Friday, August 29, 2008

"Post No. 543"

Before I review more comics I have a couple of movie reviews to get out of the way here:

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor(2008; approx. 2 hrs. Brendan Fraser, Maria Bello, John Hannah, Luke Ford; PG-13.

The best of the three flicks so far produced; yes, I think even better than the first one. You wonder how far they can take this series until it dries up, but this time the scene changes from Egypt to China and using ancient Emperors and witches, the "villians" of which is played by fan fave, Jet Li (who pretty much played the part of "Kato" in The Black Mask).

Years have supposingly passed since the second flick and Fraser and wife, Bello, are bored and need an adventure to rejump-start their romance. Their son, now grown and an archeologist himself, discovers an anceint Chinese emperor who was bent on conquering the world until a betrayed witch puts an end to his plans. If he's resurrected, he'll be unstoppable!

Good fight scenes, nice photography and effects, good sound, good story, fun flick! Great to see John Hannah return; shame Rachael Weisz had to be replaced by Bello as she was the one weak part of the story. Still one of the better flicks this year. I give it an "A" rating.

Batman: The Dark Knight (2008; 2+ hours = too damn long;) Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeeman, etc.;PG-13

Don't expect it to be a super-hero flick. No one has learned how to make one of those yet. The late Mr. Ledger might get an Oscar for his performance. I personally don't think he deserves it. He simply wasn't "The Joker", or at least, any aspect or resemblance to any I've ever seen in a Batman comic book. The reason "why" it wasn't a good comic book movie? It ignores comic book facts.

The most important relating to "The Joker" is that this character does NOT have scars making his mouth into a grin. That look comes from his maniatic smile from a thin, angular face of the character. Why can't movie writers accept this? They ignored it with the 1989 Batman movie as well. The Joker's origin is not that complicated. His wife was pregnant and he needed money, so he got involved with some thugs wanting to rob from a chemical plant. His wife begs him not to ruin it for themselves and their to be unborn child. The Joker has a change of heart and tells the thugs he won't go through with their plans. They tell him he'd best do so or harm will come to his loved ones. They convince him it'll be okay as no one will see his face because he'll be wearing a red hood to conceal his features. The Joker agrees to their plans, but Batman knocks him off into a chemical vat. He survivies the fall, but the chemicals turn his skin a chalky-white, his lips a bright ruby red and his hair, green. In the meanwhile, the thugs still kill his pregnant wife. He goes nuts and takes out his woes on all involved. End of origin. No scars, and NO make-up.

The film itself: bad sound, murky fight scenes, hated the "Batman voice", still hate that god awful-looking Batmobile. 30 minutes too long; Harvey Dent ("Two-Face" should not have died.) It's no more than a "C" film to me. Even Nicholson did a better Joker. Hell. Even Cesar Romero with makeup over his lip-warmer was more true to the character of the villian. People will hate me for this review. It's just my opinion. Give Gary Oldman The Oscar for his performance as "Commissioner Gordon" instead, or Michael Caine for "Alfred".

And now I interrupt my regularly scheduled reviews for a word about this presidential campaign.

If anyone deserves an Oscar, it should go to those in charge of organizing both the Dem. & Rep. campaigns this time around, because it is certainly The Greatest American Farce ever perpetrated upon this country and its people.

Stuck we are in a decision between an dictatorship of yet another Republican, or the antics of a Democratic Anti-Christ is simply not a great place for anyone to be located.

Hillary's acceptance of the nomination spee---ummm, that is to say, her recommendation of Obama the other night was one of the biggest grandstands I believe I've ever witnessed, and with a delivery that should be recorded in the records with The Gettysburgh Address (and I thought Bill's crocodile tears were a nice touch).

And now McCain has told us his choice of running mate is Sarah Palin? Does McCain think this is "Dancing With The Stars"?? Doesn't he realize that this choice will be who would replace him if his aging a$$ was to pass away while in office?

Oh well...maybe it doesn't matter since The Mayan Calendar just has 1,500 more days until it runs out. Which may not mean anything...but it did every time before.


At 7:35 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anti-Christ? Defend that statement.

At 5:19 PM , Blogger ~D.Puck' said...

Okay. That's unfair. I should have said that ALL Dem presidents have been Anti-Christs (and all Rep. Presidents are lunatics). However, Obama does have the type of fanatical following that could spawn a "religion" of sorts, and in these times, who knows? For that matter, does my opinion really count? I'm just sitting here "watching the world go 'round & 'round".

At 5:26 PM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

BTW, as a follow-up reply to that statement of mine: According to The Book of Revelations the anti-Christ:

The anti-Christ will

Be a man, in his 40's, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with Persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like
appeal....the prophecy says
That people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace,

And when he is in power, will destroy everything..


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home