Trace

I have gotten over the cold I'd had for the past week.

 

Thanks Sudafed & pot brownies, I couldn't have done it without you!

Frank Miller's 'nuts.... Peanuts, that is:

 

The Walking Dead #59

Very, very good stuff happening in this title nowadays. Loved the new principle character and the insights into the zombies proves to be a refreshing path, something I'd all but given up on after 50+ issues. Good time to jump (back) on.

 

X-Men Noir #4

I have no idea what just happened.

I definitely need to re-read the series in one setting before passing final judgment.

 

Young Liars #13

Ohfuckyeah! Book of the week, book of the month, and (thus far) book of the year.

I have such a Lynchian Pop-Art boner for this series that I cannot wait for each issue to come out.

Locke & Key is ok. I started reading it when it kept popping up on people's "Best of new series of 2008" lists. Some of the art is quite excellent, though in a very colorful, almost cartoony way. The first issue is a pretty good litmus test as to whether or not you'd like it. Be forewarned: the 1st series is definitely part of a larger whole, so it ends with many things left unresolved. I believe they're on issue #3 of the second series, or "chapter."

I like the idea of Damian as Robin, and (I assume) Nightwing as Batman (maybe Jason Todd?!).

Sounds like it could be a really funny pairing.

 

My hopes shall remain ridiculously high.

My favorite creative team of all time.

 

I feel that Cronenberg's Spider could do with some love too...

I liked Spider, but it was such a "quiet," understated film that I'm hesitant to recommend it to people.

Beside some levels of eroticism why would you compare Lynne to Cronenberg?

This will not be well-articulated.... Their films have the same feel to them, often exploring similar themes and employing cinematography that is (generally) darkly stylistic. Horror, sex, relationships, beautifully composed shots-- these are all elements that (for me) recall both directors. Granted, Cronenberg tends a bit more towards the dark, the violent, and the weird, whilst Lyne is more concerned with male-female relationships.

Jacob's Ladder could've been a Cronenberg film.

 

Damn, that barely makes sense.

 

 

P.S. Scanners is great. Love me some Michael Ironside.

For some perverse reason I liked eXistenZ when I saw it, even though I know deep down that it is not a good movie.

 

Anyway, Cronenberg films that I would recommend (that pop into mind):

Scanners

The Fly

Dead Ringers

Crash (1996)

Eastern Promises

 

A similar filmmaker is Adrian Lyne, who has a pretty solid track record himself:

9 1/2 Weeks

Fatal Attraction

Jacob's Ladder

Lolita (1997)

 

And um, Flashdance and Indecent Proposal.

 

(as well as the not-so-good, but not-quite-terrible Unfaithful)

Smokers: please mind where your smoke goes. If I have to smell your fucking disgusting cigarette smoke, or worse, your second-hand smoke I will shove Joe Camel down your fucking throat. Particularly you, fat obnoxious neighbor who smokes right beneath my open bedroom window. It's scorching hot 9 months out of the year and there is no fucking way I'm going to keep my window closed for even a second. Smoke somewhere else, you fucktard.

 

Also, to the dipshits that stand at the entrances/exits to things (elevators, escalators, stairs, doorways, etc.): get the fuck out of the way or be prepared to get knocked the fuck out. These are not good areas to hold conversations with others, especially if said conversation is a cell-phone one. Fuck off and die.

 

(now Atticus doesn't seem so mean)

The Apocalypse is upon us, for Hagren speaks The Truth!

Invincible Iron Man #11-Now, this is what I like to see in an Iron Man comic. Tony Stark is a fugitive who has lost everything, but the melodrama is kept to a bare minimum in order to get cool fight scenes. Tony Stark in old armour. An old enemy returns in a creepy way. And, a cool fight scene with War Machine, followed next month by a fight with Sub-Mariner. Reminds me of the late-1970s Iron Man book.

And just as hokey, too. No offence, but I think this issue only works if you don't think about it too hard. I'd have found it easier to swallow with more cartoony art instead of the post-Granov style used here.

 

Speaking of the art, Norman Osborn's face was unrecognisable, while conversely, Namor's was very familiar — no doubt issue 12 will end with Namor telling Stark to live long and prosper.

