Year: 2009
Director: Wes Anderson
Screenplay: Wes Anderson, Noah Baumbach
Starring: George Clooney, Bill Murray, Meryl Streep, Michal Gambon, Jason Schwartzman
Plot synopsis is here
While I'd admire the fact that authors such J.K Rowling and Dan Brown have got a generation reading again in an age where the most complicated read is text speak, they've never captured the creativity and wit that Roald Dahl brought to me when I was younger. Hell even now I still class Boy as one of the books I'd need on a desert island. From The Twits to The Adventures of Henry Sugar this was a man who had me enthralled by the art of story telling from a young age. I even remember going to the Dahl Museum when I was younger and if it still stands when I have kids, that's where they'll be going on their holidays too.
Imagine my surprise when I heard about Wes Anderson's plans to film an adaptation of Dahl's Fantastic Mr Fox. The talk of this development started in 2004, and only now does the spoils of labour have appeared. Why? because Anderson has decided to film the movie as stop animation as opposed to the now more common CGI.
Dahl's books have been adapted for cinema with varying degrees of success with perhaps the most famous of them being disliked by the author himself. Anderson approaches the story as an American paying tribute to the material, the stop animation not only gives the film a vivid amount of detail and style but also gives the film an English feel that would have been lost if filmed in another way. The look of the film is allegedly inspired by the Buckinghamshire village of Great Missenden where Dahl lived and worked. As someone whose not only born and bred in Bucks but lives so close to this village I could lick the place, it's clear to say that Anderson has done his homework. The look of the film may not dazzle like the vast landscapes of the excellent UP, but it has a unique homely feel that evokes the spirit of the book it has taken it's ques from.
With the surroundings almost firmly in place (explain later) Anderson, then makes the film his own. Utilizing his themes of dysfunctional families and huge egos to his utmost, Anderson makes the films central message one about pride. Like the aforementioned UP, the film doesn't pander to it's younger audience in any shape for form, nor does it ram it's morals down their throat. Fantastic Mr Fox merely lies it's cards on the table as is, presenting it's message in it's clearest form. As great as our talents are, we must sometimes rely on others to get the best out of them.
Semi-serious moments aside, the film is hilarious with many of the films best comic moments in the first act. By not watering down any elements, or pandering to peoples knowledge of pop culture (for the most part, explain later), the film manages to get away with moments of almost outrageous humor. One of the main reasons for this is the screenplay dialogue which exercises a strong use of the English language. When characters talk, none of them are condensing to each other, and the audiences reaction when I watched it merely enforces the fact that you don't have to dumb things down just for a cheap laugh.
This is not to say, it's not without it's flaws, sometimes the film's American sensibilities get in the way of the "Englishness" of the whole proceedings. Fox's whistle is a natty little trademarks, but anyone with cinema savvy will know that it's nabbed from Donald Sutherland's Hawkeye from the American anti-war classic M.A.S.H. The mixture of moods sometimes clash, but no more than feeling a little odd.
This brings me on to the voice acting, which despite clearly having these actors cast to bolster the U.S market, their voices are cast because because they're are truly right for the part. Clooney once again lends his charm to the proceedings, managing to carry the weighty aspects of Mr Fox (yeah, seriously) while still being light hearted. Streep is great foil for him as his long suffering wife. Jason Schwartzman's grumpy Ash is a wonderful addition to the story, while Bill Murray, Willem Defoe and Michel Gambon are as reliable as they always are.
Fanastic Mr Fox doesn't stick as close to the material as more rabid fans would probably have liked, but unlike say, Tim Burton's visually stunning, emotionally hollow Charlie and the chocolate factory, Anderson's film brings around more Dahl spirit than one may think. When it moves away from the book, it's not for the directors own pretensions, but to assist to themes of the story. Something that even Dahl himself would be proud of.
Hear more talk on this film at Geekplanetonline
Saturday, 17 October 2009
Thursday, 15 October 2009
Review: Halloween 2
Year: 2009
Director: Rob Zombie
Screenplay: Rob Zombie
Starring: Sheri Moon Zombie, Scout Taylor-Compton, Malcolm McDowell, Brad Dourif
Plot Synopsis is here
The first film was dull, loud and self indulgent, great stuff eh? Well if you liked Rob Zombies drab retread of John Carpenter's seminal horror classic, you'll love H2. It's even more simple-minded, it's louder and overloaded with gallons more self-indulgence. How bad? Well here's a film in which a teenager whose been through a traumatic event has a poster of Charles Manson over her bed a year after.
