Restore the Balance (you impotent, self-indulgent little stain of a person)

Car commercials are getting a lot more aggressive lately. Used to be the worst was that Mistubishi ad with the creepy woman in the beret pop-locking in somebody’s passenger seat like she was having an event. Now it’s hard to watch commercial TV for too long without feeling like you’ve been assaulted.

VW has been all up in everybody’s business, either trying to charm you into buying a Rabbit, scare you into buying a Jetta, or shame you into buying a Passat. The ads for the Rabbit, like the car, would be completely unremarkable and forgettable except for that damn song which grabs on like one of those Wrath of Khan worms. VOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLKSWAAAAAAGEN!

Then those Jetta ads, which don’t seem to be working as hard to sell you cars as they are to freak your shit out. People driving along having some dull conversation so you think it’s an ad for wine coolers or something then BAM! they get T-boned. The ads always end with two people saying “Holy Shit!” — the one in the ad, and me.

Then of course there’s the Passat ads, about “Low Ego Emissions.” I’ve gotta admit I kind of like the concept behind those. And you’ve got to like any series of ads that has a Nemesis. Not long after the Passat ads started, Hummer launched these:

This one also got a “Holy Shit!” out of me. The version posted there on YouTube is the one that’s running now, the one after somebody must have complained. The version I saw ended not with “Restore the Balance” but the real message of the campaign: “Restore Your Manhood.” The other ad in the series is a woman who gets pissed off when a rude woman cuts in front of her son on the playground, and her only recourse is to go out and buy a gas-guzzling Hummer. (She doesn’t even head back to drive the Hummer over the woman’s child, which would’ve at least made some sense).

Before I get lumped in with the “ecofeminist” who posted the YouTube video, and the other tofu defenders complaining about the ad, let me make one thing clear: it’s not the whole “you got to stop being such a damn pussy and start eating steak and drivin’ a big-ass truck and GIT-R-DONE!” that bugs me.

I mean, it’s stupid as hell, but nothing to get all upset on the internets about. Advertisers have been pulling this kind of nonsense for years, trying to grab guys by the short hairs and point and laugh at their flaccidity until they spend money on their whatever. There were a few months at EA where every morning on my way into work I had to walk under a ginormous screen showing an ad mocking guys for being impotent pussies until they bought a copy of Madden or Fight Night or whatever.

But that’s marketing; that’s what they do. There’s some parable that keeps getting trotted out about a scorpion giving a ride to a field mouse or a racoon or something. I forget the details, but it ends with the scorpion killing its passenger and when the passenger asks why he just says “I’m a scorpion” and the moral is that it’s pointless to get angry at a person for being true to his nature. Same goes for ad people: humilating you or flattering you into buying something is their purpose in life. There’s no point in getting all indignant about it.

And that’s why the Hummer ads have me baffled. Being honest is antithetical to what these people do — and if we are going to start seeing truth in advertising from anyone, it’s going to be Hummer?

But with these ads, they’re calling out their core market exactly for what they are — impotent turds with more financial worth than self-worth. They’re coming right out and saying, “You are so hopelessly insecure that even the most mundane of life’s setbacks send you reeling into an impotent rage for which the only solution is to immediately buy a ridiculously oversized, impractical, environment-destroying vehicle that should never have been released to the mass market.” In other words, the exact same message as this parody ad, but for reals.

If other advertisers decide to follow Hummer’s lead and start telling it like it is, I just have one urgent request: please, please, please, stay true to advertising convention and keep urine and menstrual fluid a bright royal blue.

Vast Wasteland

see also: Piven, JeremyIt’s counter-intuitive, but having a TiVo encourages a healthier relationship with the television box. You’re always hearing from TiVotees who go on about how they watch less TV than they did before they got one, but now I’ve got proof. Over the past month I’ve been subjected to more TV at my parents’ house and on airplanes and in hotel rooms than I’ve watched in the past four years.

The first thing that becomes obvious is that so much of TV is absolute crap. There’s a whole section of my TiVo subscription list that I always thought of as guilty pleasures, but now I can watch completely guilt-free. Because now I’ve seen what’s out there, and it’s worse. And what’s worse, I’ve been having to see it Clockwork Orange-style, unable to turn the channel but still instinctively reaching for the rewind, fast-forward and skip buttons like some kind of a phantom limb.

Or worse, stuck on a plane with a huge projection of Jeremy Piven all up in my face for an hour during turbulence.

Jeremy Piven’s Journey of a Lifetime
Also known as Jeremy Piven is an Enormous Douche. I’ve got no idea how something this loathsome made it to the normally-innocuous Travel Channel; I’m guessing there weren’t enough sexxxy spring break girls in it to make the cut for E! The premise is that inexplicably well-known supporting actor Piven makes a spiritual pilgrimage to India with a camera crew and a book about yoga he picked up while in LA.

