Leave 'Hancock' Alone You Rubes!
What a wacky world the blogosphere has become
 |
Wow, with all that is happening with the primaries tonight I am surprised I am able to even begin tapping out anything on the keyboard. As it stands Obama is only 2 points down to Clinton in Indiana with 92% of the vote in. My guess is that by the time I actually finish writing this article the results will be in and Larry King will be snuggled up in bed with his 56th wife. We'll have to see how that hammers out, but let's get to the movies…
I have wanted to talk about Will Smith's Hancock for quite some time, but I was actually compiling some links to talk about it at the end of the summer as opposed to prior to its release since the blogs have been slamming it for no apparent reason. Well, I take that back. The reason they have been slamming it is because a) it's a superhero movie; and b) it's a superhero movie that is not Batman, Iron Man or Hulk. Even Jeffrey Wells saddened me today by posting a negative article in relation to the film and even said, "[Will] Smith himself, now that you mention it, laughs and smiles too much also." Actually, Jeff, you mentioned it when you said, "I really don't like that photo of producer Akiva Goldsman laughing uproariously while standing next to Will Smith. Too many people laugh in that man's presence." Really, we are judging a man based on how happy he is? Nice.
 |
Oh no! Will Smith is happy! Get him! |
The picture Jeff is referring to is the one just above, which was taken from a New York Times piece written by Michael Cieply titled "A Man of Steel With Feet of Clay." The article has made its rounds all over the blogosphere with most bloggers picking out the meaty parts and writing their articles based on that.
Word is the film is in the editing stage as it has been presented to the MPAA twice and come back with R-ratings both times. In relation to the ratings news director Peter Berg is even quoted saying, "We had statutory rape up until three weeks ago."
What? Rape? Man, this is going to be a dark one!?!!? I betcha it's a scene where Will has sex with a little kid (no, not really). At least that is what you would believe should you listen to the blogs.
However, before the blog tune began to change, they started off slamming it saying "it looks absolutely, downright terrible" and "the movie looks stupid". Now? Well, now the same two I link above are "intrigued". They wonder "could this movie be good?" And the capper would be, "Might Hancock be darker than The Dark Knight?" One even thinks they have "been unnecessarily hard on the upcoming Will Smith superhero flick."
This is all coming in an age where if it isn't a superhero movie it isn't going to be talked about in the majority of the corners of the Internet. After all, if a film isn't about a comic it most often needs nudity, pretty girls or Oscar attention to get a mention in the new age film tabloids. The one thing any comic book movie lover seems to love just as much as comic book movies is an Oscar contender they can latch onto. Last year No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood and Juno (especially fucking Juno) were easy to latch onto. One had a ton of killing, one was fucked up and one said "honest-to-blog" and was just as stupid as can be.
However, if it misses those limited categories the majority of the time it is going to be ignored. Hell, one of the best films ever made (in my opinion) has to be 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, any guesses as to how much space was reserved around the Internet for the Romanian abortion flick? I don't think I need to tell you, but that is a film any film lover should see and should certainly have something to say about. That is if they have anything to say worth listening to.
This year, the word is "dark" and it is becoming a motto, just as is saying your superhero movie is going to be like Batman Begins.
Tonally, I would put it more in the Batman Begins sort of realm… That's sort of where we're headed."
That's a quote from Hugh Jackman with regard to X-Men Origins: Wolverine.
I think like Chris Nolan and those guys did with Batman, we just said: 'We're going to start completely with our own version of this myth or saga.'"
That's Edward Norton talking about The Incredible Hulk.
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 3 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
My problem with ratings is the fact that the MPAA is so off the wall with some of their ratings, its ridiculous. Look at the massive body count of Live Free or Die Hard, PG-13, but if another virtually harmless movie shows a pair of tits or says fuck a few times, its slapped with an R, or, in the case of The Village, a single sound effect had to be removed to maintain the PG-13. Its absurd.
/end rant
You hit it on the head when you said that movie makers are letting art take second place to revenue. The same can be said of many bloggers. They've forgotten the reasons why they started blogging.
In theory most blogs are started because somebody has ideas and opinions that they'd like to share, and/or they want to scratch some journalistic itch. Sometimes they are able to turn their hobby into an actual occupation, and some of those are able to keep doing it for their original reasons and get paid. However, far too many (not you Brad, yet :) ) have given themselves over to their advertisers by doing everything possible to get page views. It's hard to differentiate between those types and regular old attention whores.
Over the past year, I've had to take at least half a dozen blogs off of my reading list because they became obsessed with getting attention for money or ego. They start by latching on to popular subjects. Finding something popular to bash and doing so until it's no longer recognizable as a horse any more. Or, they talk glowingly about something else. Then they link to others who have the same opinions and they all can gather around in some sort of virtual circle jerk and soak up the Google Juice. The problem is that it's sort of like some sort of drug. Writing like that, they can't sustain any sort of regular readership. So they have to always be looking for their next hit. Always be looking for the next inflammatory wave to ride and get their page view fix for the week. Like a druggie, they eventually have to burn out.
Keep up the good work. Real news and real opinions, that's what's going to hold people for the long run.
There are so many reasons to cheer for this one. First off, it's an original idea. Secondly it's taking a known quantity (superheroes) and spinning it in a different direction.
It doesn't even need to be dark for me to love it, simply subversive would be enough. Plus Mann, Berg, Smith, Bateman. These are names that I respect. They all have delivered quality on a regular basis. So I'm definitely looking forward to this little project – though I wish it was an R one. R means that they don't have to pull punches.
As far as the blogosphere… there's a ton of bad movie sites out there. Nuff said.