 WARNING: SPOILERS INBOUND
Mini Kick-Ass Review: Absolutely awesome
Longer Mini Kick-Ass Review: In an age where superhero movies are churned out about as often as a Tyler Perry television series (and usually as poorly), the original Kick-Ass in 2010 stood alone as a cult hero for what it REALLY means to be a movie about superheroes. A while back, I wrote about how Mystery Men was important, well Kick-Ass is the new Mystery Men, but waaaaay bloodier. The thing Kick-Ass has going for it is, well, everything. It’s the rare film that I didn’t dislike a single thing in. The cinematography, the acting, the casting, the writing, the music, the direction, EVERYTHING WAS PERFECTION. AND, on top of that, when compared to the first 8 issues of the comic it was based off of, it’s wonderful on both ends which is even rarer. They changed just enough to make both totally unique and engaging and Kick-Ass stands as one of my favorite films ever.
KICK-ASS 2 FULL REVIEW: But where the mighty often fall is the sequel. I was first off shocked there was even going to BE one, just due to the box office amount the original Kick-Ass totaled, but hey, we got lucky! Or did we? Whereas the original Kick-Ass prided itself on making fun of the cliches and tropes of the superhero genre, and it’s charm was all but embroiled in that “hey lets laugh at superhero movies while BEING one”, that’s the biggest thing missing from Kick-Ass 2. The fun. They went from being a movie making fun of superheroes to being a superhero movie, and it didn’t quite work as well as I’d hoped.
Obviously the next logical step in the story would be the formation of a superteam, much like the comic (and surprisingly, they kept pretty damn true to the dark nature of the second set of the comic too, which made me happy), so we saw the formation of Justice Forever! which was cool, but the best part about Kick-Ass was Hit-Girl, who is now the worst part of the sequel. I get the whole “trying to live a normal life”, especially after what she went through, and I like that her skills as a superhero (like how her fighting skills land her a good spot on the dance squad) make her a cooler teenager, but in the end, we are just watching a worse version of Mean Girls. The Hit-Girl miniseries comic was entertaining in and of itself, but frankly, I wish they’d cut the majority of that out of the movie and just had what was in the second set of the comic be what was in the film. It just sort of bogged the entire film down, and this is coming from a man who loved Hit-Girl.
Red Mists turning into The MotherFucker however was PHENOMENAL. His character is so fantastic because here’s a guy who-much like Kick Ass-is just such a fucking loser and a failure, but even when he becomes the first supervillian, he’s STILL a fucking loser and a failure. At least Kick-Ass got COOLER as he grew up. Red Mist is STILL just a dork in a mask, and that’s what makes his performance as The MotherFucker so fucking wonderful. You can see he wants to be his dad, you can see he wants to be as badass as people like Big Daddy were, but in the end, he’s Red Mist and he’s a LOSER. Shit, even in the final fight scene he basically runs away from Kick Ass until he CAN’T. Then, even when he finally does die, he dies the shittiest lamest death a supervillian ever can die. Just wonderful. He even DIED like a loser. And the great thing they did was actually end the story, as opposed to ending it on a cliffhanger and never getting the funding for a third film. I actually kind of appreciated that, because, shit, as I said I never expected a SECOND film to begin with.
Kick-Ass 2 is entertaining and thoroughly enjoyable, but the last half hour or so drags a bit and feels like they crammed too much into too little space (Dave’s dad going to prison and all that), I really wasn’t into Mother Russia but to be fair I wasn’t really into her in the comic either, and I really think it was missing a lot of the charm the original had but I think that comes from being directed by a different director, which happens often in films. A sequel is made and it has a different director and you suddenly realize how important the directors vision was to the project. It was also a bit stiffly written.
Kick-Ass 2 isn’t BAD, but it isn’t GREAT. It’s MUCH better than I expected a sequel to be, but something about it that I can’t necessarily pinpoint kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Overall though, it’s shot well, it’s definitely funny at times and the action is pretty great, but it’s just lacking the charm and general enjoyableness that made the original so…well…Kick Ass.
I’d recommend it, but only for diehard fans.
KICK-ASS 2 FINAL RATING: B
 WARNING: SPOILERS
I like time travel.
Despite its glaring problems, when used correctly-or as correctly as time travel can be used-I actually find it to be an extremely enjoyable and interesting plot device. LOST, Looper, Back To The Future. These all did time travel well, but the most interesting one to me has to be The Time Travelers Wife. This is a 2009 film based on the book of the same name, and surprisingly enough, is just as good if not better than the book. Being the girl I am, I’m a sucker for romantic shit, and it gets hard to beat this for romanticism. The film follows a man named Henry-a time traveler who can’t control when he travels or to where and doesn’t know why it happens-as he flits in and out of a girls life, a girl who he ultimately marries, bears a child with and loves forever until his untimely death.