One of the remarkable things about this show is that it manages to make egomaniac Anthony Bourdain seem low-key and selfless. Hell, he makes Richard Gere seem well-adjusted. We get shot after shot of Mr. Piven doing yoga here, talking to a swami there, feeling visibly moved by the plight of a child over there before being driven back to his luxury spa here. The key theme isn’t so much “India” or “East Asia” but “get this guy on-screen as much as possible.” It’s not filmed like a travel documentary but a campaign ad. Although I’m not sure what office he could be running for other than Arch-Douche of Doucheland.

And all the while he keeps bowing and saying “Namaste” in that insufferably pompous nasal whine. I like to think that the typical shooting schedule for the “documentary” consisted of 10 minutes getting footage of him shouting “look at me” during some deeply significant ceremony, followed by 20 minutes of the camera crew just beating him repeatedly.

Bones
I’m sure she’s a fine actress and all, but Emily Deschanel has that weird Cro-Magnon thing going on. I’m just sayin’. It was surprising, is all, because Zooey’s hot.

But the show is stone dumb, even for Fox. Read the character names and descriptions on that Wikipedia site, for starters: “Temperance Brennan” and “Seeley Booth” are your heroes. Take that petri dish of stupidity and add the desire to one-up CSI at every level, and you end up with forensic pathologists at the Smithsonian who have holographic technology straight out of Aeon Flux.

Plus it has a message: the one I saw was about a murdered prostitute addicted to plastic surgery and Dr. Temperance Brennan lamenting about people so convinced they’re ugly that they willingly give up their individuality. Which is a good, albeit preachy, point, although the whole time she was talking I couldn’t stop staring at her protruding brow ridge.

The Closer
This one isn’t so bad, actually; it’s your typical old-school hour-long crime show. I just wish somebody would give Emmy Award Nominee Kyra Sedgwick a dialect coach. One of the things about her character (who’s pretty much completely unlikable and annoying) is that she’s supposed to be from Atlanta. Nobody from Atlanta talks like that, not even on “Designing Women.”

Grey’s Anatomy
I only caught a few minutes of this one, and I don’t get it. I keep hearing about what a huge hit it is, and I guess I assumed it was a show about a hospital. From what I could tell it’s a show about self-obsessed average-looking women who wanted to have sex with equally average-looking guys. Maybe it’s got some subtleties I just didn’t pick up on.

Kenneth Copeland’s Believer’s Voice of Victory
I’ve seen three sermons/infomercials by this guy, and the recurring theme of each wasn’t so much faith and belief or even Christianity, but “Praise Jesus I’ve got so much money.” He talks about his boats and his planes and his big houses and his big cars and how all of us could have as much money as he does if we just have faith. And tax-exempt status, I’m assuming.

There are plenty of televangelists out there a lot more toxic — as far as I’m aware, Kenneth Copeland hasn’t blamed 9/11 on the liberals or said “nyah, nyah” to a stroke victim. I was just surprised by the rhetoric of the Copelands, having grown up watching Jim & Tammy Faye Bakker (yes, really) reveling in their wealth and excess and seeing how that whole thing played out.

Decompression

The day after crunch mode ends on a project is like a bullet train hitting a concrete mammoth. “Brick wall” seemed too mundane. You’d think I’d be used to it by now, instead of finding myself sitting in a hotel room with nothing to do and too bored even to nap.

There’s still plenty to do, of course, but the key point is that I didn’t have to do anything today. I’m torn between halfway feeling guilty about goofing off today and then realizing that I don’t feel guilty about goofing off today and feeling guilty about that. Luckily things will get crazy busy again within a couple of days, and all that nonsense will stop.

I ended up going to Hollywood Boulevard to see Pirates of the Caribbean at The The El Capitan Theater. A while ago I complained about the El Capitan having too much of the Disney Regimented Whimsy vibe going on. That was a perfect example of what happens when Disney goes horribly awry; today was a great example of what happens when Disney gets it right.

The theater has piratey stuff over the sign, all through the lobby, and in the balcony. In the basement there’s a museum with props and costumes from the movie. If you pre-ordered your ticket, you got a bucket of popcorn and soda included (the tickets are ridiculously expensive, but a) that’s Disney, and 2) it was worth it). They had the organist going as usual, which is always cool; a drawing for tickets to Disneyland; and before the show started they did a flaming pirate skull/dungeon effect behind the screen, which was really well-done and great for getting geared up for the movie. It was pretty much exactly the promise of the theater — the Disney thing combined with the Great Movie House thing.

As for the movie itself: not bad. I’d been reading reviews panning it, and hearing people say they didn’t like it, but I don’t think it deserves the negativity. As far as movie-trilogy-franchise-building goes, it was suitably entertaining. And it worked all right as a movie in spite of being the Jan Brady of the trilogy — unlike The Two Towers (a better movie), Pirates had an arc to it.

