A Frank Review of "Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson"

It's unlikely this will come up in any other review, so let me just say it and be done: the similarity between Grant Morrison and Hunter Thompson, specifically during his early 70's bid for sheriff, is uncanny. From stone sober liberal activist to psychedelic, sometimes nonsensical druggie fantasist. Let's hope Grant's career does take the nosedive of Thompson's.

"Gonzo" is an excellent introduction to Thompson. Much of the film is made up of circumstances surrounding and anecdotes related to his great works, "Hell's Angels: The Strange and Terrible Saga of the Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs," "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" and "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72." Through archival footage and interviews with friends and enemies, a portrait is painted of the man and his times... up to a point. The problem is, Hunter's times were the turbulent 60's and indulgent 70's. That god damned picture has been painted so many fucking times, I half expect Bob Ross to peek out of the side, dabbing at a trippy little cloud. The whole film is plagued with "been there, done that." Johnny Depp, who played Thompson in 1998's film adaptation of "Vegas," narrates (mostly through reading passages from Thompson's work.) Whether you lived through the times or were buried under the retreads of the 80's and 90's, this visitation feels more nostalgic than exploratory. Even Pat Buchanan chuckles in remembrances of Hunter, de-fanged long before his 2005 suicide.

Hunter S. Thompson was a fascinating individual and a monumental asshole. A film should be made about his early development, as this doc picks up just shy of his 30's, and his decades of decline, which are glossed over in favor of indulging the legend. "Gonzo" is a modest pleasure, but it's awfully shallow and highly repetitive, when you get down to it.

The Comic Book Heroes: The Return of the Heroes

Chapter 5 of Will Jacobs and Gerard Jones' 1985 edition of "The Comic Book Heroes" began with Julie Schwartz mulling over more Golden Age reworkings of the long underwear set. The new Flash's positive reception earned him his own title in 1959, and he was soon joined by Green Lantern, "in a version departing much further from his inspiration than had Flash," becoming "Schwartz's mighty hero, his answer to Superman." The book applauded the creators' imaginative direction, which led from trial appearances in "The Brave and the Bold" to the securing of a "Green Lantern" series. An overview of the title's first nine issues was given, noting that writer John Broome stole the concept of the Guardians from a story he'd done in the early 50's for the Captain Comet strip. The authors detailed the creation of the Green Lantern Corps, Qward, Sinestro, Carol Ferris, Pieface, Star Sapphire and more within the first couple dozen issues. Of special consideration was Pol Manning, an identity assumed and resumed by an amnesiac Hal Jordan when he would be pulled into the future, Adam Strange style, by scientists to defend their world. This identity even came with its own love interest, Iona Vane, to keep Hal coming back for more!

"Such innovations made Green Lantern an instant hit. A straw poll of readers, published in Green Lantern 3, showed him to be, for the moment, DC's most popular hero, with 888 votes to Superman's 600; Flash followed with 521, Batman with 512." Schwartz followed the trend with another reworking, this time of the super-team concept, with the JLA. "This successor to the old Justice Society of America was Schwartz's most ambitious project yet. In this team he was entrusted not only with his own two heroes but with five from the stables of other editors: Weisinger's Superman, Robert Kanigher's Wonder Woman, and Schiff's Batman, Aquaman, and Martian Manhunter, to be joined in issue 4 (May 1961) by a fourth Schiff hero, Green Arrow." Gardner Fox, creator of the Justice Society (among many other notions,) was tapped to write the book, both for his proven aptitude and as a nod toward the emerging mature fandom of the Golden Age comics. Jacobs and Jones went on to synopsis and critique the titles' early years over several paragraphs.