One of the best aspects of this film is the same thing I liked about Looper. The LACK of discussion of time travel. He doesn’t know how or why he travels, he just DOES. All he knows is it’s something genetic. Looper did the same thing, as Bruce Willis eliminated any need for discussion about the subject matter by simply stating: IT DOESN’T MATTER. Because it doesn’t. As long as it’s entertaining and makes simple enough sense, it doesn’t matter. I can buy it.
This is also an impressive film from a few points. First of all, this could be a film you easily screw up because of it’s plot but it’s incredible how coherent the thing is. It’s so well done that it deserves to be held up as an example of how to make a story that shouldn’t make sense make sense. Somehow they took this premise and made a cohesive film out of it. That ALONE is respectable. It’s also acted pretty decently, but it’s shot VERY beautifully. This film is gorgeous to look at, it’s almost ethereal, as in a dream like state. It’s so pretty. Whoever did the cinematography for this film deserves an award. Artistically speaking, this film is awesome. I really have nothing ill to speak of for it.
And yet, like most great underrated movies, it holds a 37% on Rotten Tomatoes, which is quickly becoming the “I’m old/a hipster and hate shit” website.
The fact that THIS holds a 37% and something like The Hangover holds a 79%. Ridiculous. Absolutely fucking ridiculous. Even artistically it’s ridiculous. What the hell has the film world come to.
Ugh.
But that aside, the film WAS a financial success, so there’s some good news for the makers of it, and the book was a NYT Best Seller, so that’s great too. I wish more films would get made like this. Yes, it’s a bit sappy, and yes it’s a tad romanticized and yes it’s at times overly poignant but fuck it if it isn’t a fantastic fucking movie. I highly recommend this film. You know why? When I think back to years, I remember a flood of films I saw that year and which ones were the best. Give you an example:
- 2012: Robot and Frank, Thin Ice, Carnage, Moonrise Kingdom, Drive Angry, God Bless America
- 2011: Muppet Movie, The Artist, Hugo, Tin Tin
- 2010: Kick-Ass, Scott Pilgrim, Toy Story 3
- 2009: The Time Travelers Wife
I know I’m missing some in 2011 and 2010 but that being said, in 2009…I can’t even remember anything else that came out that was good, or was even memorable. That says something. When I think of movies from 2009, this is my first one and it’s the best movie I saw that year.
I think that about sums up how I feel about this film.
FINAL RATING: A+
 I only listen to a few podcasts, starting with Twit back in the day, hosted by tech geek Leo Laporte. While I’ve stopped listening to Twit, I still-until recently-listened to the Drunk Tank (I will NEVER call it the Roosterteeth Podcast) and a few others including Freakonomics Radio and Quackcast. But none of these will ever hold a torch to the greatness that was Yeah, It’s That Bad.
This is a podcast I just stumbled blindly onto by accident one day while searching the iTunes store, and as I myself am a filmmaker and a fan of hearing people rip things a new asshole (MST3K anyone?), I figured I’d give it a shot based on the premise alone. At first, I was a bit confused. Ok, here were normal guys laughing at inside jokes. They had no formal training in podcasting or film of any kind and they felt like they could just be 3 buddies you actually knew.
But therein lays their success.
While others may call that a drawback, I call that their greatest asset. The greatest achievements are the ones people connect to the most emotionally; the people that we feel we really know and can relate to. That was exactly why Martin, Kevin and Joel were so beloved by their small but fiercely loyal group of fans, because we could laugh with them and felt like we were just hanging out with great friends every Tuesday. The running gags, the inside jokes, the random nostalgia hit points from the 80s and 90s (that may also be a reason why I loved them because we’re from the same decade, and they referenced a LOT of stuff I loved as a kid and still do) were all a part of their charm.
I immediately downloaded every episode (at the time, they were at maybe…late 20s early 30s?) and eagerly awaited the next one. They even got me to watch some of these movies because of their reactions to them. I even turned my ex girlfriend onto them, and we listened to them together over Skype at night and laughed ourselves silly. Their Twilight Saga reviews ALONE were worth the podcasts existence. Never before have I heard something so wonderfully summed up in such a silly yet brutally honest way. And for people with no background in filmmaking or anything, they knew what they were talking about. They appealed to the everyman because they WERE the everyman. The thing about movies is that the age old adage is true: “Everyone’s a critic.”
Well, even here. But these were guys who made complaints and arguments that were well thought out and actually constructive. 99% of the time, they were better than real critics. I myself, as a review of sorts, looked up to them in envy at times.
Then, one day last month, they released the latest episode, 129 “The Mummy Returns”, and then vanished from the face of the internet. Their website, their iTunes feed, everything except their twitter/facebook pages were gone. While they’ve said it’s a personal choice and it really hurts to do-and I honestly believe them that it hurts because this thing was like an adopted child for them but instead they actually loved it-it’s still downright heartbreaking to watch what is a completely underrated and beloved cult podcast go out this way.
While they’ve released a “final” episode as a wrap up of sorts, and it helps a bit, it’s still sad. Never again will we have guys the likes of Joel, Kevin and Martin. This was lightning in a bottle.
So thanks guys, thanks for everything you did and all the effort you put into this thing. We all truly appreciate it and I wish you luck with whatever it is you decide to do in the future.
See ya on the flip side.
 I have two things that should’ve made me love this movie; my love for dark humor as the premise is about as dark as they come and my love for independent films. And not the independent where it’s “indie” but stars big name actors, like Young Adult did. While I liked Young Adult (and Juno), they are NOT independent films. I’m sorry. They’re not. Independent films are films made with little to no budget and most of the people in the film have not been in much before or since. Armless is both of these. Armless is also terribly shot, oddly edited, clunkily written and all and around fucking WEIRD.
As an independent filmmaker with dark humor, that says something that I didn’t enjoy this movie.
And this happens often too, sadly, where I hear about a premise and go “THAT IS BRILLIANT” and then the movie is ATROCIOUS. And it’s a shame because now they’ve wasted a perfectly wonderful premise on a badly made movie! Armless follows a man who harbors a bizarre desire to cut off his arms. Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. I mean, so rarely do we get a film that tries to even touch on such dark subject matter, and I was instantly hooked. I sat down to watch what I was sure would become one of my favorite independent films of all time.
But the film looks like it was shot on a DV camera from 2003 and everyone moves like a stop motion character. It feels as if there’s frames missing. Nothing is fluid, everything is choppy and it nearly gave me a headache 15 minutes into the film. Not only that, but it can’t decide if it’s a comedy or a drama, so it tries to do both-which is fine, many films do and it works-but it can’t do either right and it can’t do them as one right. There should be nothing funny about a man suffering from this illness which is exactly why a comedy would’ve been perfect. Alas, they decided to go a more dramatic route and realized they couldn’t make it engaging enough either. They spend so much time building up Johns secret about his arms they forget to develop John outside of his secret. Yes, we learn why he wants to do it and what he did as a child to deal with his problems, but John IS his problem. A character should NEVER be their problem. There’s one sided characters and then there’s one sided characters who are the entire premise. That’s what John is, and while it’s slightly intriguing at first it slowly becomes old and static after 45 minutes of the same repeated idea.
But not all is lost. While they fail to develop even side characters who’s plights we’re supposed to care about-like Dr. Phillips and his assistant Jenny-they definitely made them entertaining. In fact, Dr. Phillips and Jenny were hands down the best part of the movie. I would watch an entire film based just on those two. They did a great job with what they had. It’s just unfortunate all they had was a character base and nothing with depth to go into.
The musical score is odd but charming. Bells and whistles and little piano keys. Nice, in a weird way, and the original songs are fine. No complaints in the music department, but major complaint in the sound department as the mixing was pretty bad at times I have to say. I had my television up to 30 at one point and it was still mumblecore to the max.
Movies like Armless are not only disappointing premise wise but they’re what other people hold up as examples to why independent filmmaking is bad. Independent filmmaking is NOT bad. It’s just that-much like with mainstream films-a few bad examples give it a bad name. But Armless is so much more than that. It’s actually heartbreaking how fucking wonderful this could’ve been in the right hands (hahaha little wordplay there for ya). While we could’ve had a moving, deep, psychological trip into the mind of deeply depressed and confused man who wants to cut off his arms, and the possible repercussions of that, we’re instead given a watered down melodramedy that never goes anywhere beyond the premise itself. It never breaks any mold or pushes any boundaries, and it certainly isn’t artistic in any way. THAT’S what pisses me off about Armless. Not that it’s bad, but that it COULD’VE been brilliant.
FINAL RATING: C-
When I was a kid, my step-sister had a poster of Elijah Wood on her wall from LOTR and thought he was just the cutest damn guy ever to live. I-of course-made fun of her for obvious sibling reasons. This just makes things really awkward now, because who would’ve ever thought that years down the road, Elijah Wood would end up saving my life.
Especially when I’m so ready to speak about people I admire who I relate to in the film or entertainment industry, like Trey Parker or George Carlin or Larry David, it’s incredible that Elijah Wood would be the one to make the impact necessary to keep me from killing myself.