What it needed was an editor. And a few more script revisions. In the first, stuff happened because it kind of made sense to happen. It was still as formulaic as a big Disney action franchise requires, but there was motivation for everything. The second just seems as if they threw everything they could think of up on the screen. I’m sure there was a thread through the whole thing that made it vaguely story-like, and I’ll bet that it was explained in one of the hundreds of lines of dialogue I couldn’t comprehend at all. Plus the thing could’ve stood to lose an hour or so.

Speaking of bad editing and meandering purposelessness, here’s a video I made from Hollywood Boulevard. I got myself a video camera for my birthday and was playing around with it and iMovie. But if you’re into that kind of thing, the internet makes it possible. Let me reiterate that this is a home movie, so don’t watch it expecting something interesting to happen.

Blur

SLEEP!Hard to believe I’ve been in LA for a week already. On one level it feels like it’s just been a day or two. On another level, it feels like I’ve been here for months. That would be a side effect of the wicked crazy crunch we’ve been in. Any notion that I’m no longer working in videogames is belied by the fact that I’m up until the oui hours (as in, “oui, je suis très fatigué”) and seeing nothing more than the office and my hotel room.

I was playing around with the MacBook’s webcam and even after four tries, I couldn’t stifle a yawn before the picture went off. I think that says it better than anything else.

Things will get back to normal at some point, I’m certain.

In other news, the pilot for the Amazing Screw-On Head TV series is watchable online at SciFi.com. I haven’t been able to watch it yet, both for lack of time and because of the hotel’s lousy internet connection. Someone watch it and tell me how it is.

Also, my favorite song at the moment is “We Run This” by Missy Elliott.

I Have Opinions About Things

I don't know why you got to be so judgement just cuz I believe in science.One of the advantages to spending so much time in waiting rooms and on planes (all right, the only advantage) is that it gives me a chance to get caught up on my readin’ and watchin’. And now, bloggin’.

Nacho Libre
I’m baffled as to why this one is getting walloped in the reviews. It’s not a great movie by any stretch, but it does deliver exactly what it advertises: Jack Black doing his usual schtick, with a cheesy Mexican accent in a movie about luchadores by the guy who made Napoleon Dynamite. I thought the movie was fine — not brilliant, but pretty funny throughout — and I don’t even like Jack Black. It’s got his prancing around, and his poop jokes (but the fart jokes, I like), and it’s got Jared Hess’ poor-man’s-Wes-Anderson thing going on, but as far as lightweight forgettable comedies go, I don’t see what’s not to like about it.

Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell
I’ve had this one for a year but was scared to read it what with its being so long and all. I ended up flying right through it; it’s a great book. I’ve seen reviews that describe it as “Harry Potter for adults,” but I suspect that insults both the authors as well as their audiences. They’re only comparable in that they’re British and they’re about magicians.

Jonathan Strange perfectly conveys the feel of a novel written in England at the beginning of the 1800s, without resorting to too many obvious cliches like mimicking Charles Dickens’ or Jane Austen’s style, or an overabundance of “M_____” names. All the characters are believable (if somewhat anachronistic), and even the villains are sympathetic. And as one of the back-cover reviews says, it really does leave you convinced that there’s a real history of magic in England that none of us knew about.

Even when I wasn’t reading the book, I was eager to get back to it and frequently dreamt about the characters. And I couldn’t stop thinking about how to adapt it into a screenplay. So it was definitely compelling. The book does peter out a little bit towards the end, but it is a satisfying ending even if it’s more anti-climactic than I would’ve liked.

Hogfather
I started reading this book and then stopped and then picked it up again and I finished it. I suspect I’m getting burnt out on Discworld, because this one didn’t do a whole lot for me. I didn’t dislike it, but it was kind of the paperback fantasy book equivalent of celery. I feel completely unchanged as a person after having read it.

A Short History of Nearly Everything
This one is frustrating. It’s very well written — the language is clear throughout, it flows naturally from one topic to the next, and you’re never feeling left behind. But it always stops frustratingly short of what you really want to know. In the introduction to the book, Bryson explains that he wrote the book because of two major failings of science textbooks: they’re cold, dry, and impersonal; and they never explain how scientists arrived at the discoveries they made. Bryson nails the first part; he goes into the scientists’ personal histories and puts a human face on every discovery. But he fails completely at the second; I still have no better idea how these ideas and principles work than I did when I started reading.

For example, he describes how Ernest Rutherford used the half-life of radioactive materials to calculate the age of a sample and from that, estimate the age of the earth: “By calculating backwards from how much radiation a material had now and how swiftly it was decaying, you could work out its age. He tested a piece of pitchblende and found it to be 700 million years old — very much older than the age most people were prepared to grant the Earth.” Okay, Bill, but how? How did he know the size of the original sample? I can’t shake the feeling that there’s some obvious insight I’m missing, which is definitely not how the reader should be left feeling from a lightweight, accessible overview-of-science book.