Gardner Fox took on another three revivals, though they fell short of the popularity of Schwartz's initial trifecta. Aside from adding sci-fi trappings and the undeniably equal role of his wife and crime-fighting partner, Hawkman returned to comics largely unaltered. "Although he sparked great enthusiasm among the older set, Hawkman apparently failed to enthrall the children who comprised the bulk of DC's readership. After a three-issue run in The Brave and the Bold, his sales were not quite adequate to justify his own comic. Schwartz, out of fondness for the character, gave him another three-issue tryout a year later... but again sales fell short." The authors seemed to cast the blame upon series artist Joe Kubert, who's history with the character dated back to the 40's, but whose style was more raw than the cleaner work from the rest of Schwartz stable. The debate among readers was "the first serious issue to rise in DC's letter pages." It wasn't until Murphy Anderson replaced Kubert and a greater emphasis was placed on the science fiction that sales took the necessary leap to progress to series.

Fox next reintroduced the original Flash, and by extension a second Earth housing all the rest of the Golden Age DC heroes, to excite among readers young and old. Following that fan service, Fox and Gil Kane went in an entirely different and contemporary direction with the reinvented Atom. The early issues of Ray Palmer's adventures "set a standard for ceaseless invention and variation on the theme of smallness that made them gems of children's entertainment." Fox "also gave us another tough, charming Schwartz heroine in the person of lady lawyer Jean Loring, and a twist on the usual comic book romance: in this case it is Ray Palmer who proposes marriage every issue, and Jean who puts him off for the sake of her career." Atom's "Showcases" stories sold well enough to launch him in an ongoing.

Gerard Jones' 1997 revision of "The Comic Book Heroes" streamlined most the above information, excising the lengthier issue synopsis in favor of more background information. For instance, it noted that except for Archie Comics, the comic industry held off on super-heroes until they saw how well DC's follow-ups to the Flash revival turned out. Jones devoted a paragraph to Gil Kane's career up to starting on Green Lantern, and the circumstances of his time on the strip (including his dissatisfaction with his inker.) "He was smart and opinionated, with artistic ambitions, the way Schwartz always liked his coworkers." Of writer Broome and the new Lantern concept, Jones opined, "The American mainstream then seemed comfortable with authority, and Green Lantern as a space cop serving a brain trust of self-appointed leaders suited America's kids well. In the Green Lantern Corps we can see a foreshadowing of the coming Kennedy administration, with its unelected Ivy League decision-making team and its Green Berets and Peace Corps. In the dark, fearsome aesthetic of the 40's, superheroes had blazed like beacons of justice in a world black with chaos; in the aesthetic of the new DC, rapidly establishing itself as the mainstream of comic books, the heroes were reflections of a well-lit and benevolent world order, the villains eccentrics or products of an alien system like Qward... Broome played on his authoritarian themes with a wit and fantasy that made his the most sophisticated superheroes scripts of his time-- or any time."

Such thoughtful analysis and insights are directed at the other heroes covered, including the boon offered the Atom by having a lawyer girlfriend that attracted "thieves, hoodlums, and spies to fight right off the bat... after years of DC pussyfooting with physical combat, editors were finally getting bold enough to let [Gil Kane] strut his gift for action."

You can buy the 1997 edition of The Comic Book Heroes: The First History of Modern Comic Books - From the Silver Age to the Present from Amazon.com.

A Frank Review of "Southland Tales"

I remember the wonder and excitement I felt while watching "Donnie Darko" for the first time. I wanted so much to share the movie with others, and come to understand it better through outside information and interpretation. I eventually watched the deleted scenes; which did not put me off, as they were extant; and listened to the commentary track, which was forgettable. No, what did me in was the "Director's Cut," which reedited and re-contextualized the movie with lame new effects, clearly showing the film's creator didn't understand his own creation. I have not been able to enjoy the movie since. I also saw "Domino," for which he wrote the screenplay, and of which the less said, the better.

I had a good idea what I was in for after the chilly reception "Southland Tales" received at Canne and afterwards, but still, no one can truly prepare for it. The film is stunning, profound, and exceptional. By that I mean I was stunned by Kelly's cluelessness with regard to his subject matter, found the effort profoundly stupid, and the work of all involved was exceptionally bad. It's "Springtime For Hitler," so utterly misguided as to presumably be inept by design. It's a top-down disaster, and as such best taken in with a bellyful of alcohol and a sense of humor. Lord knows no such thing can be found in the flick itself. The cast is brimming with Saturday Night Live and MadTV alumni in material dubbed comedic, but so unfunny as to make the last half hour of any given Saturday Night Live look like "The Aristocrats." The dialogue in no way seems intended to elicit humor, so the only assumption I can make is that the miscasting combined with straight lines was intended to be the source of the theoretical amusement. That experiment failed epically.