But somehow, he’s turned Ryan Newman into the most relatable character I’ve ever encountered in all my years of watching television. Even with other great shows and great characters I love and relate to, like LOST and John Locke, Elijah as Ryan takes the cake. Severe depression, intense father issues and especially suicidal tendencies, it’s almost like I’m watching someone play a scripted version of myself. Maybe that’s why it’s been so damn easy to relate to him. That isn’t to say it’s just Elijah though, because Ryan would be nothing without Wilfred, played by Jason Gann, as would I. I need Wilfreds advice just as badly as Ryan seems to, and this summer especially.
This season alone Ryan has been confronted with the reality that he doesn’t let others see him as he really is, the way he did with Amanda. When Wilfred tells him that he will never find someone to love him the way she did, it really hit home as I was recently left by my girlfriend of 5 years this summer suddenly. In a later episode this season, Wilfred tells Ryan once again, “You may not know what you want to do with your life, but at least you know what you DON’T want to do.”
Wilfreds advice is critical to my own emotional state of well being because much like Ryan I am aimless, confused and lost.
But it’s the scene that the picture I included at the beginning of this that made me really realize how close Ryan and I actually are. He’s so open to just flat out admitting that he’s sad. Really sad. I’ve never seen a more honest moment come from a television character regarding their feelings, and usually even Ryan himself is covering his emotions to people other than Wilfred (and sometimes even to Wilfred) which I do to the people around me as I’m sure so many people do to the people around them. But this moment…this one little moment…it just makes me realize that I want to see Ryan get better because I want to get better. This isn’t just fanboying. This is therapy. This is actually helping me not end my life. Seeing someone like Ryan, who’s as shut in as I am and as alone as I am and as FUCKING SAD as I am, really helps me realize that sometimes you just need to shut out everything else and work on becoming happy.
"I’m sad Wilfred. I’m really sad."
As am I Ryan. As am I.
And while the writing for the character of Ryan is crucial for how relatable he is to me, it would be all but lost if not for Elijahs performance. I see so much of myself in the way Ryan holds himself. His sense of humor, his emotions, his inability to admit how screwed up he is until he’s forced to come to terms with it face to face. I’ve never been a big fan of Elijah Wood, honestly. I mean, I liked LOTR well enough, but that was about the only thing I really knew him in. But this is something where had it been anyone else I think the effect would’ve been lost. There’s something about his acting-his ability to hide his sadness under a thin veil of “everything is ok”-that makes Ryan so god damned relatable. I have bad father issues like Ryan, I nearly killed myself like Ryan, and I am really fucking sad like Ryan. Elijah Wood was never one of my favorite actors. He wasn’t even someone I really registered as being an actor I’d enjoy. I thought he did well enough in what I’d seen him in but he wasn’t someone I followed.
That’s what makes the poster situation so damn ironic.
Here’s a guy who I never really watched, never really paid a lot of attention to and made fun of my step sister for being in love with…and now he’s saved me from ending my life.
I understand it’s odd to be speaking so passionately of a character who’s a manic depressive possible schizo and his man in a dog suit friend who gets paid to hump stuffed bears for a living but…I really don’t know this time where I would be without the two of them. Or even IF I would be.
There’s been some shows in the past that have helped me deal with things, like Dead Like Me making me not as afraid of death and accepting that it’s something we cannot stop, or Daria for not feeling as much of a loner as I thought I was. But I never in a million years thought that a show about a man and his friend in a dog suit would be the one that would come along and help me therapeutically. I need Wilfred. I need Ryan. I need them far beyond a generic fanboy need like I have for other things and people. I need them because they keep me sane and keep me alive, and I’m terrified of what might happen to me emotionally if they leave before I get better. Ryans journey of self help is also my own. Weekly therapy sessions through the eyes of Elijah Wood are helping me come to terms and cope with things in my own life that I’m really sad about.
So thank you Elijah. You may never know what you’ve done for me but I felt the need to thank you anyway. Because of your portrayal of Ryan Newman, I am alive today. Thank you. And thank you too Gann and Wilfred. Because without you, Ryan and myself would be nothing.
You’re GODDAMN RIGHT he is.
UPDATE A few days after writing the original Tumblr post, I decided to send it to David Zuckerman-executive producer and showrunner-on Twitter. This was the result. Maybe Hollywood isn't as dead as I say it is.
 It’s an unfair thing when you have to compare two films due to being in the same franchise. Monsters Inc. and Monsters U. are definitely one of those unfortunate pairings. While not nearly as emotionally gripping as the first film, Monsters U. was an absolute blast, but iconic? Memorable? Not really. I mean, I loved it. I absolutely loved it, but of the two-not surprisingly-Monsters Inc. still reigns supreme. I think it’s because Pixar has become Disneyfied. As much as I loved Brave, it was a Disney movie. It didn’t really push new boundaries, it was very familiar, felt very safe. That’s kind of how Monsters U. was. It’s just more of the same, but not in a bad way. It’s more like a “Hey, these are great friends I haven’t seen in a while!” kind of way. That being said, the Monsters characters-now that Toy Story 3 has been made-are the only Pixar characters I’m ok with going back to every few years. I would watch a dozen films starring that team. They’re just very well written, as a pair.
