Batman Begins, by Pissing on Batman
“…Every Line/ I live it, I write it with a pencil so n—gas die of lead poison if they bite it/ Hate it but recite it…” *
Due to the hurricane-inspired weather for the last month or so (as well as our staggering indebtedness), “Wifey” and I have been going to a lot of movies with our friends and family. I have seen recently, among other films, The Interpreter, Star Wars, The Longest Yard, Cinderella Man (which, although besides the point of this rant, is one of the best movies I have ever seen), Fantastic Four, and, most recently, Batman Begins. I’ve also seen long trailers for countless other movies, which, along with most of the aforementioned movies, has made me very depressed. Here’s why:
I don’t know exactly why, but it’s clear to me that the heart of moviemaking is gone. Maybe it’s because the almighty dollar is the only concern of today’s major studios. Maybe it’s because the common moviegoer is a freaking idiot, part of the repeating generation of idiots that M.C. Coppin has blogged about so passionately lately. Or, maybe it’s simply because it’s the summer, the time of the big blockbuster, where the major movie factories churn out movies concerned only about their rating, their length, and their release date, because they know most people are in a movie-going mood and will pay regardless of quality. I don’t know, and it’s beside the point. The point is that movies today have no point. Or, better put, today’s movies had a point – as in, they had a point back in 1975 when their idea was originally thought up.
Today’s movies are a waste of perfectly good film. They feature recycled plots on top of recycled plots, devoid of most of the feeling, passion, good editing, meaningful music, and ACTING that got all of us to be moviegoers in the first place. In other words, movies today have become rap music. This statement may puzzle many of you, since I like rap music but have been complaining about movies. The point I mean to make is that rap music is defined (and has always been defined) by borrowing the basic musical foundation of others’ music, adding in a more urban beat and feel, and adding the artist’s own lyrics as an imprimatur. It’s a genre based upon borrowing something and improving it, and personalizing it. The movies have always been the opposite. Movies have always been about originality – the originality of screenwriters, actors, directors, and producers, combined to produce a unique and original visual portrayal of the human experience. This has traditionally always been the case. While it’s not uncommon at all with rap music with a partially recycled “hook” or “sample” to be critically acclaimed, what’s the last movie remake to win an Oscar? Exactly.
In other words, the shit that is out in theaters today is the filmmaking equivalent of the “remix.” But, while we tolerate the latest P. Diddy jingle because it’s only four minutes long and our ladies like to dance to it (yeah, we get it, Diddy, you won’t stop. ‘Cause you can’t stop. We get it, bro), we should be getting fed up with Hollywood doing the same thing for two hours and charging us $10.00 for. Or, as Richard Roeper put it recently, we're so hard on movies because that 120 minutes of our life…that we’ll never get back. Fo’ rilla.
The goal of any good movie used to be to produce a catharsis, or a “cleansing of emotions.” In other words, the true sign of a good movie is that it runs the gamut – by the end of the film, you should have been moved to feel nearly every conceivable emotion the body can feel, leaving you feeling “cleansed,” or “empty,” or, at least, different by the time the movie is over. Today, though, the goal seems to be to have just enough one-liners, toilet humor, sex, slapstick comedy, and shock-value to get you to buy a ticket. If by the end of the movie, you feel like you’ve been raped by three prison inmates, they don’t care. So, maybe instead of the cinematic equivalent of the remix, it’s the cinematic equivalent of date rape. I haven’t yet figured that one out.
What I’m trying to say here is that instead of being creative, movies today follow what I have deemed “The Formula.” Whereas a director used to think of a movie as a person, a life-form that needed to be molded and tweaked and “raised,” much like you raise a child, today’s movies are thought of by directors as Coca-Cola. As long as you stick to “The Formula,” it’s enough to keep the public coming back for more.
Feel free to add or take away from this list, but to me, here are the essential elements and trends of “The Formula.” If this discussion so far has become too abstract for you, I have included a few examples.