The biggest problem with Rob Zombies supposed thriller is that it's so unbelievably in love with its so called "vision", that it has no clue that it's just as bland as other re-imaginings. Zombie pukes up as many warped heavy metal music video images as possible but it can't even be bothered to clear up the things that truly matter. Things such as those aggravating slasher cliches which telegraph scares faster than a fat kid in a sugar factory. This is a film that truly believes that some jive about white horses will distract the viewer long enough to show that Halloween 2 has no story or atmosphere. Sorry Rob, you haven't caught me out, mostly because I know that's your wife (again) in those boring dream sequences. Once again Neopism rears it's head and Zombie finds yet another way of shoving his loved one into his film, so once again you can watch (with hands clasped tightly over face) another awful performance from her.
Zombie's got such a hard on for his wife, random dreams and romanticizing the villain of the piece (for some reason). That he misses a sub-plot that runs through his movie that is far more interesting. Zombie's vision of Halloween involves bulking up much of the plot to give Micheal Myers a stereotyped, ripped off (This film clearly nabs from psycho) background to raise some sort of empathy. What he fails to see is the plot that involves Dr Loomis (A truly hapless Malcolm McDowell) as a soulless shadow of himself, selling the story of Micheal for blood money. It's an interesting aspect of plot which is wasted, so Zombie can lavish masturbatory images of people getting bludgeoned, maimed and hacked to pieces. Not only is this tiresome but it's execution is far too over the top for it's own good. It only serves to a select few of people who believe this is extreme.
Unfortunately the best extreme cinema comes nowhere near a trite Rob Zombie screenplay, but is found in European and far east Asian endeavors. These films also have what people in the business call STORY, and do not have to resort to swearing in every other word to emphasis emotion. Swearing in dialogue is a true art form and Zombie has not mastered it with is trite screenplay.
It's clear that a Rob Zombie music video would be visually interesting, however to extend this over such a long period of time becomes extremely boring. The visuals look good but hold no tone. I'm not looking for complicated subtext in slashers but I do wish to feel some sort of tension. Zombie's film didn't even give me the cheap pleasure of jump scares, such is how bad this movie fails.
I could mention performances but why? The screenplay cares not for the characters or dialogue and the director cares not for the displays so there's no point complaining about them as these actors (or hot girls) have nothing to work with. Even the ever formidable Brad Dourif looks more embarrassed than anything thing else.
What gets my goat about Zombie's film the most is how lost his original voice is. When watching small aspects of the the film you can see that Zombie isn't truly incompetent. But of course it means nothing as the directors boorish self-importance overrides anything of interest. Indulgence is a difficult thing to keep in balance and for some filmmakers, it allows some true flourishes of inspiration for others such as Zombie you are given loud, obnoxious movies that have nothing to say other than how brilliant the filmmaker must be because they say so. At first I had given Zombie the benefit of the doubt with his debut movie House of 1000 corpses, but now I've released what's living behind Zombie's eyes is purely and simply....monotonous.
Hear more talk about this movie at Geekplanetonline
Director: Rob Zombie
Screenplay: Rob Zombie
Starring: Sheri Moon Zombie, Scout Taylor-Compton, Malcolm McDowell, Brad Dourif
Plot Synopsis is here
The first film was dull, loud and self indulgent, great stuff eh? Well if you liked Rob Zombies drab retread of John Carpenter's seminal horror classic, you'll love H2. It's even more simple-minded, it's louder and overloaded with gallons more self-indulgence. How bad? Well here's a film in which a teenager whose been through a traumatic event has a poster of Charles Manson over her bed a year after.
The biggest problem with Rob Zombies supposed thriller is that it's so unbelievably in love with its so called "vision", that it has no clue that it's just as bland as other re-imaginings. Zombie pukes up as many warped heavy metal music video images as possible but it can't even be bothered to clear up the things that truly matter. Things such as those aggravating slasher cliches which telegraph scares faster than a fat kid in a sugar factory. This is a film that truly believes that some jive about white horses will distract the viewer long enough to show that Halloween 2 has no story or atmosphere. Sorry Rob, you haven't caught me out, mostly because I know that's your wife (again) in those boring dream sequences. Once again Neopism rears it's head and Zombie finds yet another way of shoving his loved one into his film, so once again you can watch (with hands clasped tightly over face) another awful performance from her.
