-=PCTechTalk=- OT: I am a big fan of "The Green Hornet" and other superhero movies, but I am providing this PSA to save you some money (And this was not the worst review)
- From: "Larry Southerland" <larrysoutherland@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <the_bullhorn2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <thebullhornsbest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <Puters_N_Such@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <pctechtalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 00:08:26 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=20
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703583404576079380583445042=
.ht
ml?mod=3DWSJ_LifeStyle_Lifestyle_5
=20
The Green Hornet" may not be the end of movies as we know them, though =
the
people who made this atrocity were certainly in there trying. The
question=97which rises to the level of an industrial mystery=97is, =
trying to do
what? Turn a dumb concept into a smart entertainment? Save a dim =
production
by pouring a fortune into stupid effects? (The budget was reportedly as =
high
as $130 million.) Kill the special-effects industry by doing a parody of =
its
excesses? The effect of those effects, and of the cheesy 3-D process =
pasted
on as an afterthought, is simply numbing. The film's only unqualified
success is the end title sequence=97because it's genuinely stylish, =
because it
looks like it was shot in genuine 3-D and, most of all, because it's the
end.
Watch a scene from 'The Green Hornet' starring Seth Rogen and Cameron =
Diaz.
Courtesy Sony Pictures.
The initial notion must have been a retro goof on the theme of the Green
Hornet, a masked vigilante who, with his valet/sidekick Kato, first =
entered
American popular culture via a radio series in the 1930s. (The =
semisuperhero
is the alter ego of a newspaper publisher named Britt Reid.) And why =
not?
There's nothing sacred about the Hornet; indeed, there's never been =
anything
particularly distinctive about him, not on the radio or in any of his
subsequent iterations in comic books and on TV. But the notion became a
concept when Seth Rogen was hired to play the venerable crime =
fighter=97not
only to play him, but to write the script, with his longtime friend and
collaborator Evan Goldberg, and to produce the film. (Michel Gondry was =
the
director.)=20
Mr. Rogen is a funny man=97he was terrific in "Knocked Up" and =
"Superbad"=97with
a distinctive voice that mingles chortle, yodel and gargle. None of his
comic chops, however, could fill the void at the center of the character =
he
chose to inflict on himself. In keeping with the star's persona, Britt =
Reid
is now a doofus slacker, an amiable goon, a dim-bulb rich kid who =
doesn't
have a clue what to do with his inherited money or his shallow life. The
brains of his operation belong to Kato, who is now less of a valet and =
more
of a mechanical and electronic genius and kung-fu virtuoso, plus a =
casual
sorcerer who can freeze time. (The movie freezes time too. At 119 =
minutes it
seems all but endless.)
View Full Image
FILM1
Columbia Pictures=20
Seth Rogen as Britt Reid, aka the Green Hornet, and Jay Chou as his =
valet
and sidekick, Kato, flanking Black Beauty in 'The Green Hornet.'
FILM1
FILM1
Kato is played with deadpan nonchalance by the Taiwanese actor Jay Chou, =
who
is very entertaining at the outset. So is Christoph Waltz, who brings to =
the
role of the bad guy, Chudnofsky, the m=E9lange of sweet reason and =
Stygian
evil that he pioneered in "Inglourious Basterds." Yet the brains of the
script operation are missing in action, or buried beneath it. Who cares
about the bumbling hero, even when he starts to think that he knows what
he's doing? Why care about a movie that disses its source material =
without
finding a good reason for having used it in the first place?
It's pleasantly silly when, in the absence of any other motivation, =
Britt
says to Kato, "Let's do something crazy," and off they go to decapitate =
a
statue of Britt's late father. It's mildly amusing that Britt keeps
referring, with winks and nods, to their implicitly gay relationship. =
"Girls
are such a drag, Kato. Thank God we have each other." They also have =
Cameron
Diaz to woo. She plays a journalism-school graduate=97let's hear it for
serious practitioners of the profession=97who, although hired as a =
secretary,
has a vision of Britt's paper that he lacks.