1. The Remix Redux -- Today’s movies start out with a concept of something that’s already been done before, as opposed to an original idea. The Movie Biz has come full circle. While the point of movies used to be to make something creative, now the point is to make something fundamentally uncreative. The best example is the flood of movies this summer that are remakes or re-adaptations of previously-made movies or TV shows. Witness such abominations as Be-Bitched, The Longest Turd, The Dookies of Hazard, and Charlie and the Chocolate Shittery.
2. The Crack Epidemic – Related to #1, not only must the film be taken from something that has already been done several times, but it must be taken from the most refined, widely disseminated, and cheapest source. You see, first, we had movies that were adaptations of books, and plays. This was like putting cocaine in soda like they did in the 1920s. It was okay because at least you had the writer of the original getting a “say” in the final product – either because they were asked to help or their work served as a restraint on the director and the actors getting too out of hand. Furthermore, it at least required the screenwriters to read a book before working on a film. Then, we had movies that were loose adaptations of stories, legends, or characters in other films, or, at worse, comic books. This was at least tolerable, because, again, there were restraints on making the new product too cheesy and commercial, and going too far from the original fan base. This was like powder cocaine. It was by no means good for society, but for the most part not deadly, not too catchy, and too expensive to do all the time. But now, we don’t even have that. Now, we have every schmuck at every major studio making a movie out of a movie or TV show that we as a society have just got done watching. This is the movie-making equivalent of the crack epidemic. It’s cheap, addictive, and any idiot can make some. And it’s invading everyone’s neighborhood.
3. Movies for the MTV Watcher – In middle school, we learned that the average MTV show or video changed frames every 4 seconds, and based on my own experience, it’s even less than that now. Apparently, this strategy has made it on to the silver screen today. Today’s movies bounce from frame to frame, and, even worse, from scene to scene virtually without pause, like the whole thing is a friggin’ Charlie Chaplin short without the black-and-white introduction to every scene. Movies skip from one character’s scene to another without giving the audience any chance for reflection, meaningful thought, or even to process what happened in the scene before (Well, since I guess we’ve already seen the exact same movie ten years ago, we already know what’s going to happen, so why waste time, right?). And the worst part is, no one even cares! Don’t they know that movie producers are only doing this because some “bean counter” who spends his life in a closet has told them the target audience would like a one hour and forty-three minute movie more than a one-hour and forty-six minute movie, but the director doesn’t have the nuts to cut down a dumb scene? Watch Star Wars, Episode IV and then watch the latest Bore Wars and you’ll know what I’m talking about. You’ll see it also in comparing The Longest Yard to its newest remake, and even comparing American Pie to American Wedding.
4. Got Realism? -- Today’s movie-makers love to replace realism or, in the case of remakes of fantasy films, good acting, with cheap digital effects, corny jokes, or simply more characters than the original production. For instance, the decision by George Lucas to invest in getting Annakin Skywalker a mullet and a six-pack instead of getting acting lessons for him and Natalie Portman before the last installment of Star Wars. Was Annakin contemplating joining the dark side or was he just constipated? I couldn't tell.
5. Loved the Original? Now Watch us Piss on it! – I may catch a little heat for this one, but I thought this factor was the #1 reason which makes a movie like Batman Begins go from a potentially great movie to just a fairly good one. Now, I thought the idea for Begins was a pretty good one, but certain elements of the first ½ hour of the movie almost ruined the whole thing for me. First, the writers totally re-wrote why Bruce Wayne’s parents were killed and who did the killing, which totally ruined my ability to “suspend by disbelief” while watching the film. Secondly, and just as shittily, the writers ruined the “dark” aspect of the movie by making Bruce toe the line between straight vigilante and “vigilante with a conscience” throughout the whole film. Now, I won’t spoil the ending for you, but you have to admit there is a major problem with hyping how “dark” and “raw” a movie is, and then trying to make a character who’s just fanatical and bent-on-revenge-enough to become a serial vigilante who kicks the shit out of criminals without due process, but enough of a “nice guy” to not be as fanatical and bent-on-revenge as those other vigilantes out there. Now, don’t get me wrong, I thought that other aspects of the movie, like the acting of Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, and Michael Caine made the movie better than average, but the film kind of took a dump on the first Batman to make itself seem better. Batman did not start out as both a vigilante and a protector – he was a vigilante who eventually became a protector. But what do I know? Maybe in five years, when Teenage Mutant Ninja Batman comes out, we’ll find out that at sixteen Brucey liked to dress-up like a girl and screw single moms in the back of his pink Cadillac while practicing ju-jitsu in Mexico City during the summers, while Alfred danced in an all-male burlesque show while siphoning Bruce’s trust fund into off-shore accounts. It could happen.
