The Rabbit Hole

The true (abridged) story of the Cap's sidekick,  Bucky Barnes. Early reviews, far as I can tell from their titles and short summaries, seem favorable. I'm totally doing that thing where I hop back and forth on one foot with excitement. You know, metaphorically.

I'm so bored at work. We're leaving in, like, fifteen minutes for a happy hour I only just found out about. Guess I'm leaving my bike here!

It's funny that XKCD can be completely obscure engineering/math nerd stuff and then can be broadly understandable and sympathetic in the very next cartoon. This is one of the most "SO TRUE" moments I've had with the comic in a while. It's up there with "Someone is wrong on the internet!" and "You're a kitty!"

I shouldn't have this much to say about Thor. At least this isn't about Thor really?

After the debacle that was shoe-horning in Black Widow into iron Man 2 and all the Avengers stuff that Jon Favreau clearly wanted nothing to do with, I was, despite my abiding love of Clark Gregg as Agent Coulson (who I think is way more interesting than Samuel L. Jackson as Fury), quite done with the crossover stuff to a degree. I knew that there would be some Avengers stuff in Thor, especially a much talked-about cameo by ( spoiler! ). The aspect of a cameo, in particular, annoyed me because it would either be a throwaway scene that stopped the momentum entirely or would be a literally nothing scene where you couldn't tell who or what you were supposed to be excited about.

As it turned out, the cameo was more the latter than the former, but it worked for me. It was just significant enough that you went, "Wow, we seem to be more involved with this one guy than we have any of the other faceless SHIELD agents," and no more involved than that. If you didn't know who it was, you didn't really notice. This is in direct contrast to the very heavy presence of SHIELD in the movie. Some people felt that it was still being studio-mandated or whatever into being. I think that setting up Agent Coulson as a means to throw Thor and his human companions in together a little more firmly really helped instead of hurt the film.

A.O. Scott's review was extremely negative despite the fact that he, for the most part, conceded that the movie was good. It's funny because he was especially upset that the movie was good and it exists, in part, to be a prologue to the Avengers movie. There's a point to be made there, that this movie, however good or bad it may be, is part of a money-making scheme that obligates you to return for more later to get the entire payoff. I understand that, but that's more a criticism that should be lobbed at a not-great movie that boosts its popularity by demanding that you see it in order to understand what comes later (Iron Man 2) versus one that is good and has some elements that will set up a later movie (but doesn't require that you see it for something else). Look, Marvel made its bones on its crossovers, but people liked those crossovers. Yes, it's a crass commercial calculation, but if it also pleases the audience, it isn't just about money.

All this is a long way of saying that my antipathy towards the advertising for The Avengers has been mostly dissipated. In fact, I think I threw myself firmly in the opposite camp and now I want alllllll the franchises to go into a blender. I think I, in all seriousness, endorsed an Ocean's Eleven/The Fast and the Furious crossover. I would love to see Vin Diesel and George Clooney plot a heist together. For real.

I just finished Preacher--liked it less towards the end. Not to be punny or nothing, but it felt like it was slouching towards Gomorrah rather than running at the end, teeth bared and bloody, like it had been up until, oh, say the middle-to-late issues. I still liked it on the whole, mind you. I was amazed that, for a series about a guy with the ability to command anyone to do anything, very little of that sort of thing happened. Similarly, Cassidy is the least bloody-and-gutty vampire I ever met in fiction. I liked him immensely up until the story went soft around him. It was a nice change of pace from all the goddamned modern vampires. I love me some six feet of Eric Northman, mind you, but give it a bloody rest. (Ew, pun again.) I even liked Tulip, though she was a tad pathetic at times. Wish more could have been done with her, like what was done.

Anyway, I went to look up Garth Ennis to see what all else he's written. Apparently, some Hellblazer, which figures--his sense of humor and John Constantine's are nearly a perfect match. He also wrote the first six issues of The Darkness, as well as another corker of a miniseries, "Heart of Darkness," which !!!! I have the trades and I re-read 'em not infrequently. Say what you will about other Top Cow series--hell, say what you want about The Darkness--but they at least had style. And Garth Ennis literally wrote the best stories of that entire franchise, far as I'm concerned. Jackie worked best as the literal and figurative bastard he was before he was re-written to be more, I dunno, gritty or sympathetic. Ennis' Jackie was never a hero. He wasn't even saintly enough to be an antihero. He was an absolute asshole, with a streak of violence a mile wide with only his scant-few but bone-deep loyalties to redeem him as a character. He was also whip-smart and creative, which you should be, if you can help it, when you control a power that allows anything you dream to be. If they ever do get a Darkness movie off the ground, I'd love to see them go with Ennis' take on it.

But hot damn! He writes really well. I've got to check out more of his stuff!

While I was griping about stuff that is, aside from the second item, more important in the grand scheme of things, there was a press release about the third Nolan-helmed Batman film.

