#also it's directed by christopher reeve

[robertseanleonardthinker]

genuinely shocked by how few ppl have watched in the gloaming. this movie is beautiful!!!! it's gutwrenching and sweet and angering at times. it's so incredibly human. it's short and sweet yet gets so much done in its time. i love it so so so much.

[the-girl-from-another-time]

The Gendered Gaze in the Superhero Genre

Whenever media objectification of women is brought up (eg. “sexualization of female bodies is because our culture is centered around the male gaze”), some people like to counter with “but what about all the male shirtless scenes in Marvel movies?” The point being made is really that women can’t complain about our bodies being sexualized in media because so are men’s! Another argument is “well, women have been sexualized in media for so long, so let’s sexualize the men, too! Equality!” Additionally, many filmmakers/actors/fans like to justify said male shirtless scenes with “Here’s some eye candy for the ladies!”

But here’s the thing. Sexualization of male bodies in film and comics doesn’t actually cater to the female gaze.

Hyper-sexualization of both women and men in comics increased drastically in the late 80s and defined the 90s, especially with the rise of artists like Jim Lee and Rob Liefeld.

You look at this and think “Hot women for straight men to look at and hot guys for straight women to look at. Sounds equal.” Except, female comic readership declined significantly in the 90s (mostly because of the increasing female objectification). Comics were being distributed to direct-market shops, which were largely male-dominated spaces. Even characters who were historically feminist and targeted at girls were being drawn by artists (Mike Deodato Jr.) who openly referred to their art as “porn Wonder Woman,” and were now being targeted at straight men. As far as the creators were concerned, their readers were predominantly male. Male comic creators were completely uninterested in catering to women. Their hyper-muscular male characters were targeted at men as power fantasies, and that’s really all there is to it.

These portrayals? Plenty of straight women appreciate it, sure, but this is still the male gaze. Male directors might convince themselves that it’s “a little something for the ladies,” but it’s not. It’s continuing a male-targeted trend of the genre.

I’ve watched the Superman movies (1970s to now) with several female friends, and my overwhelming observation has been that they are far more affected by Christopher Reeve’s sweetness and adorable awkwardness than they are by Henry Cavill’s muscles.

As a longtime member of internet fandom, I’ve also noticed a major trend in fanart drawn by women and queer people that actually minimizes the muscle definition of male superheroes, frequently accentuating their body fat and generally making them look very soft and squishy instead of bulging veins and eight-packs.

When women routinely prefer character depth to physical attractiveness; sweetness to big muscles; fuller bodies to tightly muscled ones; hand touches to shirtless scenes; it becomes clear that the “we’re doing this for the ladies 😉” argument has little ground to stand on. It’s not about equality. It’s not about pleasing women. It’s about male power and toxic masculinity.

So actually no, directors have no excuse for dehydrating Henry Cavill and Chris Hemsworth to the point of hospitalization so they can “look like a superhero” and give the ladies some eye candy.

[lol-jackles]

I love your musings on the movie industry and actresses. I am interested in your opinion about Tom Holland, if you know anything about him as an actor. I think he's going through a rough patch. A couple years ago he was the most successful and promising young actor. At this point, his career path is very questionable. Several failed projects, including his latest TV series, which he produced himself. Critics trashed him. And on the whole, they don't like him much. I attribute this to an inappropriate remark about Martin Scorsese. He wasn't rude or disrespectful, but still his words were taken by many in a bad light. Now he has returned to the theater. But judging by the record-breaking two hours of ticket sales, I think he's still loved by his fans. But I still don't understand why he's doing so badly with his projects. At the moment he has plans for another spider sequel, possibly uncharted 2 and a Fred Astaire biographical movie. And none of these projects have any definite shooting dates or even a nominally finished plot.

I've only seen a few of Tom Holland's non-Spiderman films and he seemed miscast in those, however, he still gave very good performances.  The great Christopher Lee once said, "Every actor has to make terrible films from time to time, but the trick is never to be terrible in them."

The great Kenneth Branagh directed and starred in the stinker Frankenstein featuring the great Robert Di Niro as the monster. Kennth was also the best thing about the Harry Potter movies as Professor Lovelock. Meryl Streep's performance was praised in Mama Mia for her energy and commitment, despite the overall critical reception of the movie. Denzel Washington pretty much made a career out of elevating projects from the depths of mediocrity into something approaching watchability, and sometimes, even quality.