And he keeps doing that. We hear about Max Planck’s career and how he developed quantum mechanics, but we never learn what quantum mechanics is. We hear about Albert Einstein and get a little bit of an explanation of the theory of relativity (space is like a rubber mattress with balls on it) but then we’re told that nobody really understands it, so we’re left to assume there’s no point in trying to explain it.

Plus, I’m only just over 100 pages into the book, and he’s already described about a dozen people as the greatest genius who ever lived. I’m starting to get the impression that Bryson doesn’t understand the stuff himself, and he’s trying to cover everything up. It’s possible that I’m just not the target audience for the book, and it’s meant for more general audiences who just want an overview instead of a more detailed summation. But it just leaves me with the same feelings of frustration that Bryson describes in his introduction. I really wanted somebody to explain quantum mechanics and relativity and carbon dating and how they know the age of the earth to me so I could understand it, for once.

The Odyssey
I admit I just started to read this one because of the references in “Lost.” I’m starting to remember that we had to read it in high school, and I couldn’t follow it then, either.

Go Team Venture!

Dr. Girlfriend“The Venture Brothers” is definitely the best show on [adult swim], and if it weren’t for “Lost,” it’d be the best show on TV right now. I got the Season One DVDs when I was down in Georgia, and I’ve finally gotten around to watching the extra features.

The extra features aren’t enough to buy the DVD on their own, but it’s a great touch they went out of their way to include them. (Besides, the episodes are so good I’d’ve bought the set without any extras). There are interviews with the cast of the “live action movie,” and a special making-of segment. I haven’t listened to the commentary tracks yet. The best special feature is the totally bad-ass slipcase art by Bill Sienkiewicz.

The new season starts Sunday, June 25th, and adultswim.com has been running teasers for a sneak preview available online tomorrow (Friday). If you want to get as excited as I am, you can check out Jackson Publick’s blog and this fansite for the show.

It was from one of those blogs I heard about J.G. Thirlwell, who does the music for the show and records under the name “Foetus.” His album Ectopia (recorded as “Steroid Maximus”) is pretty damn cool. A few years ago I got Music for Imaginary Films by Arling & Cameron, and while I liked the concept, the music itself was predictable and dull. Ectopia delivers on the concept and is better in every conceivable way.

Top 10 Signs That Superman in “Superman Returns” Might Be Gay

Super Pals
BBC News: Superman ‘not gay’ says director

Defamer.com’s painful beating-the-joke-into-the-ground

10. Wears blue tights, red cape, boots, and codpiece.

9. Flies around Earth at super-speed, turns back time long enough to deliver snappier comeback to Lex Luthor than earlier “Oh no you didn’t, bitch!”

8. Starts a weblog.

7. Outfits Fortress of Solitude with hot tub, private gym, and ironic 50s and 60s ephemera.

6. Dresses dog in matching costume.

5. Giggles uncontrollably at sexual innuendo.

4. Won’t stop quoting Bring it On.

3. Clark Kent requests transfer from news desk to gossip column.

2. Admits true weakness is not Kryptonite, but the Bravo channel.

1. Reveals that time away from Earth was spent writing a poignant, wry, and bittersweet memoir of his experiences coming to terms with a world that doesn’t understand him.

I’m the Juggernaut, bitch!

Do you know who he is?This week’s summer blockbuster movie was X-Men 3: The Last Stand. I’ll give it this much: it could have been worse. Much worse.

Actually, as far as summer action movies based on comic books go, it wasn’t all that bad. If I were the grading type, I’d give it a solid B. The problem, of course, is that it’s following two other X-Men movies, one which was surprisingly good and another which was awesome. No surprises there; people have been comparing it unfavorably to the first two ever since it was announced that Bryan Singer wasn’t directing it. I’d been trying to keep an open mind about it, mostly because I just hate to see anybody getting dogpiled as much as Brett Ratner was.

After seeing the movie, I still don’t think he deserves as much hate as internet geekdom has been laying on him. But it’s plenty clear that this is Commercial Entertainment Product, meant to close out a franchise and make the producers and actors their money; if you’re looking for art in a comic book movie, I guess you’ll have to wait for Superman Returns.

There’s a lot of characters in this one, so we gotta start with the standard comic book roll call:

  • Storm: controls the weather, uses shrill complaining and Academy Award to magnify screen time
  • Wolverine: healing factor, invulnerable adamantium skeleton, claws, mutant patience power while biding time until own movie franchise
  • Iceman: can freeze moisture, has a girlfriend
  • Kitty Pryde: steals boyfriends and spotlight, can phase through solid objects while still maintaining physical form
  • Rogue: absorbs other mutants’ powers, can phase into pointless subplot while still maintaining top billing
  • Beast: super-intelligence and dexterity, blue fur, can bend laws of space and time to negate cameo appearance in previous movie
  • Jean Grey: level five psychic abilities, can levitate rocks and leaves and cause people to disintegrate, can spend entire movie sitting, lying down, or standing still
  • Cyclops: misses Jean, cries
  • Colossus: super-strength, forms invulnerable metal shell, transforms from bit character to main team member without developing any detectable character or personality
  • Professor Charles Xavier: telepathy, telekinesis, remarkable de-aging make-up ability so you’d never believe he wasn’t 20 years younger in the opening, turns out to be kind of a dick
  • Angel: fey, has wings, really cool introduction scene, powers over ham-handed allegory
  • Magneto: destroys bridges, devours scenery
  • Mystique: can kill people with her legs because that never gets old, takes the form of any person except for one of the most beautiful women on the face of the planet
  • Callisto: super-speed, can detect mutants, has sass and attitude
  • Juggernaut: he’s the Juggernaut, bitch!

I was distracted through the whole thing, because I was trying to place what the movie reminded me of. Kind of like when you taste something “off” and keep eating it until you figure out exactly what it is that’s wrong.

Part of it was that it seemed like nobody involved really wanted to be there (except for Ian McKellen, who seems to be willing to do anything for any project anywhere). It seems like Halle Berry pitched a fit until she was the star, and then didn’t know what to do with it when she got it. Some of the “leads” get less screen time than the kids from Jurassic Park got in Jurassic Park 2. And the movie does go on a killing spree with some pretty significant characters; if it were handled correctly, it would’ve at least worked for shock value, but here it just seems like actors wanting to get out of their obligations as quickly as possible.

Part of it was that it seemed like a Marvel movie, when the other big Marvel movies (Daredevil and Elektra excepted) somehow managed to escape that. In the comics, I was always a fan of DC and never liked anything Marvel put out. DC had built a modern mythology, with a stable of iconic characters fighting supervillains in an alternate universe with cities like Metropolis and Gotham and Central City. Marvel had neurotic anti-heroes living around New York, pandering to teenagers with cheesy stories that pretended to relate to the real world. In reality, the two companies put out equal parts crap and good stuff, and neither’s really any more noble than the other. But as far as corporate vision and public perception go, DC was the fun and imaginative one, while Marvel was the lowbrow cousin too preoccupied with “keeping it real.”

In the movies, that somehow got reversed. Every movie based on a DC property, since Superman II has been mediocre to awful. But with X-Men and Spider-man, all of a sudden Marvel was putting out really cool movies based on characters I cared nothing about. Even the Marvel flickering comic book pages logo was cool; finally, in movies, they “got it.” (While Batman Returns tried to be darker and more realistic; go figure.) But X-Men 3 reminded me of reading a Marvel comic book — not completely awful, but completely forgettable, with completely slapdash plotting, forsaking character development for the next action scene, and a heavy-handed, clumsy attempt to relate everything to a Real World Issue.

The Real World Issue in this one, by the way, is the serum that will “cure” mutants, with Halle Berry giving clumsy speeches about how mutants don’t need to be cured. Somehow this version of X-Men has even more of teh ghey than the ones Bryan Singer made. But as blatant and clumsy as it is, none of it really sticks because it just seems crammed in there in a desperate attempt to make everything “relevant.” The comparisons between Magneto/Malcolm X and Professor Xavier/MLK Jr. are just as blatant.

The other thing that bugged me was that the whole thing felt like a fan movie. Everything looked cheap and poorly done, from the sets to the props to the costumes. Especially everybody’s hair, and I’m not usually the type who notices stuff like that. The CGI was competent but completely uninspired; it was like some CG firm down in LA had been itching to blow up the Golden Gate Bridge ever since they saw the trailers for Deep Impact and The Day After Tomorrow, so they put it in the script even though it made no sense. I’d had somewhat high hopes, because the opening scene is set in the 70s and looks perfect for a 70s suburban house — the clothes, the hair, the furniture, everything. But judging from the bland cheapness of everything else, they apparently blew their entire artistic and creative wad trying to recreate a set from “That 70’s Show.”

And like a fan movie, it was all slap-dash plotting based more on stream-of-consciousness fan fiction than telling a real story. It doesn’t hold together, it turns up the extremes too much, it relies too much on gimmicks and cheap thrills. The great thing about the first X-Men movie was that it was based on the premise, “what would it really be like to suddenly find yourself with mutant powers?” X-Men 3 seems to be based on the premise, “wouldn’t it be like totally bad-ass if Phoenix could make people disintegrate and then Iceman and Pyro got in a battle to the death and Wolverine fought a Sentinel and Magneto destroyed the Golden Gate Bridge?”

The funny thing is that it would be pretty bad-ass to see a lot of this stuff, which is what keeps the movie from being a total disappointment. Without any pacing, flow, character development, suspense, or meaning to it, though, it just all jumbles together and then disappears. The first two movies had at least one total “oh hell yeah!” moment each — for me, it was when Wolverine accidentally stabs Rogue in the first, and when Nightcrawler saves Rogue after getting sucked out of the plane in the second. For all its noise and explosions and attempts at big blockbuster moments, X-Men 3 has nothing approaching the impact of those scenes.