All that being said, there is no pain to be found in watching "Southland Tales." Again, the movie is so obviously without merit from the very beginning, there is never any danger of emotional investment or misleading depth. You, the viewer, know what you are watching is worthless as anything but a train wreck, and so you can just partake of rubbernecking the spectacle. You can enter the picture at any point and come to this exact conclusion before the end of any given scene. It's willfully dense, yet obvious despite itself. Your expectations are never lifted, and there's a comfort in that.

Mandy Moore is the finest actress on screen. Let that sink in for a moment. Nora Dunn is, in my estimation, next in line. Ditto. Seann William Scott-- forever to be known for variations of his Stiffler character-- plays a dual role... and is the dramatic core of the film. You read that right. "Southland Tales" is the sequel to the Darko "Director's Cut," or else Kelly is repetitive as fuck with his transcendental nonsense and related motif. Worst use of a Pixies song ever, and their best besides. Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson plays a little bitch who thinks he's a pimp. Does that interest you? The film itself is a little bitch who thinks it's a cross between "Brazil" and "Dr. Strangelove." Only if you add "Rat Race" and severe head trauma to the mix. Make no mistake: I am smarter than this movie, you are smarter than this movie, and every intended subject of ridicule is smarter than this movie.

"Southland Tales" is at war with making a point. It has always been at war with making a point. It would like to skewer Conservatives, but a spatula is not the ideal weapon of choice. It is too broad and too yielding. The film would also bludgeon Liberals, but a pencil is too light and too narrow to provide more than mild nuisance. Unfocused and imprecise, the movie shadowboxes rather than assaults. "Southland Tales" is friends with everybody. "Southland Tales" just wants everybody to get along.

There's a short animated feature on the DVD. It would like to be "Watership Down," but it's more Down Syndrome. There is also a making-of featurette. It provides the cast and crew the opportunity to explain that either they didn't know what they were doing and just followed orders, or that they were giving orders, but clearly didn't know what they were doing. There is no commentary track, so we must assume Kelly has some due shame and awareness of his limitations. I know that isn't true, but I wish it aloud regardless.

Some will complain that the film is indecipherable, but comic book people should be able to piece everything together by the end. They should then chuckle at the expense of those who couldn't, not to disparage their intellect, but to express amusement at their gullibility. Watch it the next time you wish to feel superior to an all-star cast desperate or dumb enough to have participated. Take some small satisfaction in knowing Booger from "Revenge of the Nerds" is still available for feature films and children's birthday parties for a nominal fee. Note that I didn't even bring up the Cohen Brothers-Lite musical number with Justin Timberlake and a parade of Marilyns. God bless America, but Kelly-- enough with the Jesus talk already! No more religion as pseudo-science for you! Tell Ben Stein the same!

A Frank Review of "The Dark Knight" and the trailer for "Watchmen"

Like most every other comic book fan in the continental United States, I was roped into seeing "The Dark Knight" opening weekend, so I might as well review it. My caveat is that I've actively disliked the Batman for at least a decade, and never been much on the films, so don't expect much gushing. But then again, this is ...nurgh... so you should know I hate everything by now.

I will not say that this is my favorite Batman film of the series, though time and reflection may change that, but I will say it is objectively the best Batman film ever made. A problem I have with super-hero movies, which I generally dislike, is that they always seem to me like a series of set pieces strung together. Factoring in my contemptuous familiarity with most of the subjects, I'm typically bored to tears by one rote, obligatory moment after another. "The Dark Knight" is the first comic book movie I can readily recall where I was absorbed by the narrative. For once, instead of sitting in a theater making mental comparisons to the comics or simply being aggravated by a weak narrative, I was immersed in the story being told by Nolan. I actively cared about what was happening onscreen, both to the characters and with the plot, which is exceptional. Clearly, that makes "The Dark Knight" one of the best films of its ilk, period.

