Trailer: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

The first trailer for the new Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie was released yesterday. There are mixed reviews as to how it looks: many posted comments about being disappointed, or having their childhood ruined, or noting how the turtles look like a more realistic Shrek, or that Shredder isn’t Japanese, and so on. Others are saying that it doesn’t seem that bad, and regardless of Michael Bay’s involvement in the project, it still could be a good action film.

You can judge for yourself, I’ve posted the trailer below.

I have only one thing to comment on as to altered expectations: the size of the turtles. While this was probably changed during the adaptation writing process, the turtles aren’t really supposed to be that tall. In fact, even the costumes used for the first TMNT (1990), were taller than envisioned by the creators – and they reached maybe six feet. In the comic, all four kung-fu practising turtle-ninjas were thought to be closer to four feet.

I must make it clear, though, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Yes, few have come to expect a literal adaptation from a movie in the hands of Michael Bay (even if he is the producer), but so what if the turtles are big? If it works for the film, then it works. It was simply disconcerting the first time you see them.

However, talking about the quality of the film based on a trailer is worse than judging a book by its cover (which I do all the time with great results). We all know that making a trailer is not the same thing as making a film. Man of Steel’s teasers had me thinking I was going into a poetic, psychological investigation of what it meant to be Superman. I was wrong. But I still hold firm to the opinion that those teasers are some of the best in recent years (alongside the two teasers for The Master (2012)).

Therefore, despite what the final product will be for TMNT (2014), I too would rather focus on the quality of this trailer right now, and not make judgments on how these elements work in the film itself. So without further delay I must say this: the trailer is lacking and misses out on a huge opportunity. Yes, yes, I often say this. Oh well. Let me briefly explain why.

Two things are missing here: Splinter, and any sort of Japanese philosophy. First of all, don’t get Shredder to narrate the trailer, come on. Now in that way. They used Shredder for the 1990 trailer, but it was clear it was him, and his voice fits the part. I’m not a big fan of casting William Fichtner, but really, if the producers want to get people excited about this movie, keep him out of the spotlight, and allow for Splinter’s presence. Have Splinter talk about the growth of heroes, what is needed in a failing city, as well as my second point – philosophy.

I don’t mean start talking about what old stuffy professors talk about, but about Japanese mysticism. Inject at least some of it into the trailer. The amazing thing about TMNT has always been the clash of the goofy, crude, even lame teenagers, and the old-world wisdom of Japanese philosophy via Splinter. I would have loved to see a trailer showing at least a little how Japan merges with the filthy underbelly of a large American city.

Let’s be honest: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is one of the strangest and silliest concepts for storyline ever. Four teenage super-turtles, trained by a super intelligent rat in the art of Japanese styled fighting, protect New York as ninjas, all the while eating pizza and fried food. Are we really ever supposed to take this seriously? Its ridiculousness doesn’t make it a bad story though, because the way it’s treated on screen or on the page, saves it. Let’s hope the new movie is able to do it justice.

I loved the first TMNT (1990) so I’ve included the trailer for that as well. The joke said by the cab driver is priceless. And I love how the title is introduced with the music. Classic 90s. Enjoy. 

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, directed by Jonathan Liebesman, is set for release August 8th starring Megan Fox, William Fichtner, Noel Fisher, Alan Ritchson, Jeremy Howard, Danny Woodburn, Pete Ploszek, and Will Arnett. 

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990) was released a while ago and stars a lot of great people, too. If you had a childhood, you've watched it already. 

Trailer: X-Men: Days of Future Past

Keeping with the theme of the last post, I'm posting the the new X-Men: Days of Future Past trailer. Yes, I am still a geek.

The X-Men cast reunite in order to change the past, altering events that may doom mutants and humanity together. The past and future must cooperate to reach this end, and knowing how much people change, the results will be hard achieved no doubt.

While the series seems to be getting a little long in the tooth, if DOFP is anything like its trailers, it will be worth the extension.

I thought the first trailer was amazing, but this one is very impressive to say the least. Creating a preview is certainly a specific art form nowadays, but between the music and the narration, the editors of this one have it down. They've done a wonderful casting job pairing Fassbender to Mckellen and McAvoy to Stewart and I think as they sink into their shared roles with the sequel, the performances will be spectacular. That's what I'm really looking forward to.

