable.

Hollywood loves a real life tale of survival. A hundred projects to produce a film of Ralston's ordeal were probably greenlit five minutes after he was rescued. Fortunately, the project that made it into production, based on Ralston's autobiography 'Between a Rock and a Hard Place' was produced and directed by Danny Boyle.

Danny Boyle hasn't made a bad film. He is a fearless director, seemingly determined to conquer every genre. See how casually he created one of the best British horrors in recent memory with 28 Days Later. See how easily he turned Sunshine (a run of the mill "let's use nukes to save the Earth" story) into a beautiful and compelling Sci-Fi thriller. Now he tries his hand at a biography, and while 127 hours may be the smallest film Boyle has tackled, from a story telling point of view it must have been the most challenging.

Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1

It can't be overstated how impressive the Harry Potter Franchise has become. Yes it's made a Buhgillion dollars, and yes it's going to make more, but money aside, the series has grown in a way that is almost unheard of, collecting the finest ensemble cast ever amassed along the way and pushing the boundaries of family entertainment. Regardless of how you view them, the films haven't rested on their laurels and simply coasted by on the film's fan base, they have improved and expanded with every installment. That tradition continues in Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part 1. It isn't the best Potter film, (Alfonso Cuaron's Prisoner of Azkaban still holds that place) but in terms of maturity and depth it is such a huge leap forward it's frightening.

It comes from the source material. Rowling's finale to her titanic series of books stuck the landing in a way few thought possible. 'Dark' is the word of choice, and while it's an easy way to describe the story it's appropriate. The film follows the book's story rigidly. After the devastating blow of losing his mentor, Harry Potter has been left with an impossible task: Find and destroy the remaining fragments of Lord Voldemorts soul, the rub being that he doesn't know where they are, what they are or indeed, how to destroy them. The task is hopeless and without wishing to spoil it doesn't seem all that rosier come the end, an end that dumps a big fat cliffhanger on our lap to keep us excited for Part 2.

Which brings us to the obvious. Was the decision to split the book, a book which most agree contains a fair amount of, I don't want to say filler, but certainly "fat", artistically justified, or was it, as many feared, an excuse to get people to pay twice to see one movie.

Review: The Town

If Gigli was the worst thing to happen to Ben Affleck's career, then The Town is the best.

The Wire by way of Heat, Affleck's second directorial offering is an astonishing film, one that absolutely confirms him as one of the most exciting new Director's working today. Gone Baby Gone, by it's very premise required a subtle hand. Here Affleck gets a chance to show off a more dynamic skill set. When people talk about his career in years to come they will talk about The Town before they talk about Good Will Hunting.

The Town is set in Charleston, Boston. After the opening text introducing the neighbourhood and it's legacy of bank robbers we are treated to a blistering raid on one such bank, which culminates in the gang, lead by Doug MacRay (Affleck), taking the bank manager Clare Keesey as a temporary hostage. With the robbery a success, and Clare free to aid FBI agent Adam Frawley, Doug decides to tail her in an attempt to suss out how much she knows about her captors.

Comparing The Town to Heat may be a little generous. The Town is no where near as dense or grand as Michael Mann's classic, but the influence is there. For a second film Affleck shows a great deal of confidence, aside from some early use of CCTV footage there are no gimmicks used, just good old fashioned strong, clear direction.

In front of the camera Affleck plays Doug as the crook with a heart of gold, which in all honesty is a little disappointing. Doug is a man who is perpetually surrounded by violence, in fact he was born into it. Seeing him portrayed as such a stand up guy is a little too neat. Giving him a darker side would have added an interesting dynamic to his courtship with Clare. Having said that, Affleck plays him with an earnest sincerity and when it comes time for him to open up (both to Clare and his jailbird father) he manages to flesh out the character successfully. 

Review: The Last Exorcism

The triumph of The Last Exorcism is in it's slight of hand. Showing you something while doing something completely unexpected and then pulling the rug out from under you for good measure.

Don't be fooled by the seen-it-all-before trailer, The Last Exorcism is an incredibly effective horror.