I believe in Harvey Dent. Since at least Miller and Mazzuchelli's "Batman:Year One," he's been among the most fascinating rogues to face the Caped Crusader. I was greatly disappointed in Tommy Lee Jones' pass at Two-Face in "Batman Forever," his being a once favored actor in the midst of a creative free fall and determined to out-clown Jim Carrey. Aaron Eckhart seemed a perfect remedy for that foul memory going in, and coming out all the more so. Dent is the hero of "Dark Knight," the whole movie turns on his journey, and I was with Eckhart every step of the way. My only complaint is that Eckhart needed a second picture to progress from Dent to Two-Face, as he earned so much good will, my sympathies could not reasonably be expected to turn on silver dollar.

In "Batman Begins," I felt a more personal connection to Katie Holmes' sweater than her character, as she could not have been more of a tacked-on love interest in a film that needed to be trimmed of that fatty subplot entirely. Maggie Gyllenhaal redeems the character, imbuing her with life in her performance, while the script made her presence essential. The combination had me falling for Rachael Dawes, now made a unique and surprising heroine that added immeasurably to my enjoyment of the movie.

Gary Oldman is certainly one of the most daring actors working today, sometimes to the peril of his productions. His portrayal of Jim Gordon is full of distinct ticks that had the potential to distract, but instead allow him to fully inhabit a character never remotely as fully realized outside comics as he is here. Again, the influence of "Batman: Year One" is more deeply felt in this sequel than in "Batman Begins," and it is all to the good.

The same can be said of Gotham City itself, as for the first time it feels like a place human beings live, as opposed to having slightly more dimension than the cardboard backdrops of the German Expressionist films that so clearly inspired the Tim Burton cycle. Aiding in this is the support of many name and unknown actors filling out the population, including Nestor Carbonell as the mayor, Eric Roberts and Michael Jai White as crime bosses, Anthony Michael Hall as a television reporter, Colin McFarlane as the police commissioner, William Fichtner as a bank manager, Ron Dean as a veteran cop, and Monique Curnen as *not* Det. Montoya. Sure, they're all from stock, but they're at least quality stock, not glorified backdrop.

Morgan Freeman, as usual, plays Morgan Freeman. Thankfully, Lucius Fox might as well be Morgan Freeman, so the shoe fits comfortably. Michael Caine, as usual, plays Michael Caine. As Alfred, I find myself less forgiving of the coasting, but I allow myself to let it go by just watching Michael Caine do his thing.

Heath Ledger is very nearly the physical embodiment of the Joker. The way that he moved-- fought-- his mannerisms-- the build-- all so close to the ideal gestalt of many comic book incarnations. The script reflects this, as for once, the Joker is maddeningly brilliant; his insane motivations and general unpredictability made a force above and beyond any super-villain to ever make the leap into live action. This is a mind that could clearly bedevil even the Batman. That said, the scars and voice do not suit the character. Too often, the barely-there green hair dye gives way to Ledger's long blond locks, betraying the pretty boy under the half-assed make-up. Ledger can't pull off the iconic laugh, and irritations like his constant licking about the mouth recall a sexual deviant more than the Clown Prince of Crime. The "Disappearing Pencil Trick" was a movie moment for sure, but also a physical dynamic outside the more dandy comic book Joker's abilities. This is not an Oscar-worthy performance, but "Brokeback Mountain" was, so let's not kid ourselves should it yield posthumous reward to balance a prior neglect.

After seeing "American Psycho," I joined the legions of fanboys in casting Christian Bale as the best possible Bruce Wayne. Unlike those legions, I'll own up to my mistake. Bale's American accent continues to underwhelm, and his grasp of Wayne remains tenuous and utterly without charm. His Batman is worse-- his affected rasp so seemingly painful and occasionally unintelligible it amazes that anyone can take him, seriously or otherwise. His costume does him no favors, so tight around the mouth as to make it puff out like fat around overstuffed pants. The stunt work involving the suit is terrible, necessitating the banal obfuscation that comes from extended use of vehicles, firearms, and quick cuts. When Iron Man comes across as more lithe, it's time to reconsider fabrics.