Tom's current career trajectory reminds me of Michael J. Fox's dark, experimental phase as a traumatized solider and a drug addict mourning the death of his mother and marriage before returning to what he does best: funny everyman. If I was his manager, I would advise him to hire Channing Tatum's agent and take inspiration from Hugh Jackman and embrace his singing and dancing skills and natural comedic timing, so his Fred Astaire project is a good idea. Tom can still do drama and action that is silly and fun. Point Break is silly and also one of the greatest action movies of the 20th century, and it was one of the first clues that Keanu Reeve’s career trajectory is going to be less “Tiger Beat”, and more “walking away from explosions, looking directly at the camera”.

[somethingusefulfromflorida]

I've never been a huge fan of superhero comics, but as soon as I heard about Batman '89 I had to check out the boxset. These are sequels to the original movie series from the 70s and 80s using the likenesses of the actors; Christopher Reeves, Margot Kidder, Gene Hackman, Michael Keaton, Billy Dee Williams, Michelle Pfeiffer, plus a bunch of new characters based on the celebrities who would have been cast to play them had these sequels been made back then. I don't know how faithful the Superman comic is, but I grew up on the original Batman movies and this is everything I could have hoped for. It is a direct sequel to Batman Returns, ignoring the events (and recasts) of Batman Forever and Batman and Robin. I have a soft spot for Forver, I hate Robin with a passion, but Returns was always my favorite of the four because of Catwoman and the Penguin, so it's nice to see the story continuing into the 90s. I doubt this is exactly how it would have gone had the studio greenlit Keaton Batman 3, especially if they handed it over to Tim Burton again, but it's a surprisingly deep story about race relations and police brutality and it's definitely a movie I wish I could have seen on tape as a kid.

Please, for the love of God, do not let Warner Bros adapt it to screen with digitally de-aged actors and AI voices... Let it stay on the page.

They're continuing the story with another sequel, Batman '89: Echoes this November, so I'm looking forward to reading it. They also have Batman '66 based on the Adam West show, so I'll have to check that out eventually.

[hopefulstarfire]

I've been refusing to go see the Flash movie, for obvious reasons-- that being Ezra Miller, who should have been recasted and thrown in prison for, you know, all the Crimes they have committed -- but also like. There's another pivotal thing that needs to be talked about in the discussions and trashing of this film.

Because yeah. It's absolutely fucking weird and disrespectful that they CGI'd in Adam West, Christopher Reeve and George Reeves. They are deceased, they cannot consent to being in this movie and also it seems like you're just. Using them for props to try and get people to come watch your shitty movie (and let's not forget Michael Keaton Batman was all over those damn trailers because you KNEW his legacy as Batman was a real cash cow and a distraction away from Ezra Miller).

Let's not forget this either; George Reeves did not even want to be Superman again. He was, at the time of his death, struggling financially and wanting to find other ventures, including hoping to direct. All of the options he had to keep going required him playing Superman, and, he being in his 40s, was not eager to reprise it. And given everything surrounding his death, whatever side of the coin you fall on as to what exactly happened, it feels extra icky on top of that.

Hell, given what old interview footage from Christopher Reeve has to say, he would have probably been against this too; he hated Hollywood's bad case of sequelitis and seeing the execs get the key figures back to pump it through a second, third, whatever movie for sales. Which is what this is;

It's a way to try and capitalize on the heroes and actors people loved so they'd still go see this movie. It's sad and sketchy as hell and is something that infuriates me with DC.

Instead of doing gross shit like this or continuing to enable horribly people by still giving them the spotlight -- and especially after swiftly punishing those who have spoken out about abuse on set of your movies, don't think I forgot about what y'all did to Ray Fisher -- DC needs to step up and do better in the movies they make and the world's and stories they craft within them.

Because if this is the only way you think you can get people in your seats, rather than not canceling perfectly good movies (BATGIRL), then y'all don't need to be doing these movies anymore.

[alexzalben]

KEVIN CONROY, PREEMINENT VOICE OF BATMAN, PASSES AWAY AT AGE 66

NEW YORK, NY (November 11, 2022) - Actor Kevin Conroy, the most beloved voice of Batman in the animated history of the character, died Thursday at age 66 after a short battle with cancer.

A noted stage, film and television performer, Conroy rose to unparalleled voice acting fame as the title character of the landmark Batman: The Animated Series (1992-1996). He would establish never-to-be-broken records as the quintessential voice of Batman, bringing the super hero to animated life in nearly 60 different productions, including 15 films – highlighted by the acclaimed Batman: Mask of the Phantasm; 15 animated series, spanning nearly 400 episodes and more than 100 hours of television; as well as two dozen video games. Conroy was also featured as a live-action Bruce Wayne in the Arrowverse’s 2019-2020 “Crisis on Infinite Earths” crossover event.

In recent years, Conroy was a notable fixture on the Con circuit, greeting fans with the same warmth, respect and enthusiasm they reserved for him.