Except, of course, for Juggernaut’s catch-phrase, which is stupid enough to be classic. And Angel’s introductory scene was pretty damn cool, as creepy as Rogue’s from the first movie. But unlike Rogue in the first movie, Angel never had any kind of character development, so he was relegated to silent pointlessness and the aforementioned ham-handed allegory — he might as well have been a unicorn.

It still seems a little unfair to criticize the movie for not being as good as the first two, especially since X-Men had its own share of clunky moments. But the first two did a remarkable job of reminding us what is possible with a “comic book movie,” after a long drought since Superman and Superman II. Maybe it’s exaggeration or naivete, but I had the feeling after the X-Men and Spider-man movies, that we were crossing some kind of nerd/normal barrier. We’d finally see movies with stories as imaginative as comic book stories, where creators weren’t afraid of looking uncool or too low-brow for doing stories about super-heroes. And we’d get a real pop mythology going, made by people who knew what they were doing. X-Men 3 isn’t a god-awful movie, but it’s just another forgettable summer action movie, and that’s all.

Who knew blasphemy could be so dull?

So I.M. Pei was a Templar?Even though I was warned against it on this very weblog, I still went to see The DaVinci Code Wednesday night. Whoo! Somebody light a match! I didn’t expect it to be good, but I didn’t expect it to be the cinematic equivalent of lying under the chair of a guy who’s delivering a two-and-a-half-hour-long, post-three-bean-and-cheese-burrito fart.

They should’ve… no, wait. That would be going too far. But then again, it was bad enough that I think it’s warranted: they should’ve called it The DaStinky Code. Yeah, I said it.

Roger Ebert’s review says “The movie works; it’s involving, intriguing and constantly seems on the edge of startling revelations.” Which is more confounding than anything presented in the movie — how can he say the movie “works” when it’s always on the edge of being interesting, but never crossing over?

I’ll concede that there are elements that, if given more work, could be used to make either a predictable but passable thriller, or a pretty interesting History Channel documentary. Knights Templar are always good, and everybody loves a good multi-national secret organization. I’ll even admit that a deranged, fanatical albino monk, if he weren’t portrayed as a completely impotent moron, might make a good secondary villain.

But it’s like this movie didn’t even try to make a good story. I’m giving Ron Howard the benefit of the doubt, assuming that he was trying too hard to be faithful to a dumb book. Because the problems with the movie are so obvious I can’t imagine why nobody did anything to fix them. The movie is:

Pandering. You’re never given one second to figure anything out on your own; some character always rushes in to explain exactly what you just saw. When a character isn’t available, helpful CGI effects point the way — it’s a triangle, that looks like a womb… GET IT?

Muddled. It’s never clear who planted what clues and when. As Mac asked when we were leaving, “So wait… I.M. Pei was a Templar?” For all the exposition we subjected to, we’re still never given even a rudimentary timeline — who was supposed to be writing these riddles? Why would a French guy, leaving clues for his French granddaughter, use English riddles and “APPLE” instead of “POMME?”

Stone dull. About nine hours into Ian McKellan’s Flash presentation on The Last Supper (the one he keeps ready down in the basement in case any wanted criminals show up with questions), crazy albino monk jumps out of nowhere and attacks him. Ostensibly, this was to stop our heroes from uncovering the secret, but I say he was just thinking, “For the love of Christ will you stop with the exposition already!”

Stupid. As pandering and dull and exposition-heavy as the movie is, there are still plenty of places where they figured the audiences would still be too dense to be able to follow along, so they had to dumb it down for us. Again, as Mac pointed out: Tom Hanks’ character is introduced as a Professor of “symbology,” because apparently Harvard University isn’t familiar with the term “semiotics.”

Implausible. Which would be okay if it were exciting. National Treasure, the Bruckheimer “let’s be secular so as not to piss anyone off” attempt to capitalize on the craze around The DaVinci Code book, was a really stupid movie. But it at least was a decent action/thriller, so you suspend disbelief and let things slide so they can tell their story. And still its clues and plot points were better and made more dramatic sense than The DaVinci Code‘s.

For starters, we’re supposed to believe that an old man who’s just been shot in the gut is able to go around leaving a series of complicated clues for his estranged granddaughter? No. And even if I were feeling charitable and were willing to give the movie that one so it can get things going, it’s still a movie. Show him, gut shot bleeding profusely, staggering around the Louvre, thinking up anagrams, writing them on priceless paintings, hiding keys, then stripping naked, writing more needlessly cryptic anagrams and numeric sequences on the floor in his own blood, then lying down and drawing a pentagram on himself. Preferably, to the tune of “Yakety Sax.” Show, don’t tell. Or, in the case of this movie, show, don’t smell. Yeah, I said it again.

