apropos of anything

There are some blogs brewing in my head, but I haven’t had a chance to flesh them out yet, so here’s a quick-and-dirty one to fill space until my thoughts clear. (Too much to think about these days, non-linearly as always, which isn’t necessarily conducive to speed.)

I can’t remember the last movie I saw in the theater. There simply hasn’t been much out that I’ve wanted to see, although I do have one or two in the queue (notably Thank You For Smoking and American Dreamz). Now the summer movie season is a mere few weeks away, which means filtering through the hype to figure out exactly which potential blockbusters I’m actually interested in.

Of COURSE the poster is his face.

Mission Impossible III (May 5): When this film’s two predecessors were released, I knew they were overhyped, but I went to see them anyway, like a mosquito that knows the bug zapper is a Portal of Doom yet flies into it anyway. But this time, this time I am truly torn.

On the one hand, I have actors whose work I like, such as Laurence Fishburne and Keri Russell, and I have J.J. Abrams, who may have let Alias devolve into a rapid vortex of suck the last two years, but who seems to have redeemed himself a little last week and who at least created the originally awesome show to begin with.

On the other hand, I have crazy Tom Cruise, who has been known to jump on couches and whose child was “coincidentally” “born” mere days before the premiere of his new movie and who could not help himself of buying into the grand celebrity tradition of kooky names. Perhaps if he’d named her “Sarah” instead of “Suri” I might be rolling my eyes less. Goodness knows I certainly couldn’t roll them any more.

So the question is — do I go see a movie I’m pretty sure will be nowhere near as good as it claims to be (nor anywhere near as good as it could be) despite crazy Tom Cruise? Or do I run as fast and as far away from the encroaching Scientology as possible?

The DaVinci Code (May 19): And speaking of overhyped, Dan Brown’s book was the most over-exposed bit of fiction since The Firm. It was a page-turner. A thriller. Period, end of statement, finito. And as that, it was perfectly entertaining, but let’s not pretend it was on the same level as The Interpreter of Maladies.

But, like the Grisham books and the Jack Ryan novels, The DaVinci Code was made to be a movie. Add Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou (of the delightful Amelie) and Ron Howard, and you have me looking for the sign-up sheet. If it’s not good, I won’t be terribly disappointed because I don’t really care much either way. I suppose it helps that I’m not Roman Catholic, but there have been enough unflattering movies made about Muslims that the religious tempest is simply not making my radar.

Aww, Wolverine, it’s good to see you.

X-Men: The Last Stand (May 26): Notice how they’ve dropped the “3″ from the movie title, as originally this was supposed to be the last of a trilogy, but the new buzz claims they’re not done with this franchise yet. I wish they would have stuck to the trilogy idea. It’s easier to make good movies when you know you’ve got a finite set to work with, and I’m afraid they’re going to sacrifice quality for quantity in the end.

This is the first X-Men movie with new director Brett Ratner, enemy of fanboys everywhere, and that might not be a good sign. I’m going to withhold judgement until I see the movie, but for now, you have to admit they’ve at least done a stunning job with the ad campaign.

I know nothing of the comics, so I’m unfamiliar with Pheonix, but I’m looking forward to seeing how they weave her into the story. The positive thing about the previous two X-Men movies is that they’ve managed to balance the special effects with a story, so I hope Ratner doesn’t go all Chris Columbus on us. If I wanted to see a special effects extravaganza, I’d watch one of the Star Wars prequels.

Cars (June 9): I have not the words to express how much I loved The Incredibles, although I did make a feeble attempt. Really, Pixar hasn’t gone wrong yet, so Cars is a safe bet to be full of punny goodness.

The “all-star cast” is too tiny to see.

A Prairie Home Companion (June 9): I like the idea of PHC, but I have to admit, to myself and to the Internet, that part of the draw here is Lindsay Lohan, who I have a fondness for because I loved, loved, loved her in the remake of The Parent Trap, where she was just too cute for words. It makes me sad to see her headlining Defamer, and not in a good way. (As if there were a good way to headline Defamer.) It doesn’t hurt that I’m a fan of Robert Altman’s previous work either, or that I generally expect a Garrison Keiller project to be enjoyable, and to come equipped with a nice flair, too.

The Devil Wears Prada (June 30): I know I go on and on (and on and on) about how much I loathed the book. I did loathe the book. If I had to choose between using a copy of that book or the heel of my shoe to kill a cockroach, I’d choose the book with no qualms or regrets.

However. It might actually make a good movie, given the right casting and the right direction. The casting part they appear to have down; I have no doubt Meryl Streep will make an amazing Miranda Priestly, and Anne Hathaway (who is in my good books for being a cute little starlet who has yet to grace the Defamer servers and who was even content to sit back and let her Brokeback Mountain costars get all the accolades for the movie) may even be able to sell the insipid protagonist whose name I have blocked from my memory. (I think it’s been changed for the movie, which is no end of funny to me.)

If they do it right, the movie will provide the missing “show” part of the story. It will fill in the blanks and flesh out the characters. It will make me actually care what happens to these people. If they do it right.

But even if they do it right, do I want to go see a movie that might actually be entertaining and funny if it means adding to the coffers of that hack Lauren Weisberger?

Is this not the most beautiful film poster you’ve seen all year?

Superman Returns (June 30): Ah, the big one. Superman Returns. Y’all know about my teeny-tiny (read: all-consuming) love for Superman, right?

I have been excited about this movie since they finally fired Nicholas Cage. (His dramatic abilities aside, Nic Cage is not and never will be Clark Kent or Superman.) I don’t know if they’re going to do it right. If they don’t, I’ll probably be crushed, like the Tolkein fans who came out of The Two Towers complaining that the elves don’t show up at Helm’s Deep.

For me, there are two keys to a good Superman story: how they portray Lois Lane, and how they portray Clark Kent. Is Lois all hardcore and feminist, a journalist and nothing more? (No.) Is Clark a bumbling, incompetent dork? (No.) Does she have too much edge for it to be believable that Clark loves her? (She shouldn’t.) Is Clark the real person, or is Superman? (Clark.)

Kate Bosworth worries me. So does Brandon Routh, a little, because I’m afraid they cast him more for how perfectly he looks the part than for his acting abilities, but since I’ve never seen him in anything, I shouldn’t really say.

It doesn’t really matter though, because if I go to only one movie all summer, it’s going to be this one. I may come out of it raging, but I’ll go see it. It’s Superman. I simply couldn’t stay away.

On another note, it’s interesting to see how many September 11 movies are waiting in the wings this year: Giuliani Time, United 93, World Trade Center, and The Road to Guantanamo. I’m curious to see how they’ll be received, whether people will go to see them, and how many of them are going to get it right. (For the record, my money is NOT on World Trade Center.)

Post a comment

Name: (required)

Email Address: (will not be published) (required)

URL:

Comments: