Picking at the bloated carcass of geek culture...occasionally!!!

A Good Day to Ask What the Fuck Die Hard Means. Like he dies but with difficulty? Or he dies on Viagra? Or he’s a car battery?

In Movies on February 27, 2013 at 12:19 am

A couple of weeks ago I saw A Good Day to Die Hard. Last weekend, I saw the original Die Hard and man, what a disappointment that was. I mean, in the first movie he’s all afraid of flying glass and a few dudes with automatic weapons. In this last movie, he dives through windows before falling 10 stories into construction scafolding without the slightest hesitation. In the the original he’s all whiny as he pulls a little sliver of glass out of his foot. In the last Die Hard movie, he laughs while pulling out a piece of metal rebar impaled in his son’s stomach. In Die Hard, John McClane is worried about his wife being in danger and feels bad when some yuppie scumbag gets killed over the phone. In A Good Day to Die Hard, John McClane never seems worried at all that his only son may get killed despite the fact that they are hopelessly outgunned and outnumbered. It never crosses his mind that he might be hurt or feels any remorse about the scores of humanity he willfully cuts down. Isn’t that awesome?

Alright, alright. Enough. Yes, Die Hard is really a masterpiece of action cinema, holding up better today than it did over two decades ago. And yes, A Good Day to Die Hard is really pretty shitty. I mean, just piss poor. But it did inspire me think about the evolution of John McClane . In Die Hard, John McClane is just a tough, resourceful cop in a really terrible situation just fighting for his life and trying to make it through the night. By the fifth movie, John McClane is entirely something else. He has survived so many near-death experiences and slaughtered so many people, it has become so clear to him. It is not hard for him to die, it is impossible.

So like Bill Murray in Groundhog Day, while he may not be the God, he is clearly a God. Like Ares or Thor, he is diety. He is the manifestation of death and chaos. Humanity is a plaything for his amusement. And why not? Everything from the original Die Hard on reinforces this idea. And he keeps pushing it further and further where, by this last movie, he is falling through buildings to land in radioactive water (rain water, my ass) just to see if he can still feel pain anymore. He’s Roy Batty with less humanity. If you asked him a question about a tortoise, he’d just smirk and execute you. And his son? Don’t worry, he’s a McClane. Like Zeus addressing Perseus, McClane just wants his namesake to embrace his omnipotence and bond with his old man as they just fucking kill everyone.

This was my favorite Die Hard sequel. Where the sidekick from Die Hard 3 realizes that John McClane is superhuman and works to thwart him. I mean, doesn't Unbreakable just mean Die Impossible?

This was my favorite Die Hard sequel. Where the sidekick from Die Hard 3 realizes that John McClane is superhuman and works to thwart him. I mean, doesn’t Unbreakable just mean Die Impossible?

Next Die Hard movie, John McClane jumps into a volcano on fucking Mars with no space suit, then ends up fighting a race of aliens while constantly mugging to the camera and barking “I’m on vacation.” Remember, you heard it here first.

An Australian Guy Using an English Accent to Portray a Spanish general in the Roman army

In Movies on January 23, 2013 at 11:40 pm

I have a thing about accents, in general, and their use in period movies, specifically. I am fascinated by what we are able to suspend our disbelief about and what we cannot seem to get over in this area. For instance, as the title of this post suggests, we have Russell Crowe in Gladiator. Does he sound either Spanish or Roman? Well, actually, I have no idea. I haven’t the foggiest idea what the ancient Roman accent sounds like, but why default to something British? Is it Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar we have to blame? I, Claudius? Or is it that some form of British accent sounds classier, more timeless, or just more appropriate? Or is that a lot of good actors happen to be British? I don’t really know. Maybe good acting is associated with the Bard and his accent is emulated.

On the otherhand, I’ve heard that the English during Shakespeare’s time did not sound like the modern British accents (for all you Scots, Welsh, and shit…I don’t know…Liverpoolipaneans whom complain that there is no one British accent but a myriad collection of different ways of speaking that sound cooler than me). So Sir Ian McKellen and Sir Laurence Olivier, while amazing, are no more accurate than any other person’s accent.

But what do many people think when they hear Tom Cruise in Valkyrie or Kevin Costner in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. It sounds phoney or stupid or just plain wrong. But many rarely would complain if that accent was British, like in Schindler’s List. Not all wrong accents are created equal. Just ask Brad Pitt, an American who used a quasi-English accent in Troy so he could sound like…someone from ancient Greece, I guess?

I love how Costner gets slammed for his accent but gets a pass on the mullet. I mean, check out that ape drape.

I love how Costner gets slammed for his accent but gets a pass on the mullet. I mean, check out that ape drape.

But that’s just about what you’re used to. British accents sound right for many period pieces because they are often used in them. So Michael Fassbender in Centurion sounds fine but Channing Tatum in The Eagle sounds ridiculous. Fair enough, I guess. I have a bigger problem when accents are not consistent within one movie. The worst offender is the post-Titanic Leonardo DiCaprio movie, The Man in the Iron Mask. It’s set in France but we have an DiCaprio (American) as the king but also Gabriel Byrnes (British) and Jeremy Irons (British), Gerard Depardieu (super French yet kinda Russian now) and John Malkovich (Martian) as the former musketeers. Hearing these “French” dudes talk about their duty to their country and what not is hard to buy when they can’t decide what country they come from.

Maybe it’s just me.

The Preservation of an Untainted Idea

In Comics, Movies, Science Fiction on January 12, 2013 at 12:55 pm

“You should absolutely not see the Hobbit. In fact I’m calling you now.”

This was a text I received from a good friend upon informing him of my Wednesday night plans. I know you may be thinking, “Why hasn’t Scott seen the Hobbit yet?” And that is a good question. Have I lost my obsessive nature in the nearly two years since I posted? Well, maybe? Or maybe I know it’s not going anywhere and I’m not worried about spoiling the story because it’s been around for 70+ years.

But that brings me back to my original point. Why would my friend warn me off of the Hobbit? It’s about spoilage. But not the “Bruce Willis has a dead penis named Rosebud at the end of the Citizen Crying Sense” kind of spoiler. More like, a beloved property or franchise exists in your mind and you cherish it. You may treasure it and cultivate it in your memory. Then, somehow, something new comes out that threatens that memory on a personal level.

It might be like Frank Miller’s return to his 80’s roots in much maligned The Dark Knight Strikes Again that causes you to examine why you loved The Dark Knight Returns in the first place. Or how The Phantom Menance forced you to like the original trilogy slightly less than you did. Or, how the first Hobbit movie threatened the idea of the Hobbit for my friend and he wanted to save me.

And it’s not optional, in some cases. You cannot unsee what you saw. You can rationalize it all you want. Midichlorians? What are those? Josh Brolin’s Jonah Hex? Never heard of it. Crystal Skulls? It’s weird Harrison Ford has an entirely new franchise coincidentally starring a character name Indiana Jones, but whatever. Sometimes you can separate Jaws from Jaws: The Revenge and not have a problem enjoying the original.

I always thought this moment would be so great.  I really did.

I always thought this moment would be so great. (sigh) I really did.

But sometimes you can’t…and it kinda sucks.

For the record, I wasn’t over the moon for the first Hobbit movie but I understand that Peter Jackson is goofy and makes goofy movies. I enjoyed it for what it was and I will see more of them.