As far as prequels are concerned however, WOW. I’m not a big fan of prequels honestly, and not a big fan of sequels-especially unnecessary ones-but this really may be the best prequel I’ve ever seen. I’d say it’s just as good as the first film, but not as memorable as the first film. Let me explain what I mean by that. All the great aspects of a Pixar movie are there. The writing, the music, the cinematography and all. All there. All EXCELLENT. However…it doesn’t break any boundaries or push any lines, but I’m ok with that, because that’s what the 1st movie did. This is more of a just a good time at the movies.
And like I said, I’m fine with that. I’ll always give a Pixar film a shot (outside of Cars, Cars 2 and any finding Nemo or Up sequels) but I do believe we’re past the “classic” Pixar decade, and it ended with Toy Story 3. That being said, both Brave AND Monsters U, while maybe not being “classic”, are still fantastic movies. It’s definitely a lot lighter than the first film too. The original Pixar movies and the newer ones are different-which is why I say the new ones are “disneyfied”, to welcome to a younger audience-because the older ones are incredibly dark which is what made Pixar appeal to such an older, adult audience. I mean, Up in and of itself is just downright depressing at times, and the incinerator scene near the end of Toy Story 3, that was basically a suicide pact we witnessed on screen. OF A KIDS MOVIE. I mean, they’re…they’re dark movies. But these are lighter, and for even as dark as Monsters U and Brave might get at moments, they’re never as dark as the other Pixar movies were. Monsters U is full of laughter, nonstop fun and is definitely a kids movie, but I’m ok with that, and I think other people should be too, because it’s still a great movie. It got a 78% (I believe) on Rotten Tomatoes and that sounds about accurate. I will note however that when it did finally get to the truly emotional and dark moment of the film, it did make me yearn for older Pixar, so there is that.
But it’s good. Despite any irritations you may have, it’s good. I didn’t hate a single thing really, and that’s coming from a guy who can nitpick his way out of a paper bag. I liked it, I really honestly liked it and I hope Pixar continues to make fantastic movies for years to come. Although I will be skipping Finding Dory. Hands down. Fuck you for making that. Otherwise, yay Pixar!
Also, if you can find it, watch the short film beforehand “The Blue Umbrella” I believe it was called. MAN. THAT was AWESOME. They ALWAYS outdo themselves with those short films.
So, a fun film that you can definitely take the kids to and still enjoy on your own. That’s what I call a success.
Overall, I’m giving Monsters University a B. Solid, fun and well made. Good job Pixar.
FINAL RATING: B
 WARNING: SPOILERS
Remakes are never really good (though there are exceptions) and horror remakes are usually at the bottom of the totem pole. So how in the HELL did The Hills Have Eyes become, what I consider to be, one of the best horror movies ever while being a remake?
There’s a few things about this film that make it the success that it is.
First of all (and yes before you ask, I own both the original and this one), this film takes all the horror film character types we’re familiar with and makes you believe that you’re in for just yet another generic scary movie filled with cliche characters who are going to play out their roles in the same cliche way we’ve always seen. This, however, is NOT the case. The big tough dad is not the hero, the young dorky father is not the first to get offed and the blonde sister isn’t an absolute pathetic useless idiot. In fact, the guy we all expect to die right off the bat is the one who ends up being the hero. I think that’s what surprised me the most about this film. It flips everything on it’s head. Where as “Cabin In The Woods” ATTEMPTS to tear down horror tropes and cliches but fails absolutely miserably, this movie does it very well. The character of Doug, a man who is seemingly the most weak guy in this trailer they travel in despite being the second oldest man, and can only seem to operate machines and have no knowledge of being a “real man” like the father Bob, ends up becoming the biggest most absolute badass. I refer to Hostel in this sense. Hostel did something very similar where they made you think the film was about the white kid and then it completely flips it and makes it about the asian kid. Sorry, I haven’t seen Hostel in a long time and don’t remember their names and I don’t care enough to go to Wikipedia, so deal with it. But it does sort of the same thing, it flips stuff on its head and that’s what makes it fresh and engaging. That’s what makes it work.
