Alexis Bledel, so very not.
Agreed.
All this whitefont is tempting. I should avoid Movies until I see Batman, huh?
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
Alexis Bledel, so very not.
Agreed.
All this whitefont is tempting. I should avoid Movies until I see Batman, huh?
Oh yeah, I dug the twist. I'm glad they did the thing with IMDB, because they are so often the reason for unintentional spoilers.
From icv2.com:
Variety is reporting that Seed Productions, a new production company formed by actor Hugh Jackman and John Palermo, has agreed to a "first look" deal with Twentieth Century Fox. According to Variety a key element of the deal calls for the new company to produce a David Benioff-scripted Wolverine movie, with Jackman starring in the title role, as soon as shooting on X-3 ends. Jackman and Palermo will produce the Wolverine film (see "Hugh Jackman Involved in the Production of X-3, Wolvie"), along with Lauren Shuler Donner and Avi Arad. Benioff is expected to turn in his first draft of a Wolverine script very shortly (see "Troy Scribe to Pen Wolverine Movie").
According to Variety Jackman was involved in the behind-the-camera drama when director Matthew Vaughn left X3 shortly before filming was to begin. Jackman told the trade, "It got to be a roller-coaster ride there, but I wasn't worried because the script is so strong. Matthew had his reasons, but he helped make the movie better before he left. Brett has come in with a lot of enthusiasm and a full understanding of the franchise. It has been a real learning curve, as has been putting together the script on Wolverine. That project (Wolverine) is a good start for me as producer, because I have intimate knowledge of the character."
I discovered a really stupid review of Batman:
After much unnecessary padding and delay, the film settles down to its central story line, which turns out to be a thinly veiled and thoroughly trivialized reworking of 9/11.
Uh...what? Oh, wait:
Their plan even involves hurtling a very large engine of death at a skyscraper that is the symbolic heart of the city. Sound familiar?
Did he forget the part where the point of that plan had nothing to do with the engine of death or the symbolic heart of the city and everything to do with the microwave whatsamawhozit and the water mains underneath Wayne Enterprises? For fuck's sake. Everything is not about fucking 9/11. Except War of the Worlds, because Spielberg said so.
I think it's perfectly valid to read that in as a symbolic image even though it's not the overt focus of the plot. Symbolism is kind of big WRT Bats, after all.
Maybe so, but the review seems to imply that the entire villain plot, which is about releasing fear gas and causing mass panic so the city will destroy itself, is like 9/11, which seems absurd. Unless you make the leap that terrorists/villains like to make people scared, which isn't a radical, 9/11-specific notion. Or anything not already found in the Batverse pre-9/11.
Besides, if it were so "thinly veiled," someone else would have mentioned it by now.
I think you can draw parralels, but I think that it's reading into it to think that that's what the makers of the movie were referencing. P-C, I think you last point is most relevant. I mean, they're friggin Super-Villains, they destroy cities. It's what they do . Asking Bats to fight people who aren't acting like Supervillians is silly, and, you know, their motivations were better and clearer than the majority of the Supervillains I've seen, and it's kind of nice that we can find parallels between our cultural icons and actual events and issues. I'm confused as to what kind of Bat-movie this guy would have liked.
I think you can draw parralels, but I think that it's reading into it to think that that's what the makers of the movie were referencing.
Yeah, I agree. Because once I started thinking about it, I could start making some arguments by twisting things around, but I never made the connection in my mind until this guy brought it up.
I mean, they're friggin Super-Villains, they destroy cities. It's what they do .
I want to see a supervillain's résumé.
EXPERIENCE
GOTHAM CITY
8/04 - 3/05
*Ran organized crime syndicate
*Delivered narcotic substances in a timely manner
*Executed unfit minions
METROPOLIS
2/04 - 3/04
*Held city hostage for three weeks
*Demanded large ransom with conviction and aplomb
*Fought Superman and lived
CLEVELAND
9/03 - 1/04
*Served coffee to tired patrons
*Calculated totals without the use of a computational device
*Deceived customers with friendly demeanor
Bastard would probably get a job before I did.
their motivations were better and clearer than the majority of the Supervillains I've seen
Heh. I liked how in the beginning, the League of Shadows came off as this good organization working for peace. But then you realize their methods are a bit...unconventional, and they're actually pretty eeeeevil. I don't think their good intentions held much water once they set on Gotham. They're like the Sith!
[nevermind]