I love Larrocca, but his art on IIM has been strange. Too much blurring and coloring in photoshop, methinks. I miss his more traditional approach to pencils and inks, with all that awesome detail he used to pour into every panel. I think his art started to go south with the "Blood of Apocalypse" arc in X-Men, which also featured some of Milligan's worst writing.

 

I've started in on Jason Aaron's Scalped and Ghost Rider; I've only read one issue of the former, and am about 7 issues into the latter. I used to read Ghost Rider when I was a kid and looking over some of my old comics I realize that pretty much no incarnation of the character is worth a damn. Until now. The current series is mindless fun, all centering around a weathered, crusty Johnny Blaze (instead of the hokey 70s/80s version or that whining 90s abortion Danny Ketch). Good, entertaining stuff with some really interesting art. Not a must-read or anything, but if you're like me and are running out of new things to check out, it's worth a look.

Your picture is strangely fascinating, Jessie.

Just a snapshot, or something posed?

I dragged my buddy along to see it and he doesn't read comic books at all. In fact, I don't think he's read a single issue in his life. However, he did think The Dark Knight was the best film of 2008. Then again, he didn't care much for Snyder's 300. Additionally, he is card-carrying member of the "I hate camera tricks" club. So he was a bit of toss-up going in.

He ended up hating everything but the scenes with Rorschach.

 

A co-worker of mind who is a major comic book geek, but who has not read the book, went to see it today. He plans on reading the text now, so I'll get his opinion on both and see if reading the source material causes him to reevaluate the film (which I'm guessing he really enjoyed).

Oh, Goode lord!

 

Matthew, you're just an actor, a marginal one at that; please leave the writing duties to others.

 

Thank you.

 

RE: Balthy's take on SSII

I liked her character in the comic. She's a person caught between worlds: Her mother's old-fashioned sense of womanhood, the feminism of the 80s, a (forced) life as a hero, and living/being a "normal" woman. Her character has real growth and is interesting (even when she's being "a bitch") and that gets me to care for her. Plus, she becomes humanity's advocate!

The film, however, missed all of that (except, obviously, the advocate part, which was unconvincing as fuck).

Sparklehorse + German Expressionism = WIN

 

Wish I had known Linkous was going to be in my backyard that night, I would've gone in a heartbeat.

If for some reason the episodes in S1 aren't doing it for you, skip ahead to S2. What little continuity there is (one of many reasons I enjoy the show) is within-season.

She's obviously had a good influence on you, if you're seriously considering posting a photo of yourself with her.

We took a picture sitting together on the couch....but it's extremely weird in that only she showed up in the picture.

Of course.

I was only joking when I asked about that: I don't really want you to publish a photo of the poor woman.

Apparently there's a limit to how much we can quote when posting a reply, so here's the rest of it:

 

I'd need an example of bad cinematography, if Eastwood is anything he's competant.

Eastwood's frames and compositions are rarely self concious and I didn't get a made for DVD feel about the

look either.

There was enough richness in the decrepit suburban mundanity.

That I recall, my only real shot composition gripe was his

dying Jesus pose

.

I was thinking more of the DP/cinematographer. Some of the lighting was oddly harsh, while at other times descending into noir. Some of the locations lacked visual weight and the

looked like a poorly-lit version of the

set.

Again, ostensibly the film was nothing new at all, but personally Clint makes even the overfamiliar believable, naturalistic and enjoyable.

Less a film about vigilantism

(It appears as if he only really aggravated/escalated events until just before his end)

more a quiet statement that blood is not thicker than water.

 

Yes, it's a film made by an old man...about an old man.

There's genuine synnergy there.

Good arguments, but I still think the film is a dud.

 

As an aside, I'd like to state for the record that, when it comes to film, I am very, very picky. A negative review by me (or a positive one for that matter) should not prevent anyone from seeing a film they have interest in. So yes, Matt, you should check it out and let us know what you think.

I'm not that sure whats to defend.

Nothing, really. It's just that I respect your opinions on films and was hoping we'd be in agreement on this one, but c'est la vie.