Not only is Hills Have Eyes really cool storytelling wise, but it’s brutal. A lot of people called it torture porn, and I don’t really think that’s accurate actually. I think a lot of movies, like the Saw sequels perhaps, go out of their way to make things horribly gross and gory and what have you but I don’t think this is one of those films. The brutality in this film is justified I feel. I mean, these acts are being performed by people who weren’t shown any compassion by their own government when these tests occurred and their land was having bombs dropped on it, so why should they show any compassion to anyone else? The way they see it, everything is fair game. This is why everything they do falls in line with just their personality and not being done for shock value. And visually, these monsters are awesome looking. This isn’t necessarily pure CGI, there’s actual makeup being done here. Learn something from that, kids. It takes SKILL to make a movie. Not computers.
I’m sad to see the reception the film has-most notably it’s 50% on Rotten Tomatoes-but I’m glad it’s gotten THAT much acknowledgement, even though I feel it deserves MUCH much more. Now, in regards to the 70s original I can see where people say it’s been adapted to be more mainstreamed for todays audience (or rather 2006s audience) but yes, that’s unfortunately how shit works, folks. What was scary to people in the 70s isn’t necessarily scary to people today. Some things hold up, are timeless, classic, but a lot of things need that extra edge. And if you look at the films box office totals, it was a success. Not that every film that does well is successful as a movie-MICHAEL BAY-but as far as putting people in seats, they did their job. They made their money. They just also happened to make a damn fine film on top of it, which is what filmmaking should be about.
The Hills Have Eyes is absolutely fantastic. The beginning even-before the actual attack-is tense as shit and the rest is just a god awesome thrill ride once it gets going. This film really deserves to be seen, and I feel it should be more recognized as the great film that it is. For a horror movie, and a remake of a horror movie, this is a good one. And that’s rare in this day and age.
I award The Hills Have Eyes an A+.
Invader Zim was a staple of my childhood. I accidentally caught the premiere the night it aired and watched every single episode until it was canceled about a year later. As with most canceled things with a cult fanbase, it’s found refuge in the hope that it may come back one day. I’m here to tell you why this is a bad idea, and why you shouldn’t want this.
Futurama, Family Guy, Arrested Development. These are all things that have come back after having been canceled, and they’ve never been quite right. Whereas Family Guy was never good to begin with, Futurama was, and it at least has been the closest to its original creation that it’s been enjoyable to watch since it came back. Arrested Development is a whole other story that I’ll get to at a later point (spoiler alert: i did love it). Invader Zim has bugged me on more than one thing over the years as I’ve gotten older, the first of which being this:
That’s the first thing I want to discuss on this post. This faux fandom. This fandom that’s been created around the Hot Topic culture of kids who didn’t grow up on the show, but instead grew up on the IDEA of the show. They latched onto the icon more than the product and therefore became a bystander of something they knew NOTHING about. It’s not about the product. It’s about the BRANDING. It’s these middle school kids who think the show is dark and edgy and use Gir as a symbol of their nerdom (which by the way, this series never had anything to do with nerds and in fact I’m pretty sure the word nerd was never mentioned once in its entire run) and on top of ALL THAT, Jhonen Vasquez doesn’t get paid at ALL for ANY of this merch. They’re these kids who want to stand out. When I was in school, standing out meant getting beaten up. Now it means you’re cool and unique. It’s a complete 360. 180. Whatever, I’m bad at math (and analogies apparently). But now because of the meaning that “standing has” has adapted, these kids look for the cultish things they can latch onto, and sadly Zim fits the bill.
So that’s the first thing. That is really upsetting to me, to watch this great unique program just be butchered by the company who owns the rights to sell t-shirts that have nothing to do with the show to kids who don’t know what the show is. Fucking. Depressing.
But this is about more than t-shirts. There’s a reason you don’t want Zim to come back. It won’t be the same. I mean, when it was originally canceled, I myself was happy to try and get it back too. But I was like, 15. I was a stupid kid. Now that I’m almost 24, I’m pretty happy to know that I experienced it in the first place and that it should STAY where it is. The writing won’t be the same, the animation won’t be the same (purely because of technological advancements in animation. For god sakes the damn things been off the air since like 2002, not to mention Lucille Bliss is dead now) and it just won’t live up to what you want it to, like pretty much everything else that has come back from the dead. To this day they hold InvaderCon-which is all fine, it’s nice to have that for fans to go and show their appreciation and whatnot-but they do this thing where they STILL try and get Nick to bring the show back.
It’s not coming back. And it SHOULDN’T come back.
Invader Zim, as much as I love it, is dead. Please just let it rest in peace, ok? And stop buying stupid fucking t-shirts that don’t promote anything but your sad attempts to be noticed and accepted into a culture that first makes you ADMIT you’re nerdy before accepting you. That isn’t a culture. That’s just a CULT.
I’d say the same things about Firefly too, but I don’t really enjoy it all that much, and I’m afraid of the backlash quite honestly. Let’s face it, some fandoms (Dr. Who *cough cough*) just don’t know how not to raise hell when someone says something even remotely negative about the thing they adore with all their soul. Firefly is a totally fine program, but for the same reasons, you will not want it back once it’s back. Trust me.