Insulting. One of those anagrams, if I’m remembering it right, was for “LEONARDO DAVINCI THE MONA LISA.” Which is good, because people standing in the Louvre aren’t going to pick up on your clue if you just said “Mona Lisa.” (All the promotional stuff around the book has pictures of the Mona Lisa, which always implied to me some ancient mystery revealed in the painting — nope, turns out it’s a message written, in English, on the painting). But maybe grandpa knew he had to be explicit, on account of Sophie’s learning disability. For a story whose central conceit is the idea of evil men in the Catholic Church concealing a secret for millennia in order to preserve their oppressive patriarchy, you’d think the one woman in the story wouldn’t be such a simpleton. She spends the entire movie having things explained to her. Supposedly trained from the age of four to solve riddles and puzzles, she can’t figure out any of the basics, even at gunpoint.

I’d said earlier that I was doomed to see the movie no matter what, just to see what all the fuss was about. So I guess at least I can say that’s over. I just read an excerpt from the book online, and it looks like the movie was pretty much a line-for-line reverse-novelization. So at least I only wasted two and a half hours on it, instead of however long it would’ve taken me to read the book.

It has shaken my faith, though. The book has sold over 60 million copies and has plenty of people who still defend it. How could a loving God let this happen?

Prophet 5, Fans 0

The EndThe season finale of “Alias” aired on Monday night. There’s a bit where Sydney tells her evil mom, “I’m through being disappointed by you.” That pretty much sums it up.

I’m not going to bother with spoilers, since it’s already up for free on ABC’s website, and anyone who’s still interested in this show has probably already seen it.

As episodes of disposable television series go, it wasn’t all that bad. There were explosions, and stunt scenes, and espionage setups, and a teary dramatic moment between Sydney and her dad that was actually pretty well done. Still, the whole thing soured me on the series and was enough to make me kind of embarrassed I ever got into the show in the first place.

The deal with “Alias” was always that you go the sense they knew exactly what they were doing. They knew exactly how ridiculous their plots were, but damn if they weren’t going to give you the best CIA family drama with evil twins and zombies and explosions story it’s possible to make. When it worked, it was populist without being pandering, not taking itself too seriously but also not resorting to arch parody.

When you’ve got that balance, you can keep ratcheting up the action sequences without worrying about its getting too unrealistic — as long as it makes dramatic sense, you’re golden, ancient prophecies and sentient bee swarms and all. And you can throw in character drama without it devolving into melodrama or being just a whiny soap opera. But without that balance, it just lays bare the unbelievability of the plot and the characters.

That’s my problem with the finale; it just made it obvious that they didn’t know what they were doing. There’s really no excuse for it, either — they had a long maternity leave, and they knew that the series was going to end, so they had plenty of time to build up to a big finish. Instead, they dicked around for five or six episodes, and then tried to tie up everything in the last 15 minutes or so. I’m even fine with what they did, just not how they did it. It was like they had a bullet list of things that had to happen: these people have to die, these have to live, we’ve got to blow up headquarters, we’ve got to have clandestine picture-taking, two bomb countdowns, tie up the Rambaldi business, have dramatic death scenes, and tie up Sydney Bristow’s Personal Journey. You’ve got an hour and a half. Go.

It was all so by-the-numbers that none of it mattered, and it in retrospect, it made the whole series seem pretty stupid and cobbled together. The whole season has been like that — storylines like the one with Tom that just went nowhere. To get into “why can’t you be more like your brother?” territory — when “Lost” had its big shocking episode a couple of weeks ago, the episode of “Alias” that aired the same night technically did the exact same thing (killed off two major characters with one plot twist). But while “Lost” had me sitting on the couch feeling like I’d had the wind knocked out of me, “Alias” just had me thinking, “Well, that happened.”

The worst is that I can take their bullet list of things that had to happen, and come up with a much better scenario that would’ve worked and tied everything together, without even trying that hard: All they had to do is have the first hour be the build-up to a big showdown on Mt. Subasio. Most of the main characters get killed as Sloane does the “horizon” thing with the sunlight (skip the bit in Rambaldi’s tomb; that was dumb). Jack sacrifices himself to save Sydney and kills Sloane in the process. Sydney’s left standing there looking just like the drawing in the manuscript, then she decides to use the horizon’s power to “fix” everything. (In this version, it actually lets you control time and such, instead of some immortality juice that’s a huge let-down after five seasons of build-up).

The whole second hour is flashbacks/alternate reality type deals where she’s going back through series and saving people she couldn’t save before. Like her fiance, and Francie, and everybody that got killed in the first hour. But the whole time, she keeps being reminded that people choose their own path, and she can’t save everyone. When she sees the results of all her changes, it’s the end of the world, with the “stars falling from the sky” and all the other prophecies we were promised. Irina gives her speech about power being the most important thing, but Sydney tells her she’s wrong, because she has all the power in the world now and still can’t fix everything. Jack tells her he wanted to keep her safe from the whole spy business, but now he realizes that he didn’t control her; she made her own choices to save the world. With that, she goes back to the final showdown and lets it play out with most everybody surviving. Jack still sacrifices himself to save her, Irina and Sloane die, and we get the exact same epilogue we had in the “real” episode.