Directed by Bryan Singer and set for release on May 23, 2014, the movie stars the regular cast of the previous films: Ian Mckellen, Patrick Stewart, Hugh Jackman, Michael Fassbender, James McAvoy, Halle Berry and Ellen Page.

This is definitely one to see in theatres.

A Trip to Broadway: Mckellen and Stewart in Waiting for Godot

It was my first time in New York. My friends and I flew out the morning of the 19^th, prepared to fly again that evening, only willing to make such a lengthy journey for the sole purpose of seeing a play, Waiting For Godot. The city itself was as monumental as I expected – gathering all my impressions from various depictions in novels and films – but while I was dazzled by the rush and burble of the streets, the real wonderment lay within the quieter walls of the Cort Theatre.

We picked up our tickets a few blocks away, close to Time Square, walking through a few more sights of the city, until reaching the Cort. Already there was a line to get in, all for ticket holders, and shortly after we arrived the line doubled and tripled until I couldn’t see the end of it. The marquee showed the four actors we were about to see and instantly I could not help from smiling. The singular faces that looked upon me were Ian Mckellen, Patrick Stewart, Billy Crudup (who I did not know I would be seeing at that point), and Shuler Hensley. My inner-geek was promptly screaming out for Lord of the Rings, X-men, Star Trek, and Watchmen.

We sat on the highest balcony, four rows up from the ledge, perched on the edge of our red seats. The stage was cast in low light and had simple furnishings: wooden deck panels on the floor, raised slightly upstage; a single barren tree; a small stone bench; all lined with a border of rock and brick tracing background.

The audience wasn’t full, being a matinee, and was scattered with groups of high school students and teachers, older couples and vacationers, young folks and even single viewers. Beside me sat a man of the latter type, telling me he had picked up a discount ticket just that day.

After the final audience members had filed into their seats, the house lights were brought down, and as if the air had instantly been removed from the theatre, everyone immediately silenced. Not a breath or shifting stir could be heard. I have yet to watch a movie and have this happen, but I am still waiting for that day. Then, from behind the rock trimming, a hand and an arm shot out, then a hat, followed by an old man sluggishly climbing over. Mckellen rose from beyond sight.

To skip the summary of the entire play, as the two giants entered the stage the audience applauded as was due, and that same elation lasted until the end of the performance. Mckellen and Stewart were funnier than I ever thought they could be. The two old friends traded lines so smoothly I could have sworn their lines were lubricated. It was really a privilege to watch them in the moment.

The ensuing antics of all four actors, the two old men paired with the wild exaggerated characters of Lucky (Crudup) and Pozzo (Hensley), served as some of the most engrossing acting I’ve seen in a long time. It wasn’t that I believed these actors really were who they were playing (I don’t think that’s what theatre does), it’s that I could feel the energy and mastery of the actors, as if it were a thick paste spread over the entire room.

At the end of the play, after the bows and standing ovations, Mckellen and Stewart exited the stage last, on opposite sides each other, then threw their hats centre stage, which hit each other and remained. This simple act was what blew the performance out of the water for me. There was something so perfect about the moment, about the meaning behind the hats, about leaving them there while the audience left – it was a purely romantic gesture. I wish I had taken a picture, but now the image will just have to remain in description, and in my memory.

Here is what I’ve wanted to say: I was brought to the theatre, and thus New York, on the pretence of witnessing live the wondrous aura of Gandalf, Captain Picard, Magneto, and Professor Charles Xavier all at once – a geek’s wet dream. I was not only going to see them, such as I would at a convention, but view them acting, moving, breathing in their element. I couldn’t resist the opportunity to see this.

But as much as I love film and television, I learned that putting a screen in between the experience of the creators and the experience of the audience filters out an important immediacy in the art form of acting. Yes, I was bored at times watching the play. No, I didn’t get to see the actors as well as I wanted to. But those things, among others, are worth the sacrifice in order to see experts do what they do best. Within five minutes of the performance, I wasn’t watching as a geek anymore – Magneto and Professor X weren’t on stage. These were the real men, their roles as superheroes superfluous fractions of what these actors really were capable of.