And as for Invader Zim, once you’re not a teenager anymore, you’ll understand what I mean. Trust me.
A while ago, I wrote about how comedies are just not funny anymore, as much as they TELL us they’re funny, but now I’d like to follow that article up with this one, stating that while I don’t necessarily think these movies are good, they also aren’t bad. See, as I said before, comedy is hard because humor is always constantly changing and what’s funny today won’t be funny 10 years from now (hell, maybe sooner), so it’s hard to nail down what we consider comedy because our tastes as a society are always rotating.
That having been said, movies like Identity Thief or Grown Ups aren’t necessarily “bad”. In fact, I rather enjoyed Identity Thief but I also would do anything for Jason Bateman, so. But they aren’t really bad, they’re movies that are generationally behind. These are films that had they been made in the 90s would’ve been money making machines and beloved. Back in the 90s, we found stuff like this funny. These days we seem to enjoy more subtle, dry, witty humor thanks to shows like The Office (of which I only like the BBC) or movies like Knocked Up. Now while there’s an occasional exception to the rule-like how Bridesmaids made a lot of money AND was funny, despite being more of a 90s comedy filled with gross out humor and whatnot-this is how it goes now. So not all of the blame is to be put on the film.
I’d say it’s 50/50 honestly.
Yes, Grown Ups IS not that good a movie. But that doesn’t make it a BAD movie. A bad movie is a movie that does NOTHING right. Movies like Troll 2 (which is bad example as it’s so bad it’s good) or anything they watched on MST3K. Giant Sharktopus. This kind of shit. THOSE are bad movies. A lot of horror movies that come out these days; THOSE are bad movies. While Grown Ups might not have been 100%, I chuckled here and there and found it occasionally amusing, and this is coming from someone who’s favorite shows are Arrested Development and Spaced. It’s not that my humor is either lowbrow or highbrow, it’s that I’m accepting of anything as long as it’s entertaining, and that’s where we seem to have gotten stuck. We’re so damn critical these days that we forget that the sole purpose of these things is to ENTERTAIN US. As long as it does that-even just a little-it succeeded. It did it’s job. Identity Thief was pretty poorly written, kind of stiffly shot, not that well acted but you know what? It was a better way to spend a Saturday afternoon than sitting on my couch eating Cheetos and watching the Miss America contest. For everything it did wrong, it did entertain me to an extent and therefore, it succeeded in its goal.
These films would’ve joined the ranks of Billy Madison and Dumb & Dumber (both of which I think are incredibly stupid, but well loved because of the time period they came out in and the humor we found funny at that time) had they come out at the time we found stuff like this funny. These are middle of the road comedies. They don’t offer up the extreme or the subtle. We seem to only have 2 types of comedy these days, the extreme or the subtle. The extreme being things like This Is The End where shit is SO over the top that it comes back around to being hysterical or the subtle being things like Superbad where it’s funny because of how well we relate to the characters and their predicaments because it reminds us of every day life. But these middle of the road comedies seem to have gotten lost somewhere along the way and tagged with a “bad movie” slogan, which I don’t think is very fair. It’s not that the movie is 100% bad, it’s that the movie is 50% bad and our humor isn’t the same as it used to be. That’s all it is.
I might go see Grown Ups 2. Why? Because it’s a better way to spend an afternoon than sitting around doing nothing, and because I don’t think it’s fair to honestly harshly judge something I’ve never seen. Everyones humor is subjective to themselves; you should judge it based on how YOU like, not on how the MAJORITY likes it.
And that’s all I have to say about that.
Earlier, this happened.
I was shocked. Thankfully, the majority of comments on the article seemed to be shocked as well. I’ve made a lot of Friends bashing comments on this blog, and for good reason I feel, but now it’s time to settle this once and for all, and explain how I feel. First, Friends is the best example of a ‘comedy’ that was almost never funny and where its fans were so seduced by the star-potential of the actors to not care that it wasn’t funny, was creaky, sentimental, manipulative and exemplified all of the worst qualities of multi-cam sitcoms. Friends-if made today-would be a drama, basically. The characters and plotlines became so soap opera that they edged out whatever “comedy” they had to begin with, and I couldn’t watch this show when I was a teenager, let alone today. This is personal taste AND reviewer taste. These are personal problems, and problems I feel the show legitimately has from my reviewer perspective.