Zombie's got such a hard on for his wife, random dreams and romanticizing the villain of the piece (for some reason). That he misses a sub-plot that runs through his movie that is far more interesting. Zombie's vision of Halloween involves bulking up much of the plot to give Micheal Myers a stereotyped, ripped off (This film clearly nabs from psycho) background to raise some sort of empathy. What he fails to see is the plot that involves Dr Loomis (A truly hapless Malcolm McDowell) as a soulless shadow of himself, selling the story of Micheal for blood money. It's an interesting aspect of plot which is wasted, so Zombie can lavish masturbatory images of people getting bludgeoned, maimed and hacked to pieces. Not only is this tiresome but it's execution is far too over the top for it's own good. It only serves to a select few of people who believe this is extreme.
Unfortunately the best extreme cinema comes nowhere near a trite Rob Zombie screenplay, but is found in European and far east Asian endeavors. These films also have what people in the business call STORY, and do not have to resort to swearing in every other word to emphasis emotion. Swearing in dialogue is a true art form and Zombie has not mastered it with is trite screenplay.
It's clear that a Rob Zombie music video would be visually interesting, however to extend this over such a long period of time becomes extremely boring. The visuals look good but hold no tone. I'm not looking for complicated subtext in slashers but I do wish to feel some sort of tension. Zombie's film didn't even give me the cheap pleasure of jump scares, such is how bad this movie fails.
I could mention performances but why? The screenplay cares not for the characters or dialogue and the director cares not for the displays so there's no point complaining about them as these actors (or hot girls) have nothing to work with. Even the ever formidable Brad Dourif looks more embarrassed than anything thing else.
What gets my goat about Zombie's film the most is how lost his original voice is. When watching small aspects of the the film you can see that Zombie isn't truly incompetent. But of course it means nothing as the directors boorish self-importance overrides anything of interest. Indulgence is a difficult thing to keep in balance and for some filmmakers, it allows some true flourishes of inspiration for others such as Zombie you are given loud, obnoxious movies that have nothing to say other than how brilliant the filmmaker must be because they say so. At first I had given Zombie the benefit of the doubt with his debut movie House of 1000 corpses, but now I've released what's living behind Zombie's eyes is purely and simply....monotonous.
Hear more talk about this movie at Geekplanetonline
Sunday, 11 October 2009
Review: UP
Year: 2009
Director: Bob Peterson & Pete Docter
Screenplay: Bob Peterson & Pete Docter
Starring: Ed Asner, Christopher Plummer, Jordan Nagai
Plot Synopsis is here
I'm not sure I've said it in my blog yet but I'm sure I've said it in real life; If mainstream Hollywood absorbed half of what Pixar does with every one of their films, then I would be in cinematic heaven. For me it's gone beyond how colourful there movies are, or how great the animation is. Their movies are now nothing short of what I want from ANY film let alone a family film. Today I watched a film which had a montage with more emotion and pathos then the entire 166 minutes of Benjamin Button. I saw action sequences with more invention and thrill behind them than your Fast and Furious' and enough humor to stand against the so-called best comedies of the year. Even then there's more to UP than what I've just said.
It's is hard to top the films sublime almost wordless first act, which details our protagonist and his regret beautifully (it features two of the most heartbreaking moments I've seen in a family film in a long time) but UP manages to maintain it's emotional connection until the end due to Pixar's belief in character and story. These are characters that ring true even if it's they're talking dogs. The filmmakers firmly believe there's a story to be told about a 78 year old man and they believe that people will want to watch it.
This is a story with grand themes of mortality, loss and living your dreams with well rounded characters with real hopes, fears and beliefs. It doesn't insult the viewers intelligence and sell them short. It doesn't just want to tell you the story visually (which it does with aplomb) it wishes to truly engage you with what it has to say about life and the human condition. Human Condition? You may ask.But at times, if it weren't for the more outlandish parts of the film and the bright colours, this could be high drama. UP may be considered a "kids film" but it's one which is brave enough to deal with the death of a family member head on. I admire the films wish not to conceal aspects of life that we must contemplate one day.
But the humor! Oh the humor! Real gags with actual timing! With most family films wringing comedy (celeb) voices for cheap laughs or reverting to bland pop culture for easy jokes, it's just heartwarming to see a film that can make you laugh because the characters are funny. It's not forced, it feels very real. I laughed out loud....a lot. But UP is one of those films.