I think the biggest problem is that today’s movies are ruining the “guilty pleasure” by making every movie a guilty pleasure. In the past, I could go see a Few Good Men or a Shawshank Redemption or an L.A. Confidential and then come home and pop on Driven or Dirty Work because I needed something light and stupid. Now, if I want to watch something intellectual, I have to [gasp!] read a book or, even worse, do something I’d never do – watch a period piece starring some wimpy prick with a foreign accent.
What’s the R.D.’s advice to get us out of this quandary? Skip The Craptastic Four, The Bad News Bores, and Be-Bitched and watch Cinderella Man five or six times. If Hollywood only cares about the almighty dollar, then let’s show them with our wallets what makes a great movie.
* = this song lyric is by Shyne, not B.I.G.
Due to the hurricane-inspired weather for the last month or so (as well as our staggering indebtedness), “Wifey” and I have been going to a lot of movies with our friends and family. I have seen recently, among other films, The Interpreter, Star Wars, The Longest Yard, Cinderella Man (which, although besides the point of this rant, is one of the best movies I have ever seen), Fantastic Four, and, most recently, Batman Begins. I’ve also seen long trailers for countless other movies, which, along with most of the aforementioned movies, has made me very depressed. Here’s why:
I don’t know exactly why, but it’s clear to me that the heart of moviemaking is gone. Maybe it’s because the almighty dollar is the only concern of today’s major studios. Maybe it’s because the common moviegoer is a freaking idiot, part of the repeating generation of idiots that M.C. Coppin has blogged about so passionately lately. Or, maybe it’s simply because it’s the summer, the time of the big blockbuster, where the major movie factories churn out movies concerned only about their rating, their length, and their release date, because they know most people are in a movie-going mood and will pay regardless of quality. I don’t know, and it’s beside the point. The point is that movies today have no point. Or, better put, today’s movies had a point – as in, they had a point back in 1975 when their idea was originally thought up.
Today’s movies are a waste of perfectly good film. They feature recycled plots on top of recycled plots, devoid of most of the feeling, passion, good editing, meaningful music, and ACTING that got all of us to be moviegoers in the first place. In other words, movies today have become rap music. This statement may puzzle many of you, since I like rap music but have been complaining about movies. The point I mean to make is that rap music is defined (and has always been defined) by borrowing the basic musical foundation of others’ music, adding in a more urban beat and feel, and adding the artist’s own lyrics as an imprimatur. It’s a genre based upon borrowing something and improving it, and personalizing it. The movies have always been the opposite. Movies have always been about originality – the originality of screenwriters, actors, directors, and producers, combined to produce a unique and original visual portrayal of the human experience. This has traditionally always been the case. While it’s not uncommon at all with rap music with a partially recycled “hook” or “sample” to be critically acclaimed, what’s the last movie remake to win an Oscar? Exactly.
In other words, the shit that is out in theaters today is the filmmaking equivalent of the “remix.” But, while we tolerate the latest P. Diddy jingle because it’s only four minutes long and our ladies like to dance to it (yeah, we get it, Diddy, you won’t stop. ‘Cause you can’t stop. We get it, bro), we should be getting fed up with Hollywood doing the same thing for two hours and charging us $10.00 for. Or, as Richard Roeper put it recently, we're so hard on movies because that 120 minutes of our life…that we’ll never get back. Fo’ rilla.