I'm actually not at all upset about Tom Hardy playing Bane. As several of the commenters at io9 pointed out pictorially, he could pull off the shape just fine. We only have to hope that Nolan uses him in the slyer, smarmier way that he did in Inception (rather than how Joel Schumacher used the character in that film I refuse to believe exists). It could work.

It's Anne Hathaway I remain unconvinced by. Anne Hathaway is, in a word, cute. She's cute, cutesy, pretty, girly, twee, etc., etc., etc. None of these are things I associate with Catwoman. I don't doubt her abilities as an actress, though, again, most of what I've seen her in has generally fit into the label "twee" without spilling over. (Before you tell me, I'll let you all know I still haven't seen her in Brokeback Mountain, in which I hear she was great. I promise I will get on that.)

Perhaps I'm just disappointed that my much-preferred casting choice for the role, Rachel Weisz, didn't get it. Maybe they're saving her for Talia al Ghul? I don't know. But Rachel Weisz is TEH SEX in mind, body, voice, and attitude. Funnily enough, the first thing I saw her in was The Mummy, in which she plays what I would call the Anne Hathaway type--ditzy, pretty, somewhat smart but not overly arrogant. But ever since then, the woman has been made of sex (including in the less-good sequel to The Mummy in which she wears so much eyeliner I died). It's a missed opportunity to have her in the movie.

Still? It's a Nolan Bat-film, so it'll be good, Anne Hathaway or no. I should just be glad that Catwoman has plot immunity and can't be killed off just to make the hero feel ways about stuff like Nolan does in all his movies....right?

GOOD NEWS EVERYONE. I NO LONGER HAVE ANY ANGST ABOUT CAPTAIN AMERICA.

IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE THAT I COULD BE COMING AROUND ON THIS SPIDER-MAN REMAKE.

Okay, so, in less capslock-y analysis, I like these pictures. A lot. I am sure most people will look at the Captain America one in particular and give me the big o.O face from behind their compu-machines. But I'm digging it. It is kind of outrageous and yet perfect. I think the suit does an impossibly good job at being everything all at once. It's period-appropriate and still future-forward as fashion. As in, I know someone in the 1940s could have made this outfit, but since real life is not a comic book, no one ever did. It manages to conform to Chris Evans' body shape (which, as I may have mentioned before, is pretty much my sole reason for seeing this movie, humminah humminah humminah) without being ridiculously stiff looking, like the X-Men movie uniforms or the Batsuits of the Burton era. It also manages to capture the spirit of the Cap's spandex suit while not being entirely faithful to it.

The Spider-Man photo is impressive in its own right, too. Most significantly, they don't try to buff up Andrew Garfield in it. It remains to be seen if he'll be as impressive without the muscle suit when he's moving around and not strategically posed in the shadows. But I dig a lean Spidey. He's pretty much always been a beanpole, especially compared to the over-muscled among the other Avengers and what not. (Which, because Sony has the rights to Spider-Man for the foreseeable future, I doubt he'll be joining onscreen.) One of my favorite interpretations of Spider-Man is Ultimate Spider-Man, and this feels like that's where they're taking this. I am still not entirely cool with a reboot of a movie that came out eight-nine years ago and whose sequels ended three years ago, but this is definitely a step in the right direction. Well played, Spider-Man reboot!

(Hmm, will they call it The Amazing Spider-Man to differentiate it from Raimi's trilogy, do you think? Or Spectacular Spider-Man? Or would they just do a fangirl some service and name it Ultimate Spider-Man?)

I admit to being totally excited about Captain America, definitely more than that dated comic character's movie update deserves. I know it won't be "good," but I've been more excited about other movies before with bigger letdowns than Captain America could ever have. ::Sobs over Tron Legacy some more:: 

Point is, excited as I am, I'm not stupid. I'm also not really going into it thinking "This could be the next Iron Man!" Imma gonna get me sommathis:

Am I shallow? FUCK YES. But I know what I'm in it for. I'm not in it for good. I'm in it for beefcake. (Ooh, and 1940s lady hair. I love me some victory rolls!)

But even with my shallower-than-a-drop-of-water-hitting-a-high-mountain level of interest, I had to pause when I realized that the man directing Captain America directed last year's lamentably bad The Wolfman. Now, I can forgive a lot of what was wrong with that movie because it was clearly a case of studio meddling and delays leading to disaster. Fifteen different people walked out on that thing (and I'm not just talking about audience members)--people who were supposed to do pretty major things, like direct, act in, or score the damn film. Still, a film that manages to waste Hugo Weaving in what may be the only time he and Anthony Hopkins could have had a Ham-Off (TM glvalentine ), is doing something seriously wrong. That someone has to be the director because the Wachowski brothers couldn't direct the third Matrix movie to save their lives, but Hugo Weaving still managed to rampage the shit out of that funk. The only one stopping Hugo Weaving from EPIC HAM is someone other than Hugo Weaving. (Because Hugo Weaving, dramatic actor, was long banished to indie cinema of Australasia by Hugo Weaving, Actor Capable of Set Demolition Even When Only Present As Voice Actor.)