As above I admit that the script could have done with a further push and the film with another coat of restraint (Specifically his groans and sneers in the first half), but Clint fills the gaps for me directing from the front.

Glueing the film together enjoyably.

Fair interpretations, all.

By no means his best but completely undeserving of "awesomely bad", something I doubt you'll find a review to accompany.

Eh, I don't really care if a professional critic backs me up or not. The critic I most admire thought it was one or two elements away from being a classic.

I dont see the hard contrivances or their scaffolding either.

Of course they are there, but I believe they are embraced.

In the instance of the girl walking home.

She's Clint's literal neighbour in a small community and it's more than conceivable that they would take similar routes back home.

He's retired and thus the time of day isn't a hard coincidence either, hell he probably drives around all day.

Mind boggling randomness does not factor into it.

I can forgive her running into the black youth, as well as Clint's fortuitous timing, but the heretofore unseen white boyfriend felt thrown in and this

As for the three way race scene, the dialogue excuses this as all as the male youth have that cliche asian girl fetish.

caused my eyes to roll so much they made it home before the rest of me.

I will, however, accept your reasoning that

The "white brother" was a decent fleshing out of Clint's racism, additionally bringing the issue of "culturalism" into the fray.

None of this grabbed me in the way it did you:

Additionally the Asian Youth gang

are only really aware of Clint because their cousin has moved next door and thus it sparks their interest in his Torino.

I think he gets away with his contrivances, if anything the closeness in proximity and intersection of the characters is very much a soft point of the film (Opting not to make some loud Altman esque look how connected we all are spiel ).

So close and so far away yadda, yadda.

The only contrivance that personally sticks was the juxtaposed

funeral and baby bash alongside each other.

But as that was a deliberate juxtaposition and deliberately follows the priests seemingly trite words on from death-comes-life (The film subsequently choosing to affirm those very trite words).

Funnily enough, that didn't bother me at all (aside from the poor acting by the guy playing the priest).

And I don't believe that his charcter being painted in broadstrokes is an issue.

Note that I don't say that he isn't, because interestingly he really isn't an "interesting" character.

A rascist War Veteran who worked in a Ford factory until he retired who's only real unique point of interest is his pristine car (From his own families point of view too) which he never rides in opting for his battered Ford instead.

Which is really metaphor enough.

He's meant to be bland, beliveably so, and Clint then adds the human sparkle himself.

It's testament to his performance that it feels as if it's a role that only he could pull off.

You've almost convinced me. Almost.

Exactly.

 

Take a stand and show that you've thought critically about the topic.

That's not the problem, the problem is how LONG should the opinion be. Like a paragraph or just a simple sentence or two.

My assumption is that your opinion will come at the end, in which case a paragraph (consisting of at least 2 sentences) should suffice. The paper is only 5 pages so your opinion should only need to be anywhere from a paragraph to half a page at most.

Don't repeat yourself, and really try to approach the problem/question/issue from as many perspectives as you can.

Again though, it's hard to give specific (read: good) advice without knowing the details.

So the subject is simply Volcanic Activity?

If so, what conclusions/opinions did your study of VA lead you to?

Hard to compare the three as they each have their own stylistic take on the noir thriller. I prefer Kiss Me Deadly, but I've also viewed it and written on it numerous times.

However, it's tough to argue against Graham Greene, who is one of the most influential writers of the past century and lends his unique flavor (beautifully realized by Reed and Krasker) to the bleak post-WWII, pre-Cold War era.

Then again, Kiss Me Deadly employs a MacGuffin, so it gets the nod. :wink:

One other show that I don't think has been brought up (at least not recently): Flight of the Conchords. Much like The Office (U.S.) this show really started to hit its stride once it got past the remakes (much of the first season's material was adapted from the earlier folk/comedy CDs and radio show).

 

I have a feeling quite a few forumites would dig this show, especially Sethos.

 

Plus, I'm curious what our 'Roo and Kiwi friends have to say about it-- there are some great Australia vs New Zealand gags in recent episodes.

GF, have you seen Kiss Me Deadly or High Sierra? I think you would dig those, especially the Nuclear take on Mike Hammer in the former.