Kids these days....

Great segue for mentioning that I saw Speed Racer at an Imax theater this afternoon. I think it's a touch too long for such a slight story, but it's hugely entertaining, the thing looks incredible, and I really like the actors they chose (although why they didn't just go ahead and get Tim Curry for the villain is beyond me, because they may as well have). The kid and the chimp were a touch over cute, but even they had redeeming moments. Susan Sarandon and John Goodman have both had what I must consider two of the strangest careers in Hollywood.

I wish the races had been just a touch more comprehensible, as what I could figure out was so much fun. Finally, I must agree: John Goodman, kung fu master = comedy gold.

I don't get why the critics are acting like this is the end of cinema as we know it. Compared to Michael Bay's atrocities, this is Bergman.

Not sure whether this should really be in Premium Cable instead of here, but...holy fuck, Recount is depressing.

Danny Strong, congratulations on bringing back that sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. Very well done.

Ugh.

I'm Not There is just plain awe-inspiring.

Kids these days....

Well, in that vein, I just watched Peter Jackson's King Kong because Ray Bradbury told me to.

It was REALLY LONG.

It takes an hour to get to Skull Island, and then there's over an hour on Skull Island that mostly consists of the crew being picked off one by one. The movie's called King Kong, not Skull Island, Land of the Dinosaurs ! There were some cool dinosaur scenes, but mostly, everything went on too long.

The basic meat of the movie, though—the relationship between Ann and Kong—was very sweet and sad, though. So that part was good.

Michael Rymer is rumored to be the director of the upcoming Witchblade movie.

P-C, I saw King Kong on a recent(ish) flight, and was mightily, mightily underwhelmed. Too long, too slow, too many weird gross giant bugs, too much Jack Black.

Meh.

Discussion Monday:

I've been reading a lot of blogs that find Iron Man to be sexist (at best) or downright misogynist (at worst).

What say you all?

I haven't seen it yet! I will try and remedy that this week.

Thoughts without having seen it --

Is it possible that *Tony Stark* is sexist and possibly misogynistic?

By which I mean, people frequently react to a character without stopping to think that maybe the character is not meant to represent the work as a whole, or the actual opinions of the author. Lolita being a good example -- Yes, Humbert Humbert is a pederast, but he is not admirable or meant to be an example of good behavior, nor is he meant to represent the author's approval of snatching up underage girls and trying to make them your lover.

So yeah, it strikes me as terribly likely (again, without having seen it yet) that Tony Stark is meant to be misogynistic, but that does not meant the film is misogynistic.

Just my initial thoughts.