This interview about why The Wolfman isn't The Wolfman's director's fault IS NOT HELPING. Basically, he says that whatever Captain America is or is not, it is not The Wolfman, which is like saying while your movie may not be Citizen Kane, it is still better than those commercials Orson Welles did at the end of his life. "I only did The Wolfman 'cause I was 'po. Now Marvel has showered me with money to make this movie, iz allllll goooooood, baby."

This would be the same Marvel Studios that paid Robert Downey Jr. less than a million dollars (reputedly) for the first Iron Man. That balked at paying Jon Favreau any more money for Iron Man 2 despite the fact that he delivered them a hit that cost them next to nothing. Whose continued refusal to pay talent what it's worth has led to Favreau being ousted as director of Iron Man 3. (And led to the replacement of Terrence Howard by Don Cheadle, but that's fine 'cause I loves me some of the Cheadle.) The studio that almost wouldn't take JOSS WHEDON, HE OF THE INCREDIBLY RABID AND LOYAL FAN BASE, for The Avengers because of his price.

Either this director got $5 to make The Wolfman, or the previously tight-fisted Marvel got an accounting sphincter-loosened. And I'm not going to lie--I could believe that The Wolfman was made for $5. They could have just filmed Anthony Hopkins drunk on his weekend in his dirty old mansion, for all I know. Judging by the state of Benecio del Toro's eye bags, ditto. Hugo Weaving, it is assumed, shows up places in period or fantasy costumes all the time. It's not inconceivable that he raided Hopkins' place dressed like a Victorian dandy.

That means this Joe Johnston person is, like, SUPER PSYCHED about his budget of $15. Must remind myself: beefcake. As long as there is beefcake...

Racists suck. But stupid racists are hilarious. Case in point: there is a conservative hate group that is actually hating on the upcoming Marvel movie Thor (our May Movie, folks!). Not because the trailer made it look like another $200M exercise in mediocrity. (True fact: at least half that budget was spent on replacing sets that Anthony Hopkins had devoured.) They're protesting because Idris Elba in it.

Personally, I'd protest any movie that doesn't have Idris Elba in it. (HOTT.) Give this man allllll the roles in Hollywood, kthanxbai.

Here's a great take-down of the racists' claims. Look, racism is bad. But with a little more of this kind of racism, we might just kill the whole evil, malingering cancer of racism outright. Bad day to be a racist if these guys are your spokesmen. And I say men, because, let's face it, only a bunch of white dudes would get this far up their own assholes about Idris Elba. (Because they secretly wish it were Idris Elba up there.)

For one thing, I didn't have to wait for the internet to get its hands on the latest issue and throw these pictures of Chris Evans in Captain America up. Warning: That link contain seeeeeerious beefcake. Check out the red-headed dude in the last pic scoping out the Cap's shapely behind. I'm with you, pervy scientist dude!

In all seriousness, the pictures that they've chosen are surprisingly well done. They look period-accurate and they capture some of the spirit and fun of the movie. The one still of the Cap walking away with the old shield slung over his shoulder (but being otherwise togs-less) looks like a panel from a comic. I like! Plus Hugo Weaving smiling demonically? SIGN ME UP.

Back to looking at Chris Evans with his shirt off. I'll be in my bunk. (Which I actually have!)

I got to see The Colbert Report yesterday, and I'm in love with Stephen Colbert. The real one. He's a TOTAL NERD. Before each show, he comes out to answer questions not in character. I was a little embarrassed at the silence my question generated, but I had to know if he was seriously going to be the POTUS in the new Avengers movie series. He said he'd love that, and then told us a story about how he got Captain America's shield up on his wall. I breathed a sigh of relief that I wasn't the nerdiest person in the room when Colbert, asked to name his favorite LOTR character, went into a long tangent about events in The Silmarillion. (As he put it, he lost half the audience talking LOTR, but you lose 99% of people when you talk about The Silmarillion.) Anyway, the real Stephen Colbert is, like, the awesomest, nicest nerd person who is famous.

The show was good, too. :P

I also found out today that the AC&C in NYC (that's "Animal Care and Control") does, in fact, want to interview me to volunteer. Volunteering, besides the GRE, is the last bit of polish my application (hopefully next year!) for veterinary school needs. To be super-awesome for that, I should, like, go shadow vets in the city. Still working up to that one. It takes a lot of chutzpah to go into a clinic and ask to follow a vet around. It does if you're me, I mean. I blushed so hard asking Stephen Colbert a question--that he solicited! Imagine how well I do asking people for favors who aren't really looking to give any out. I get so, so red. So first step, get in good with AC&C. Second step: ??? Third Step: vet school!