Louisiana born Reverend Cotton Marcus is an evangelical minister who doesn't believe in God. He is a good minister and a good man but his faith has slipped away from him. When his young son became ill, it wasn't prayer that healed him but medicine, so he turned to science and his belief in a higher power began to wane. His faith was shaken further when he read the story of young boy who died while priests performed a staged exorcism on him, an exorcism just like the ones Marcus used to perform himself. With his faith in both God and his clergy in ruins he enlists the help of a film producer to expose the bogus exorcisms by visiting the home of Nell Sweetzer an allegedly possessed teenage girl.

These days the found footage/mockumentary genre is beginning to feel old hat. Gone are the days when a film like The Blair Witch Project could explode into the mainstream and really make it's audience question what they were seeing. Even in the best examples the same cracks in the logic pop up. In addition to the typical "Why would you keep filming that?" question director Daniel Stamm doesn't really commit to the tool he has chosen. The trio only have one camera, for example, but often a conversation has multiple perspectives shot from different angles. The film uses a score which, again undercuts the idea that this is "found" footage. It would be very interesting to see this film again without the score, there are certain moments that I honestly think would have worked even better without the shrieking violin telling you to jump. It doesn't detract from the film, but it feels like a definite decision made early in pre-prodution would have yielded a stronger result.

Review: Scott Pilgrim Vs The World

Lord help me, I just didn't get it.

It seems that this film has been on the horizon forever and on paper it's a winner. Edgar Wright, creator of the sublime Spaced, the brilliant Shaun of the Dead and the very good Hot Fuzz, was to adapt Bryan Lee O'Malley's Scott Pilgrim series into a feature film. This is what's known as a match made in heaven.

But Scott Pilgrim just isn't quite as good as that promise and the fact that it comes so close makes it worse.

You've seen the trailers. Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) is your typical slacker twenty something. Coasting through life, he is in a go nowhere band and in a relationship with a highschooler when  he meets and falls in love with Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Much to his surprise she returns his affections but there is a catch, he must defeat her seven evil exes.

First things first, the film is every bit as beautiful as those trailers promise. On a visual level, Wright has made an incredible film. No comic book adaptation has done this much to translate the aesthetic of a "funny book" to the screen. POWs, BANGS and WHIPS litter the screen, music comes to life and weaponry is summoned from thin air. At the moment the comic book movie is on the verge of shifting; Snyder's Watchmen, Vaughn's Kick-Ass and Nolan's Batman films are all pushing the genre and experimenting with what it can do. Edgar Wright has taking it a giant leap further and on that level Scott Pilgrim is a slam dunk.

Review: Toy Story 3

Toy Story 3 will make you ponder your mortality.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting that either.

Pixar studios have made their name loading their films with concepts and themes that, on paper, have no business being in family films and yet time and time again they succeed. Each film feels like a challenge to the rest of the industry to, well, challenge their audience.

Now that this trilogy is complete (and it is definitely complete) the themes it has laid down are clear. The first film was about Love, the second about abandonment and the third, death. The best thing to be said about Toy Story 3 is that this truly feels like a necessary chapter in the story and a worthy finish to the franchise. Compare this to Dreamwork's Shrek the Third and the difference is clear. Consider as well the eleven years since the first sequel, and Toy Story 3 is something to be truly admired.

Taking place eleven years after the events of the last installment, Toy Story 3 sees a 17 year old Andy ready to leave for college. After a mixup during a clearout of his room Woody, Buzz and the gang find themselves donated to Sunnyside Daycare centre a paradise for toys who have "moved on". In most cases toys accept and embrace this new life but Woody cannot let go and sets out to find his owner.

These deep themes have been present throughout but have never been quite so explicit as in this instalment and never have they been so singularly personified than in the film's antagonist, Lotso. Lotso's backstory mirrors Jessie's in Toy Story 2. Both were seemingly abandoned by the people they loved the most and left alone. But while Jessie eventually came to terms with her loss, Lotso got angry. Lotso is a villain who, unlike Sid, Al or Stinky Pete, has nothing to lose. What's interesting is that while all of the toys in the series have been aware that they are just toys, Lotso is the only who realises how disposable they are and that even the most cherished of toys are replaceable. Perhaps moreso that Jessie, his story is the most tragic.