I loved the modern comic book continuity, with a mini-episode early on involving a returned Scarecrow, again (if briefly) played by Cillian Murphy. The movie could have used a couple more of those, but for reasons you may not expect. You see, this movie comes to a rousing conclusion, and then the sequel starts, leaving you squirming in your seat. Characters speak voluminous dialogue and spoon feed text and subtext to the point where you wish someone would take a hit from the Riddler or something. The film is so bloated, it needed bullshit extras so that it could be chopped in half and sold to audiences twice. Also, that theoretical sequel has a really awful, ham-fisted ending that taints much of what came before. Jim Gordon's closing monologue had me begging for the credit crawl as it droned on without consideration for the audience or its own inanity. The movie closes the deal, then won't shut up, and ends up going home alone (but still has your number.)

On the other hand, more action means more lousy action directing. When it comes to fisticuffs, everything is muddy and the mind checks out. Also, speaking of Iron Man, there are numerous, ridiculous leaps in technology that would destroy the film's credibility if it didn't run so blasted long you eventually forget the contrivances. The Batman movie plague continues in that the villain so outshines the hero, the Dark Knight Detective must resort to deus ex machina to save the day. The screenwriter and direction serve so many characters so well, and then the ball is dropped on every level when it comes to the supposed star of the production.

In the final analysis, "The Dark Knight" is a swell crime movie with horrific digressions, and the only thing getting in its way is the super-hero business. I'm glad I saw the movie, and believe it to be the best made of the perpetually flawed Batman movies. Do go see it, do enjoy it, but do get over the hype.


A major draw for my going into "The Dark Knight" was the opportunity to see the trailer for "Watchmen," if only for the irony of seeing the two titles intertwined once again. "Watchmen" seems to be in the submissive role here, with the trailer's use of the Smashing Pumpkins' "The Beginning Is the End Is the Beginning" from the "Batman and Robin" soundtrack. Its also a variant version of their "The End Is the Beginning Is the End," which won the '98 Grammy for "Best Hard Rock Performance" and was an international, if perhaps minor hit. Even the Batman-centric video was up for a bunch of awards. Odd choice that.

I strongly suspect that the CGI on display will improved greatly by next March, or else it will look embarrassing on DVD. There's a slightly rubbery and highly staged feel to the world presented. The costumes are pretty damned nice and functional, though. I'd say Nite Owl looks more like Batman than the stiff Cat-Man from "Dark Knight." My only problem there is that they look too good, seeing as how these are supposed to be silly poseurs well past their prime.

There is so very nearly a peener on Dr. Manhatten that I'm delighted by the audacity. Jackie Earle Haley, based on one line and gorgeous visuals, seems absolutely perfect as Rorschach. "Watchmen" has never been one of my favorite graphic novels, but the movie looks to be such a strong adaptation, I may well end up preferring it to the source material. We shall see...

1966 Mattel "Fright Factory Thingmaker" Ad

I'm still shocked to see such a gruesome image on the back of a comic book, specifically one of this vintage. That kid is tore up! I actually find this a bit disturbing. Kudos to Mattel, for the image, and for getting "Plastigoop" trademarked!

1978 Slim Jim "Satisfy Your Meat Tooth" Dracula Ad

I guess we'll make this a Vampire Weekend in the advertising department. I almost skipped scanning this one, because the ad was so prominent in comics and magazines when I was growing up, I took it for granted everyone knew it. It has been near thirty years, and it was a fun piece, so I figure to enshrine it here. Anybody know the artist? Looks like Jack Davis

1966 AMT "Grandpa Munster "Digs" The Drag-U-La!" Ad

I got away from the old school scans when my computer went ker-floopty and I lost aspects of my favorite program. I've trained myself with new software in my work at the Idol-Head of Diabolu, so it seems like it's about time we got back to the goods. I'm sure everyone's sick of my reviews by now, anyway...