The goal of any good movie used to be to produce a catharsis, or a “cleansing of emotions.” In other words, the true sign of a good movie is that it runs the gamut – by the end of the film, you should have been moved to feel nearly every conceivable emotion the body can feel, leaving you feeling “cleansed,” or “empty,” or, at least, different by the time the movie is over. Today, though, the goal seems to be to have just enough one-liners, toilet humor, sex, slapstick comedy, and shock-value to get you to buy a ticket. If by the end of the movie, you feel like you’ve been raped by three prison inmates, they don’t care. So, maybe instead of the cinematic equivalent of the remix, it’s the cinematic equivalent of date rape. I haven’t yet figured that one out.
What I’m trying to say here is that instead of being creative, movies today follow what I have deemed “The Formula.” Whereas a director used to think of a movie as a person, a life-form that needed to be molded and tweaked and “raised,” much like you raise a child, today’s movies are thought of by directors as Coca-Cola. As long as you stick to “The Formula,” it’s enough to keep the public coming back for more.
Feel free to add or take away from this list, but to me, here are the essential elements and trends of “The Formula.” If this discussion so far has become too abstract for you, I have included a few examples.
1. The Remix Redux -- Today’s movies start out with a concept of something that’s already been done before, as opposed to an original idea. The Movie Biz has come full circle. While the point of movies used to be to make something creative, now the point is to make something fundamentally uncreative. The best example is the flood of movies this summer that are remakes or re-adaptations of previously-made movies or TV shows. Witness such abominations as Be-Bitched, The Longest Turd, The Dookies of Hazard, and Charlie and the Chocolate Shittery.
2. The Crack Epidemic – Related to #1, not only must the film be taken from something that has already been done several times, but it must be taken from the most refined, widely disseminated, and cheapest source. You see, first, we had movies that were adaptations of books, and plays. This was like putting cocaine in soda like they did in the 1920s. It was okay because at least you had the writer of the original getting a “say” in the final product – either because they were asked to help or their work served as a restraint on the director and the actors getting too out of hand. Furthermore, it at least required the screenwriters to read a book before working on a film. Then, we had movies that were loose adaptations of stories, legends, or characters in other films, or, at worse, comic books. This was at least tolerable, because, again, there were restraints on making the new product too cheesy and commercial, and going too far from the original fan base. This was like powder cocaine. It was by no means good for society, but for the most part not deadly, not too catchy, and too expensive to do all the time. But now, we don’t even have that. Now, we have every schmuck at every major studio making a movie out of a movie or TV show that we as a society have just got done watching. This is the movie-making equivalent of the crack epidemic. It’s cheap, addictive, and any idiot can make some. And it’s invading everyone’s neighborhood.
3. Movies for the MTV Watcher – In middle school, we learned that the average MTV show or video changed frames every 4 seconds, and based on my own experience, it’s even less than that now. Apparently, this strategy has made it on to the silver screen today. Today’s movies bounce from frame to frame, and, even worse, from scene to scene virtually without pause, like the whole thing is a friggin’ Charlie Chaplin short without the black-and-white introduction to every scene. Movies skip from one character’s scene to another without giving the audience any chance for reflection, meaningful thought, or even to process what happened in the scene before (Well, since I guess we’ve already seen the exact same movie ten years ago, we already know what’s going to happen, so why waste time, right?). And the worst part is, no one even cares! Don’t they know that movie producers are only doing this because some “bean counter” who spends his life in a closet has told them the target audience would like a one hour and forty-three minute movie more than a one-hour and forty-six minute movie, but the director doesn’t have the nuts to cut down a dumb scene? Watch Star Wars, Episode IV and then watch the latest Bore Wars and you’ll know what I’m talking about. You’ll see it also in comparing The Longest Yard to its newest remake, and even comparing American Pie to American Wedding.