It's also one of those films that shows true talent within the craft. Co-Directors Bob Peterson and Pete Docter bring about a dazzling array of visual images (bizarrely reminding myself of Herzog's Fitzcarraldo) that aren't just pretty because of the animation, but because they're beautifully staged and full of creativity. For me the house being lifted by balloons will be one of the definitive moments of my cinematic year.
The voice acting is once again top notch which Ed Asner carries the film effortlessly. It's a voice that sounds familiar but isn't really. It's also a layered performance, one not restricted to just grumpy and scared but one which completes the characters poignancy. Asner is aided by the perfectly goofy voice of Jordan Nagai, whose first film endeavor is a lovable one. The villain of the piece is played by Christopher Plummer with a certain sleazy charm.
If I were to nitpick at the film it would be to say that the film is running on fumes slightly by the last act. Many might be a little dismayed by the films villain and how the the final showdown is a little anti-climatic. With this said Pixar have become bigger than simple films about good and evil. UP is a film about making sure that the life you live is one worth living no matter what happens. A moral that a child can truly take to the bank.
Hear more talk about this movie at Geekplanetonline
Director: Bob Peterson & Pete Docter
Screenplay: Bob Peterson & Pete Docter
Starring: Ed Asner, Christopher Plummer, Jordan Nagai
Plot Synopsis is here
I'm not sure I've said it in my blog yet but I'm sure I've said it in real life; If mainstream Hollywood absorbed half of what Pixar does with every one of their films, then I would be in cinematic heaven. For me it's gone beyond how colourful there movies are, or how great the animation is. Their movies are now nothing short of what I want from ANY film let alone a family film. Today I watched a film which had a montage with more emotion and pathos then the entire 166 minutes of Benjamin Button. I saw action sequences with more invention and thrill behind them than your Fast and Furious' and enough humor to stand against the so-called best comedies of the year. Even then there's more to UP than what I've just said.
It's is hard to top the films sublime almost wordless first act, which details our protagonist and his regret beautifully (it features two of the most heartbreaking moments I've seen in a family film in a long time) but UP manages to maintain it's emotional connection until the end due to Pixar's belief in character and story. These are characters that ring true even if it's they're talking dogs. The filmmakers firmly believe there's a story to be told about a 78 year old man and they believe that people will want to watch it.
This is a story with grand themes of mortality, loss and living your dreams with well rounded characters with real hopes, fears and beliefs. It doesn't insult the viewers intelligence and sell them short. It doesn't just want to tell you the story visually (which it does with aplomb) it wishes to truly engage you with what it has to say about life and the human condition. Human Condition? You may ask.But at times, if it weren't for the more outlandish parts of the film and the bright colours, this could be high drama. UP may be considered a "kids film" but it's one which is brave enough to deal with the death of a family member head on. I admire the films wish not to conceal aspects of life that we must contemplate one day.
But the humor! Oh the humor! Real gags with actual timing! With most family films wringing comedy (celeb) voices for cheap laughs or reverting to bland pop culture for easy jokes, it's just heartwarming to see a film that can make you laugh because the characters are funny. It's not forced, it feels very real. I laughed out loud....a lot. But UP is one of those films.
It's also one of those films that shows true talent within the craft. Co-Directors Bob Peterson and Pete Docter bring about a dazzling array of visual images (bizarrely reminding myself of Herzog's Fitzcarraldo) that aren't just pretty because of the animation, but because they're beautifully staged and full of creativity. For me the house being lifted by balloons will be one of the definitive moments of my cinematic year.
The voice acting is once again top notch which Ed Asner carries the film effortlessly. It's a voice that sounds familiar but isn't really. It's also a layered performance, one not restricted to just grumpy and scared but one which completes the characters poignancy. Asner is aided by the perfectly goofy voice of Jordan Nagai, whose first film endeavor is a lovable one. The villain of the piece is played by Christopher Plummer with a certain sleazy charm.
If I were to nitpick at the film it would be to say that the film is running on fumes slightly by the last act. Many might be a little dismayed by the films villain and how the the final showdown is a little anti-climatic. With this said Pixar have become bigger than simple films about good and evil. UP is a film about making sure that the life you live is one worth living no matter what happens. A moral that a child can truly take to the bank.