And something very important happened at the culmination of that play. I was more enthralled with playwriting than I ever have been. To paraphrase Adam Elliot, I did not just want to grab a hold of life, I wanted to strangle it – specifically the life of writing. Now, I’m an amateur writer who writes mainly in prose, but seeing a person’s work elevated to that level made me hungry for the chance to create something similar.

My advice here is not to go see live theatre so you can get excited about life again. Instead, if you are excited about creating something – be it art, writing, music, a business, even a blog – see it happen in the moment, when there is life injected into its creation. See music live, get on set, support a local playwright. It may not work, but what I do know is that I’ve rarely felt more elated than I did the moment two old men through their hats centre stage. 

Two For One Trailers: Enormous and Godzilla

Two trailers have come out somewhat recently about the attack of giant monsters, both of which deserve some attention: Enormous and Godzilla.  

There is obviously a difference in the quality of the trailers, but since one is a web series and the other a multi-million dollar blockbuster, it's best not to compare directly. Either way, they both look like great fun for different reasons.  

Enormous is a new web series from Youtube's Machinima adapted from a comic first published in 2012. Interestingly, the series and comic deals with the fallout after everything has collapsed, rather than during it, so we'll get to see a different picture of survival in this scenario. It brings to mind The Walking Dead expect with large, large monsters - ones probably moving a little faster than zombies. It's a powerful trailer and I think the series will be a good one.

Godzilla is understood without explanation, taking on the same plotline as most monster movies, however, this is a damn good trailer and I'm really looking forward to seeing the full film. Cranston's voice echoes through the images, and as always, brings some real gravitas into it all. Yet the best feature is the haunting music throughout the two and half minute trailer, which seems to originate straight from a nightmare. 

Both are worth checking out.

Enormous, adapted from the Tim Daniel and Mehdi Cheggour comic, will premiere March 20 online, starring Steve Brand, Ceren Lee, Garret Coffey, Erica Gimpel, Charles Melton, and Billy Miller.

Godzilla is in theatres May 16 starring Bryan Cranston, Elizabeth Olsen, Sally Hawkins, Aaron Taylor Johnson and Ken Watanabe. 

On Through the Looking Glass, or Why a Sequel to Alice Could Be a Good Thing

Well, hey there! Mr. Fuzzles wasn't too angry with me so I’m writing again. The stitches will come out soon and I’m told scars make you look distinguished, especially on the face. So I want to thank you Mr. Fuzzles for being such a great, big pussy. All hail. Anyway, as usual I heard some news and wanted to comment on it (sit down you damn cat).

YayI'ts the Red Queen! Or wait, maybe it's the Queen of Hearts...I dunno. Nevermind.

Helena Bonham Carter is reprising her role as the Red Queen, alongside Johnny Depp and Mia Wasikowska, in the sequel to Alice in Wonderland aptly entitled Through the Looking Glass. The first movie, despite not being well received critically, made noodles of money with wide international succ-sauce. So, they’re making another dish. Contrary to my distaste for the whole thing, I’m going to try to explain why this could actually be good.

Here are some things we know: Alice (2010) was not meant as a direct adaptation of the book, but rather a loose reimagining of the world of Wonderland in order to follow a much, much older main character. This caused a number of ripple effects including but not totalling slight differences in characters, an extended history, and various changes to the world at whole.

Also, we know there are many many interesting references of Wonderland that have spanned generations and nations (the Hatter, the Cat, the Queen, the Caterpillar) to the point of Alice becoming a cultural icon for the absurd and wacky.

Here are some things we don’t like: The biggest problem with the first movie is that the writers, even though they said they were loosely adapting the novel, didn’t really stray away from the source material that much. The plotline is different (since there really isn’t much of one in the book) but many of the lines and references are taken straight from both books, just in the worst way possible – let me explain.

I’m sure the creative team feared that if they just directly adapted the source material, the audience wouldn’t be getting anything they haven’t already been seeing on film since 1951. “Let’s create something new,” they said, “Let’s make her older,” another chipped in, “Yeah, then we can change what’s been happening in Wonderland because so much time has passed,” another concluded. Think of it in the way Chronicles of Narnia worked. Every time the characters go back to the fantasy world, so much time has passed that the writers can create a whole new history. Ah, what a perfect opportunity to create something fancy and wonderful. But in Alice (2010) instead of really creating a new world, like they should have, the audience was presented with a terrible rehash of old material.