There. (If you want a better resolution for Sloane, he could be in a mental institution with Nadia and Emily haunting him for the rest of his life). That only took about 20 minutes, and even that is better than what they came up with after five months. You get all the stuff they were trying to say about power and choices and sacrifice, and you get all the cheesy sci-fi spy stuff, and you still get a semi-happy ending.

And that doesn’t count as “fan fiction,” so shut up.

Rogue Wave

I looked through both X-Men movies frame by frame and would you believe Rogue doesn't wave once?Tonight I went with Mac to see Poseidon. Yes, on purpose.

The reviews will tell you this movie is bad, and the reviews will be correct. It’s really tough to recommend; we had fun watching it, but we had to put a lot of effort into it. I think even if I were Joel Siegel and I were desperate to come up with quotable blurbs to put on the poster, the best I’d be able to come up with would be “Guaranteed to make you have to pee!”

It was pretty clear it was going to be bad as soon as the opening shot started. It was a long fly-over of the boat that didn’t look like an ad for a cruise ship line as much as an ad for a piece of open-source CGI rendering software. Set against a sunset straight out of one of those inspirational “Footsteps in the Sand” posters.

I think the whole point of the scene was to introduce us to our hero, who is not Matthew McConaughey. Dude likes to run, and he had some type of previous career involving the Navy. That’s about all the character background we get for him, but that’s all right because that’s pretty much all the character background we get for anybody. The movie’s got an assload of dead bodies throughout, meant I guess to imply how horrible a disaster the Rogue Wave caused but without having to go into a lot of exposition as to who these people are. But you don’t really care much more about the main characters than you care about Random Immolation Victim #38.

There’s the ex-Mayor of New York who loves his daughter, the daughter who needs to prove to Daddy that she’s a grown woman, the boyfriend who’s there, sleazy greasy gambler Lucky Larry, a waiter, a captain who’s clearly slumming after “Homicide” got cancelled, and a woman who has a kid.

Fergie from the Black-Eyed Peas is in the movie. Ironically, she’s the only actor in the main credits who remains dry throughout the entire film. When I’d heard she was in it, I was hoping there’d be a dramatic scene where everybody’s standing hip-deep in water and they say, “Wait… did it just suddenly get warmer?” And then the camera pans over to Fergie and she shrugs and there’s the sound of tinkling bells and a slide trombone.

Richard Dreyfuss goes against type and plays a mopey, fussy, annoying old gay architect. I couldn’t tell if he was acting so prissy because they wanted to play up that he was old, or because they wanted to play up that he was gay, or because he’s Richard Dreyfuss. Mac pointed out that he exclaims “oy vey!” at one point, and also calls the waiter guy “gorgeous,” so I’m guessing his role in the movie was to combine Shelley Winters’ and Red Buttons’ characters from the original into one show-stopping performance.

Nadia from “Alias” is also in the movie, playing the Catholic claustrophobic Elena who’s Catholic. Also, she’s Catholic. This is crucial, because her crucifix is the only thing the movie has that resembles a plot point. In case you were in danger of forgetting that she’s Catholic, they make sure to show her making the Sign of the Cross every 30 seconds. This was clever re-enforcement of the idea (to wit: she’s Catholic), otherwise audiences would be completely bewildered at the sight of a Hispanic woman wearing a crucifix. On “Alias,” she only appeared for like 20 episodes, and by my calculations, she was impaled by glass shards about 18 times and turned into a zombie. In Poseidon, she isn’t much less clumsy.

I never liked disaster movies, because they always seemed completely pointless. This movie is so pointless and inessential it makes the original seem profound. I kept hoping for some sign of cleverness or suspense, or even irony, but the people making the movie just wouldn’t meet me halfway. They just really wanted to be faithful to the canon of the original, I guess, and exhaustively document the story of a ship that sinks and almost everybody except a few people dies.

Which reminds me: the death count is disappointingly low. I kept hoping for random shark attacks or electrocutions or getting sucked into jet engines or even ravaged by an unexpected shipment of snakes that break loose from the cargo hold. There’s only two main character deaths that are cool at all, and they’re both telegraphed way in advance and happen too soon and too close to each other. The annoying child character comes tantalizingly close to death about a dozen times, but for whatever reason he shows a Terminator-like knack for surviving.

There’s exactly one sequence in the movie that’s genuinely kind of cool. It’s after crash when Kurt Russell suddenly climbs out of a pile of open-eyed dead bodies, horrifying the mom and her kid. It lasts about 8 seconds. That’s not too good for a movie that’s about 100 minutes long.

But the summer movie season ain’t over yet. Next week: The DaVinci Code. I really want to go to the theater a day early and wait in line, wearing my albino monk costume. Incidentally, every time a big blockbuster movie comes out, there’s always a porn movie with a parody title released soon afterwards. When are they going to come out with The DaVinci Choad?