Review: Inception

While watching Inception I realised I haven't been genuinely wowed by a film in years.

In fact, I can't think of the last time I watched something and felt like I was seeing something I really hadn't seen before. Last year's big hitter Avatar certainly promised to be that film. It wasn't. Sure, it provided some admittedly dazzling spectacle, but in terms of story, in terms of ideas, it was disappointingly familiar.

Enter Chris Nolan who, with Inception, is playing in a world all of his own. The imagination and creativity on display here is nothing short of astounding and it is the work of an auteur at the absolute top of his game. Films as rich and huge as this just don't get made anymore and they're rarely, if ever, tackled this well.

In terms of plot I'm reluctant to go into detail. Leonardo Di Caprio plays Dominic Cobb, the world's best "extractor". His, highly illegal, talent involves him and his team entering a target's mind and stealing their ideas while they sleep. A very lucrative offer comes along to attempt the impossible; Inception. Planting an idea inside someone's mind as they dream. If Cobb can pull this off the past that is haunting him may just go away.

Moreso than any film in recent memory the less you know about this film the better, not because of any potential twists, but simply because me outlining the plot would rob you of the way Nolan presents it. It's an amazing feat of story telling. Inception could have been a expositional nightmare but Nolan presents the concept and explains the rules quickly and clearly. To be fair he cheats a little, (new recruit Ariadne played by Ellen Page is the stand in for the audience asking questions she should probably already know) but Nolan is confident enough not hold your hand through the film. To watch a mainstream summer blockbuster this big that allows and trusts you to think for yourself is such a refreshing experience and doesn't happen nearly enough.

The Internet became a flurry of excitement when Di Caprio said he based Cobb on Nolan himself and that adds an incredible new layer to the film. People talk about films being personal, here Nolan is showing us how he dreams or at least an approximation of it. Perhaps disappointingly there is restraint shown within the dream world presented. It's far more logical than any I've ever had and you have to wonder whether Nolan tried to push the surreal but was reigned in by Warner Brothers. Whatever the case he manages to craft some incredible imagery, the city folding itself in half, a freight train appearing in a busy street and even MC Esher's Infinite Staircase brought to life by some crafty special effects.

Mr Nolan would also like to announce that he can shoot action. One of the main criticisms of his two Batman films was the rather pedestrian action sequences. Not here. Inception is bursting at the seams with some incredibly realised set pieces, the stand out being a zero gravity fist fight in a spinning hotel room. Tense, exciting, inventive and beautifully choreographed the entire scene is utterly mesmerising and is instantly one of the most stunningly realised action scenes since Neo ordered all those guns.

But as with all of Nolan's films the concept revolves around the human. DiCaprio is the heart and soul of Inception and it's difficult to go into how well he portrays his character without revealing some of the film's mystery. Cobb has a secret, one that could jeopardise everything for the team he has assembled. In fact, this new job offer could be the answer he is looking for. Many have compared Cobb to Teddy Daniels, DiCaprio's US Marshal in Shutter Island. The comparison is apt, both men have a darkness eating them alive as they try desperately to unravel something. DiCaprio has always played desperate well, he can build that anger and despair in such a subtle way that when he does inevitably snap he is electric.

If there is one criticism of Inception it's that it's overlong. There is enough content here for a trilogy of films. The film is crammed full of ideas and concepts that can barely be contained in the almost two and a half hour runtime. What's worse is that the third act contains an extended action sequence that just isn't necessary, in fact it distracts from what's actually happening. The Dark Knight suffered from some excess bloat and unfortunately the same applies here keeping the film shy of perfect. Sometimes there can be too much of a good thing.

But this is a minor criticism of an incredible film. After Inception I have no reservations calling Nolan one of the most important Directors working today. Not only has he made a cerebral brain bender but he manged to smuggle it into a mainstream blockbuster. If he had only done that I would be impressed, the fact that it's this is good is staggering.

Nolan has said he wanted to make a Bond film. You hear that MGM? Give him the next film, give him the whole franchise.