If the writers are saying, “we are loosely adapting,” then actually do it. Instead of relying on their own imaginative abilities, they just recycled and repackaged old lines from the source. They brought references out of context placing them wherever it sort-of kind-of fit, butchering the real meaning of it all. The same thing happened in Sherlock Holmes (2009) and I was mad then, too.  Taking bits and pieces of the source material, cutting it up, mixing it with placebos, and asking us to snort it believing we’re still getting just as high, is wrong.  

You either adapt what’s in the novel properly, or hardly use it at all (Think Star Trek (2009). Yes they referenced the old series, but not that much, and in the sequel even less). I know Alice (2010) took a mixture of references from the first AND second books, just as the animated movie did, so they have to find a way to fit them together in new ways, but come on, they weren’t even trying.

For example, The Queen of Hearts and the Red Queen are two separate characters, not the same one. Proof the writers are just mashing the two books together, losing major parts of the world’s mythos, and trying to pass it as if creating something new, is right there: Carter plays the Queen of Hearts while being called the Red Queen, toting the tyrannical influence of the former and the chess-styled attributes of the latter. Each one is a main character in the first and second novels respectively, not at all the same thing. Granted, I have tried to use my chess queen when playing gin rummy, thinking that if it could move in any direction on a chess board then it obviously could at least make a three-of-a-kind, but Mr. Fuzzles has sharp eyes.

While I hate this, and without trying to be nit-picky about the creative licenses allowed in an adaptation, the point I want to make is that an entire character is being lost here, just as many subtle meanings, poetry, humour, and psychedelic spawnings are lost too because Alice (2010) is butchered by rearranging something that already worked.

"Alice Strangles Bambi": A key moment in Through the Looking Glass

Now to the point: why this can be a good thing for Through the Looking Glass.

What the first movie SHOULD have been, the second movie could be. I’ve read the books. I’ve seen the Disney take on it. I’ve watched the old short film. I’ve noticed the references in movies again and again. What I haven’t seen is something new added to a world nearly a century and a half old.

Luckily, they’ve used a lot of the most famous sections from the two original novels already, so maybe they will buck up and create something themselves, because that’s what Wonderland needs.

I don’t want to see the Down’s syndrome Tweedle-twins, or the mismatched March Hare, or even the Cumberbatch Jabberwocky (wait, I might be mixing up my well-spoken dragons). This is WONDERLAND, create anything you damn well please, just make it interesting. Create a movie in the spirit of Lewis Carroll, don’t just butcher what he’s already done properly 150 years ago.

There are still wonderful, amazing writers out there – scores of them, in fact. Just because Lewis Carroll came up with something that shook the world a long time ago, doesn’t mean we can’t create something equally amazing now.

So I’m calling out whoever is writing Through the Looking Glass daring them to be different, to actually loosely adapt a wonderful creation and make it mean something in 2016. You screwed up the first one, fine – as long as you’ve gotten that out of your system, let’s try again next time. Show me something I haven’t seen before. It’s friggen Wonderland.

We’re Back: A Take on Big Bang

Yes, we are finally posting after almost two years in the dark, and if we had any readers at all, this would be a big deal. Fortunately, only my grandma and her cat will be reading this, so the absence has not been greatly felt (Hi Mr. Fuzzles!). You may be asking, Why were you gone for so long, to which I will say, Don’t worry, Mr. Fuzzles, I only left the room – stupid cat. Anyway, I felt a great desire to comment on an episode of Big Bang Theory I just watched, and so here I am. 

             I will get it out of the way first – yes, BBT is not nearly as great as it used to be and has been steadily declining already for a few seasons. The relationships are rather flat, character development slow, jokes lack much of the poignant originality they once had, and most of the story-lines are missing even a clear meaning. Despite this, there are two things I want to talk about: one about desperate characters, the second one about missed opportunities.