That being said, the people IN Friends aren’t untalented at all. I really enjoy pretty much everyone on it, and I love them in movies and other things I’ve seen them in, but the biggest flaw in Friends was its writing. I mean, for a 3 cam sitcom, it’s shot well enough I suppose, but it’s just so poorly written and tossed together that it almost feels like it was made by a student film class, where each student takes a scene and gets to write it. It’s just sloppy and, at this point in time especially, cringe worthy. But the actors and actresses on the show, top notch. Got no problems with them personally. They did the best they could with a bad situation, I feel. My step-sister used to watch Friends, and I’ve seen it a good number of times since I’ve gotten older, and it-to this day-still has not made me laugh. That says something.
Whereas Friends appealed to the mainstream audience of America-because of its easy to follow “plots” and it’s likable cast of characters-Seinfeld is almost not even a comedy. It’s a documentary about how people ACTUALLY are. Friends is how people WANT to be. Goofy and silly and happy. Seinfeld is how people REALLY are. Mean, and cruel and backstabbing and manipulative and the best part is, Seinfeld knew what it was from the beginning and never let itself get bogged down by the garbage that ruins so many other good sitcoms. From day 1, they knew what they were doing and they nailed it every year. I even like Season 9, and I know I’m in the minority there. Outside of maybe a few stinky episode-and even the worst stinky episode of Seinfeld is better than the best episode of Friends-the show as consistently excellent EVERY SEASON. Do you know how hard that is to pull off? Shows gradually become worse as they go on, but to stay consistently good basically your ENTIRE RUN? Shit son, that is an accomplishment in and of itself.
The biggest complaint I’ve ever heard about Seinfeld was that the characters were unlikable.
Well yes, it usually does make you feel bad when you see things that remind you of the real world and how people really act. Seinfeld-at its core-was showing us that everyone…EVERYONE…deep down is a bad person. Even the best people on the show, like Susan, was a horrible human being. But it’s not necessarily their fault (and the gang obviously let their awfulness show more openly than most people do). It’s societies fault. Seinfeld is a show about living in a society that forces you to act this way. A society obsessed with greed, and looks and sex appeal and gluttony and selfishness: “He who has the most toys wins”. Of COURSE the characters of Seinfeld act the way they do. That’s the world we live in. Friends is the world we WANT to live in. It’s escapism. I can understand people being depressed by that aspect of Seinfeld, because let’s face it the world is depressing, but it’s crucial to recognize that this is how things are, unfortunately. 95% of the time, the world is a bad place filled with bad people who will do anything-even to their closest friends-to get ahead and come out on top. Sad? Absolutely. Should it change? You bet. Will it? Probably not.
Seinfeld is a show for people who are willing to admit that life is pretty shitty. Friends is a show for people who don’t want to focus on the negativity. Understandable. I mean, I get it. I don’t like Friends and I-from an artistic writing point of view-don’t think it’s well written or funny at all, but I get the appeal of it. The poll makes sense. We are in a world we don’t want to be in. To cope with that, we escape to places like Friends. I get it. I do.
But that doesn’t make Friends the better show.
From a purely artistic standpoint, Seinfeld is 100% better. Though it’s wrong to compare things. It really is. The poll shouldn’t even exist because two forms of the same media should never be compared because that says that they tried to be better than eachother, when no, they just tried to be entertaining on their own. It’d be like comparing M*A*S*H* and Scrubs. Sure, they’re two shows about medicine, but they’re also two entirely different creatures. It’s not right to compare them.
And now, for the final-and possibly the part that will get me the most hate-bit of this…something that I’ve been needing to discuss for ages on this blog…the ending of Seinfeld.
It is considered (until LOST I suppose, which is another one I don’t understand, but whatever, let’s not get into that right now) the worst series finale of all time. But why? If anything, it’s the only realistic series finale. These are TERRIBLE PEOPLE. Look at the things that they have done over the course of those 9 seasons. For god sakes, Susan is DEAD by the end of the show. This is a woman who is DEAD because of these people. They have-accidentally, sure, but still-helped in the demise OF ANOTHER HUMAN BEING. And you’re SURPRISED that they go to jail!? I’m shocked they didn’t go to prison! These people DESERVE to end up where they do! If anything, it’s the only finale that makes the most sense of its series. It says, “These people did terrible things and now they are being punished for them, just like you would in life.”
The ending of Seinfeld is fantastic. It’s believable, it’s realistic. IT’S FUNNY. Rarely do you see true consequences in a sitcom. Seinfeld was all about that. It was all about bad decisions. Well, now they know where they’ll end up for making them.
I can understand people not liking it from the point of view of “Well I followed these characters and wanted a happy ending”, except Larry & Jerry said from the beginning of the series, there are no happy endings in this show. There’s no growth. Not ONE of those characters became a-even slightly-better person over the course of that series. Not one. Not a BIT. You want a happy ending? Go watch Friends.
You want to see real life? Go watch Seinfeld.
|
RSS Feed