Still, pitifully little comes of the male rivalry, or her presence. In =
this
film, nothing comes to anything but the chaos of special effects: the =
usual
explosions and subwoofer blasts; general-issue fireballs; crazed car =
chases;
vehicles going airborne; bullets spewing from retractible machine guns
mounted on the hood of Black Beauty, the Green Hornet's car, an old =
Chrysler
Imperial sedan gussied up with a new grille and so heavily loaded with
assorted weapons that it could pass for a technical in Somalia. And oh, =
the
awful photography! Not only the pseudo 3-D, with its steep light loss
through Polaroid glasses, but the grungy palette and bleached-out =
colors.
How could such a costly production look so crummy? Don't ask me. I =
started
off by saying it was mysterious.
***
Special effects can be glorious (from "2001: A Space Odyssey" through =
"Star
Wars" to Pixar and "Avatar"), as well as good, bad or indifferent. What =
they
always prove to be is challenging=97otherwise they wouldn't be =
special=97and
draining. A reminder of how that challenge can affect another medium =
turned
up on the cover of this week's New Yorker magazine=97a cartoon showing a
hospital ward full of Spider-Men in various states of orthopedic =
extremis.
The wryly humorous reference was to injuries recently sustained by
performers in "Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark," the Broadway musical that =
has
embraced the allure of cinematic effects with unprecedented fervor, and =
has
spent unprecedented=97for a stage show=97amounts of money in the =
process.
As a professional moviegoer, I often feel I'm drowning in the FX tide; =
just
when I thought I'd recovered from "Tron: Legacy," along came "The Green
Hornet." As a theatergoer, though, I enjoy adventurous stagecraft, so I
couldn't resist the chance to see a Spidey matinee. (No glasses =
required:
every member of the cast appears in genuine 3-D.)
Since this "Spider-Man" continues to play in previews, and since my
colleague Terry Teachout, the Journal's theater critic, won't publish =
his
review until after the official opening, I'll confine myself to noting =
what
everyone who has followed the show's development already knows: the =
aerial
sequences are remarkable, even if Spidey and his nemesis, the Green =
Goblin,
fly around the theater on wires that the Spider-Man movies rendered
invisible; and the mechanisms that produce various effects don't always
work. One famously balky prop is a giant cocoon that entraps the =
heroine,
Mary Jane. It got stuck for a while during the performance I attended, =
but
it also bestowed the gift of a memorable image for FX-dependent movies, =
not
to mention live shows that seek to emulate them=97productions trapped in =
a
cocoon of technology.
That entrapment is most obvious in a fiasco like "The Green Hornet," =
which
took refuge in technology as a means of averting box-office failure. =
What
can never be measured on screen, though, is the extent to which a film's
special effects have drained the filmmakers' energy, distracting them =
from
fundamental concerns of storytelling, performance and pace. And that
drainage comes with the FX territory. A stuck cocoon on stage is kids' =
stuff
compared to the things that can and do go wrong in the movie industry =
with
today's immensely complicated visual wizardry.
This is not to say the movies should go back to painted scenery and =
handmade
models standing in for flying saucers. Who doesn't thrill to special =
effects
when they go well? Even when they go incomparably well, though, effects
can't carry a film on their own. "Avatar" or the "Toy Story" trilogy =
stand
as the signal achievements they are because they use technology in the
service of their narratives. It's also worth noting that digital
manipulation ranged from invisible to nonexistent in two of last year's
finest feature films, "The Social Network" and "The King's Speech." =
Drama
remains the most special effect.
Write to Joe Morgenstern at joe.morgenstern@xxxxxxx=20
=20
=20
Your friend,
=20
Larry
=20
---------------------------------------------------------------
Please remember to trim your replies (including this sentence and everything
below it) and adjust the subject line as necessary.
To subscribe, unsubscribe or modify your email settings:
//www.freelists.org/webpage/pctechtalk
OR
To subscribe to the mailing list, send an email to
pctechtalk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject. To
unsubscribe send email to pctechtalk-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe"
in the Subject.
To access our Archives:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCTechTalk/messages/
//www.freelists.org/archives/pctechtalk/
To contact only the PCTT Mod Squad, write to:
pctechtalk-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To join our separate PCTableTalk off-topic group, send a blank email to:
pctabletalk+subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---------------------------------------------------------------
Other related posts:
- » -=PCTechTalk=- OT: I am a big fan of "The Green Hornet" and other superhero movies, but I am providing this PSA to save you some money (And this was not the worst review) - Larry Southerland