                I’ll just give a quick summary of the most recent episode, “The Mommy Observation.” Howard and Sheldon are in Texas when Sheldon sees his mom having sex, and he deals with the issue – not that important. Meanwhile, Raj sets up a murder mystery dinner with the rest of the gang, including Stuart – more important. Throughout the entire night the gang bitch and moan about the game Raj has so excitedly and elaborately put together, which includes an element of time travel, while only Stuart plays along with the story-line (albeit, he only lays on the ground as the murdered member the entire time).

Near the end of the episode, however, Leonard suggests to the group that no matter where they are in twenty years, no matter how scattered around the globe, they should all meet again in front of the building they have spent so many hours in and have dinner together. The final scene shows a lonesome gray-haired Stuart, twenty years later, being stood up by everyone saying, “I knew it.” Although it has been shown before in different ways, at the end of this episode I could not help feeling one thing: there are now real losers in BBT.

Where we once had a show that celebrated being a geek, a nerd, an outcast – therefore cancelling out the labels – in the recent string of episodes in season 7, there really are cool kids and losers. To put it plainly, anyone in a relationship seems to have finally realized what being ‘normal’ really is, but anyone without a partner, are sad hopeless dreamers.

Raj tries so hard for his friends but is given no relief. The writers refuse to allow him any lasting happiness, only burying him in deeper pit of desperation, whether it’s making him fall deeply in love with his dog, or constantly referencing his awkward metrosexuality. It’s hard to watch. This is similar to Stuart, who, despite being the most lovable character on the show, is allowed no connection and only jokes of self-loathing.

And although Raj gets this more than Stuart does, it seems like the group actually looks down on Raj now, treating him as if he actually were a loser. That’s not what this show is about. At the beginning, it was the entire opposite. Geeks had a community. They were cool even if they were weird. Now most of them seem to put down that sort of behaviour. My god, they play D&D all the time – what the hell is the big difference between that and the role-playing in a murder mystery?

The second, and more important point, is about missed opportunities. The writing in BBT focuses on one thing: silly, inane laughter. Dramatic sections are next to nil, totalling probably an only episode’s worth of screen time for the entire series, and even the sweet moments come few and far between now. They need(ed) to use dramatic development as a way to anchor the audience’s involvement with the characters. When everything is all jokes, who the fuck cares?

Having an entirely dramatic episode of The Big Bang Theory could provide the opportunity for one the series’ best moments, but I doubt the writers will take that chance. What I mean by this, is that everything done in the show seems to work toward making fun of people, or breaking down relationships, instead of building them up. They provide themselves an opportunity to change the feeling of the show, only to smack it down and make the audience feel shitty (think of how they brought up and crushed the dreams of Howard going back into space).

Stuart standing alone twenty years in the future marks one of the biggest mistake made by the writers – proving that it’s even in the small details. Instead of making Stuart into a greater loser, as I described above, I suggest another route to take.

Leonard suggests they all meet twenty years in the future outside the building. Stuart, a sweet man of little money, doesn't have a calendar on his phone, so he needs to write it down. Flash forward twenty years: Stuart stands outside the building, painfully aware no one is going to show up. He mutters “I knew it,” and begins walking home (cue sad audience). As he does, hanging his head low, a beautifully dressed Penny, slightly wrinkled, her hair resembling that of a woman in her mid-forties, walks into Stuart. She embraces him, surprised and thrilled that he’s actually there, only to look past him in wonderment. She asks him, “Where is everyone else?” He shakes his head as Stuart is known to do, and we see the confused disappointment in Penny’s face. She is clearly longing for someone, however, being a woman of greater maturity, she tells Stuart that they should go to dinner anyway. They both smile and he takes her arm, making some quirky joke, as they walk off down the street.

Why I think this works better than what they had: A twenty year gap is a PERFECT opportunity to raise questions without giving answers. The episode focused explicitly on whether or not Penny and Leonard will end up together, so why not show them twenty years later NOT together? The gap is big enough that the audience gets to wonder why, expecting something in the show, without getting it rammed into our eyes. Also, we don’t have to suffer another showcase of a great character being tortured as a loser. Everyone gets stood up, but come on, not this way, and not to Stuart. By the end of the episode, I just felt bad and unhappy. This is Big Bang Theory, not Buried.    

                Anyway, grandma, I’ve finished my rant. There need to be some changes, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. Maybe it’s time to just put the damn thing to sleep. No, not you Mr. Fuzzles – stupid cat.