4. Got Realism? -- Today’s movie-makers love to replace realism or, in the case of remakes of fantasy films, good acting, with cheap digital effects, corny jokes, or simply more characters than the original production. For instance, the decision by George Lucas to invest in getting Annakin Skywalker a mullet and a six-pack instead of getting acting lessons for him and Natalie Portman before the last installment of Star Wars. Was Annakin contemplating joining the dark side or was he just constipated? I couldn't tell.
5. Loved the Original? Now Watch us Piss on it! – I may catch a little heat for this one, but I thought this factor was the #1 reason which makes a movie like Batman Begins go from a potentially great movie to just a fairly good one. Now, I thought the idea for Begins was a pretty good one, but certain elements of the first ½ hour of the movie almost ruined the whole thing for me. First, the writers totally re-wrote why Bruce Wayne’s parents were killed and who did the killing, which totally ruined my ability to “suspend by disbelief” while watching the film. Secondly, and just as shittily, the writers ruined the “dark” aspect of the movie by making Bruce toe the line between straight vigilante and “vigilante with a conscience” throughout the whole film. Now, I won’t spoil the ending for you, but you have to admit there is a major problem with hyping how “dark” and “raw” a movie is, and then trying to make a character who’s just fanatical and bent-on-revenge-enough to become a serial vigilante who kicks the shit out of criminals without due process, but enough of a “nice guy” to not be as fanatical and bent-on-revenge as those other vigilantes out there. Now, don’t get me wrong, I thought that other aspects of the movie, like the acting of Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, and Michael Caine made the movie better than average, but the film kind of took a dump on the first Batman to make itself seem better. Batman did not start out as both a vigilante and a protector – he was a vigilante who eventually became a protector. But what do I know? Maybe in five years, when Teenage Mutant Ninja Batman comes out, we’ll find out that at sixteen Brucey liked to dress-up like a girl and screw single moms in the back of his pink Cadillac while practicing ju-jitsu in Mexico City during the summers, while Alfred danced in an all-male burlesque show while siphoning Bruce’s trust fund into off-shore accounts. It could happen.
I think the biggest problem is that today’s movies are ruining the “guilty pleasure” by making every movie a guilty pleasure. In the past, I could go see a Few Good Men or a Shawshank Redemption or an L.A. Confidential and then come home and pop on Driven or Dirty Work because I needed something light and stupid. Now, if I want to watch something intellectual, I have to [gasp!] read a book or, even worse, do something I’d never do – watch a period piece starring some wimpy prick with a foreign accent.
What’s the R.D.’s advice to get us out of this quandary? Skip The Craptastic Four, The Bad News Bores, and Be-Bitched and watch Cinderella Man five or six times. If Hollywood only cares about the almighty dollar, then let’s show them with our wallets what makes a great movie.
* = this song lyric is by Shyne, not B.I.G.
posted by TheRealDookie | 9:30 PM
2 Comments:
Here Here!!!! TF's for Mike. I agree. Ras' Al Ghoul did not "create" or "train" Batman. He was a self motivated, vindicitve, hate filled, ass kicker. He openly persued all who would train him in all pa2rts of the world. Not lock himslef in a chinese prsion camp only to train with Rob Roy, what a freaking joke.
But the movie was very well made and 90% well acted, with many good scenes. I say 90% casue Katie Holmes was to busy taking Tom Cruises weiner out of her mouth to say a intelligable line.
If you ignore the orgins scenes, the movie was great.
Oh God! Katie Holmes was terrible! I kept waiting for her to take out a lollipop and start doing aerobics in the middle of her "dramatic" scenes! I mean, life isn't fair. Much like you can't cast Al Bundy as the President of the United States, you can't cast a Dawson's Creek star in a self-respecting Batman movie. But in this case, it's not even close to unfair because I saw better acting in Team America: World Police than I saw out of Katie Holmes in "Begins."
I'm glad you brought that up, because I was going to mention it but felt it was a little off the point of the post.
Just another thing that made a potentially great movie just good. But, considering the crap that's out there this summer, I may have to alter my expectations.
Post a Comment
<< Home