Hear more talk about this movie at Geekplanetonline
Saturday, 10 October 2009
Review: Zombieland
Year: 2009
Director: Ruben Fleischer
Screenplay: Rhett Reese & Paul Wernick
Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Emma Stone, Abigail Breslin
Plot synopsis is here
For the last few days I've been ridiculously ill, with today was the first time I was able to drag myself out the house if only to the cinema briefly (no popcorn as it might up back up again) to watch Zombieland (such is my passion for film). I'm glad my half dead ass managed to make it to the cinema in order to watch these full dead asses terrorize Jesse Eisenberg and co.
While they've always been with us since Victor Halperin's White Zombie (1932), it was 2002's 28 Days Later which appeared to shove Zombies* into the true mainstream limelight. Two years later, the spaced crew (Frost, Pegg, Wright et all) release a film that quickly became a cult classic: Shaun of the Dead
Zombieland is a comedy which is clearly inspired (the director Fleischer has supposedly said this as well) by Edgar Wright's ode to an American monster with good ol British humor. And while Fleischer and co have a lot to learn when it comes to subtly, Zombieland was quite simply a bloody good laugh.
Zombieland lacks the layered, British, wit that is littered throughout Shaun of the Dead, but with it's visual rule list, kills of the week and superb cameo, (which is best left nameless to truly appreciate the brilliance of the casting) the film so in your face that it doesn't matter in the slightest. Hoping on the Zombie bandwagon, the film makes light of an extremely fucked up situation. The films plot is a fragile as a Kleenex but the films dialogue crackles and the characters keep you interested.
Fleischer (whose supposedly only watched one zombie film before) keeps his film light and breezy as we are introduced very quickly to our zombie killers who in turn get to know each and become a dysfunctional undead-murdering (?) family. The group a natural chemistry together and characters are way more entertaining to hang around than those you see in horror zombie films. This is a good thing because we spent a lot of the films running time with them, in fact the zombies are almost background for a lot of the time. However, when shoved in the forefront the film spares no expense in dispatching them in ludicrous and grotesque ways.
The star of the show is of course Woody Harrelson, an underrated actor whose Texan drawl works absolute wonders here. Consistantly funny throughout, his badass, live fast character is one part Mickey Knox, two parts Ash Campbell. While Jesse Eisenberg shows that you can have fun with the straight man character. Despite playing an anxious character there's a laid-back aspect that I couldn't ignore but enjoyed watching. Also note that Eisenberg was doing the Micheal Cera "thing" before him so this makes him the original**. Abigail Breslin is almost unrecognizable from Little miss sunshine (showing her range), while Emma Stone makes what could have been a bland character her own by infusing it with a sexy attitude, alleviating the love interest character into a more rounded figure***.
Zombieland is one of those cheer along films that is best enjoy with a bunch of beers and pizza. You can drink along to the rules, zombie kills and moments of good ol U.S wit. It's not Shaun of the dead, hell it's not even the superb Drag me to hell, but Zombie land can exist with them in it's own right. Why? The on point dialogue, the brief but fun action sequences, the friendship between the characters and that cameo....THAT Cameo will have zombie fans giggling for weeks. Original? Not really, but top points for effort and execution, and that's what counts. Quite simply a barrel (shotgun) full of laughs.
*They are not dead, just infected, it's stated in the god damn film. Get. Over. It.
** Roger Dodger was 2002 when Eisenberg started his awkward male bit, Arrested Development appeared after.
***When Emma Stone says in the sexy, husky voice she doesn't want drink alone...you join her.
Hear more talk about this movie at Geekplanetonline
Director: Ruben Fleischer
Screenplay: Rhett Reese & Paul Wernick
Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Emma Stone, Abigail Breslin
Plot synopsis is here
For the last few days I've been ridiculously ill, with today was the first time I was able to drag myself out the house if only to the cinema briefly (no popcorn as it might up back up again) to watch Zombieland (such is my passion for film). I'm glad my half dead ass managed to make it to the cinema in order to watch these full dead asses terrorize Jesse Eisenberg and co.
While they've always been with us since Victor Halperin's White Zombie (1932), it was 2002's 28 Days Later which appeared to shove Zombies* into the true mainstream limelight. Two years later, the spaced crew (Frost, Pegg, Wright et all) release a film that quickly became a cult classic: Shaun of the Dead
Zombieland is a comedy which is clearly inspired (the director Fleischer has supposedly said this as well) by Edgar Wright's ode to an American monster with good ol British humor. And while Fleischer and co have a lot to learn when it comes to subtly, Zombieland was quite simply a bloody good laugh.
Zombieland lacks the layered, British, wit that is littered throughout Shaun of the Dead, but with it's visual rule list, kills of the week and superb cameo, (which is best left nameless to truly appreciate the brilliance of the casting) the film so in your face that it doesn't matter in the slightest. Hoping on the Zombie bandwagon, the film makes light of an extremely fucked up situation. The films plot is a fragile as a Kleenex but the films dialogue crackles and the characters keep you interested.
Fleischer (whose supposedly only watched one zombie film before) keeps his film light and breezy as we are introduced very quickly to our zombie killers who in turn get to know each and become a dysfunctional undead-murdering (?) family. The group a natural chemistry together and characters are way more entertaining to hang around than those you see in horror zombie films. This is a good thing because we spent a lot of the films running time with them, in fact the zombies are almost background for a lot of the time. However, when shoved in the forefront the film spares no expense in dispatching them in ludicrous and grotesque ways.
The star of the show is of course Woody Harrelson, an underrated actor whose Texan drawl works absolute wonders here. Consistantly funny throughout, his badass, live fast character is one part Mickey Knox, two parts Ash Campbell. While Jesse Eisenberg shows that you can have fun with the straight man character. Despite playing an anxious character there's a laid-back aspect that I couldn't ignore but enjoyed watching. Also note that Eisenberg was doing the Micheal Cera "thing" before him so this makes him the original**. Abigail Breslin is almost unrecognizable from Little miss sunshine (showing her range), while Emma Stone makes what could have been a bland character her own by infusing it with a sexy attitude, alleviating the love interest character into a more rounded figure***.
Zombieland is one of those cheer along films that is best enjoy with a bunch of beers and pizza. You can drink along to the rules, zombie kills and moments of good ol U.S wit. It's not Shaun of the dead, hell it's not even the superb Drag me to hell, but Zombie land can exist with them in it's own right. Why? The on point dialogue, the brief but fun action sequences, the friendship between the characters and that cameo....THAT Cameo will have zombie fans giggling for weeks. Original? Not really, but top points for effort and execution, and that's what counts. Quite simply a barrel (shotgun) full of laughs.
*They are not dead, just infected, it's stated in the god damn film. Get. Over. It.
** Roger Dodger was 2002 when Eisenberg started his awkward male bit, Arrested Development appeared after.
***When Emma Stone says in the sexy, husky voice she doesn't want drink alone...you join her.
Hear more talk about this movie at Geekplanetonline
Beyonce + Wonder Woman = Fail
I know this was a while ago but it suddenly cropped up again on our WNATM podcast for some reason...Beyonce Knowles as wonder woman.
In my opinion? No, not really. I mean it's bold getting a (mediocre) non-actress to carry a film which could become a franchise. But having a Afro-American Wonder Woman for the sake of it is WRONG. There's a few issues that make the idea of having "Foxy Cleopatra" as Wonder Woman a difficultly (one being the desperate desire to appear "hip" and "with the times" being one of them) but the one I'm going to go with is of course alienating the fans and I really think you need them on your side for a project like this.
Also I wouldn't want John C Reilly to be fucking Shaft would I?
I'm watching you Hollywood
Being black, I would love to see more roles handed out to talented black actors/actresses and I would also love a kick ass superhero/comic book style film with a black lead sometime soon. But after the whole Daredevil debacle...
They tried it before...did it work? Did it fuck
"And it would be a very bold choice. A black Wonder Woman would be a powerful thing. It's time for that, right?"
In my opinion? No, not really. I mean it's bold getting a (mediocre) non-actress to carry a film which could become a franchise. But having a Afro-American Wonder Woman for the sake of it is WRONG. There's a few issues that make the idea of having "Foxy Cleopatra" as Wonder Woman a difficultly (one being the desperate desire to appear "hip" and "with the times" being one of them) but the one I'm going to go with is of course alienating the fans and I really think you need them on your side for a project like this.
Also I wouldn't want John C Reilly to be fucking Shaft would I?
I'm watching you HollywoodBeing black, I would love to see more roles handed out to talented black actors/actresses and I would also love a kick ass superhero/comic book style film with a black lead sometime soon. But after the whole Daredevil debacle...
They tried it before...did it work? Did it fuckI'm sure this rumor will evaporate like the proverbial fart in the wind but while it lingers. Please for the love of God can we not have Xania from the Pink Panther as Wonder Woman.
Hear more drunken ramblings on the Geekplanet podcast
Hear more drunken ramblings on the Geekplanet podcast
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)