“Kevin was far more than an actor whom I had the pleasure of casting and directing – he was a dear friend for 30+ years whose kindness and generous spirit knew no boundaries,” said Emmy Award winning casting/dialogue director Andrea Romano. “Kevin’s warm heart, delightfully deep laugh and pure love of life will be with me forever.”

“Kevin was perfection,” recalled Mark Hamill, who redefined the Joker playing opposite Conroy’s Batman. “He was one of my favorite people on the planet, and I loved him like a brother. He truly cared for the people around him – his decency shone through everything he did. Every time I saw him or spoke with him, my spirits were elevated.”

Born on November 30, 1955 in Westbury, New York, and raised in Westport, CT, Conroy began establishing himself in the acting community while under the tutelage of John Houseman at The Julliard School – where he studied alongside the likes of Christopher Reeve, Frances Conroy, and his roommate Robin Williams. 

Conroy began his career following his love of the theatre, keeping him on stage in both New York and at the Old Globe Theatre in San Diego. The actor received rave reviews for his starring performances in A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the Public Theater, Eastern Standard on Broadway, Arthur Miller’s The Last Yankee, and in the title role of Hamlet at the 1984 New York Shakespeare Festival. In addition, he performed in films and television – most notably in the mid-1980s when he had recurring roles on Dynasty, Tour of Duty and Ohara; successful runs on soap operas Search for Tomorrow and Another World; and guest roles on popular series like Cheers, Murphy Brown, Spenser: For Hire and Matlock.

But it was his incomparable, nuanced performance as the voice of Batman that put Conroy on the map – and the fans’ radar – when Batman: The Animated Series debuted on September 5, 1992. From that point on, Conroy would forever be linked to the Dark Knight – in TV series like Batman Beyond and Justice League/Justice League Unlimited; films ranging from Batman: the Killing Joke and Batman: Gotham Knight to Batman & Mr. Freeze: SubZero and Batman: Mystery of the Batwoman; and more than two dozen video games.

“Kevin was a brilliant actor,” Hamill said. “For several generations, he has been the definitive Batman. It was one of those perfect scenarios where they got the exact right guy for the exact right part, and the world was better for it. His rhythms and subtleties, tones and delivery – that all also helped inform my performance. He was the ideal partner – it was such a complementary, creative experience. I couldn’t have done it without him. He will always be my Batman.”

“Kevin brought a light with him everywhere,” said Paul Dini, producer of Batman: The Animated Series, “whether in the recording booth giving it his all, or feeding first responders during 9/11, or making sure every fan who ever waited for him had a moment with their Batman. A hero in every sense of the word. Irreplaceable. Eternal.”

Conroy is survived by his husband Vaughn C. Williams, sister Trisha Conroy, and brother Tom Conroy. Memorial services are pending.

[ashleygraceworld]

6 Most Underrated Al Pacino Movies

Al Pacino made awesome movies, but some really good ones didn't get enough attention. Here are the 7 underrated gems of Pacino that deserve more love.

From classic movies like The Godfather, Heat, to The Irishman, Al Pacino has been a big deal in the movie world for a long time. He's been in some of the best movies ever, and fans really love him.

But because he's been in so many movies, there are some that didn't get much attention or didn't get praised by critics, even though they're actually pretty good. So, here are some Al Pacino movies that not many people talk about, but you should definitely watch.

1. Donnie Brasko

Even though critics liked it when it came out, not many people talk about the movie "Donnie Brasco" these days. It's about a guy named Donnie who works secretly for the FBI and hangs out with a mafia hitman named Lefty, played by Al Pacino. As time goes on, Donnie becomes really good friends with Lefty, but he has to decide whether to tell on him to the FBI or go against them.

The movie is well-written, well-directed, and Al Pacino does an amazing job playing Lefty. Some folks say it's one of Al Pacino's best but doesn't get enough credit.

2. The Devil's Advocate

"The Devil's Advocate" is a movie where Keanu Reeves plays a lawyer named Kevin Lomax who joins a famous law firm in New York, led by Al Pacino's character, John Milton. The story gets pretty dark and confusing, but overall, it's a well-written movie with great acting. It also teaches us a lesson about how chasing money can make people forget about doing what's right. Even though it has some supernatural stuff, a lot of it is about real-life problems like greed, desire, jealousy, and anger.

3. Insomnia

Insomnia, a movie directed by Christopher Nolan and starring Al Pacino, is often overlooked but deserves more attention. It's about a detective named Will Dormer (played by Al Pacino) who goes to a small town in Alaska to solve the murder of a 17-year-old girl. As he investigates, he starts facing his own inner struggles and has to juggle both the case and his declining mental health. Insomnia is a lesser-known film by Nolan and is a must-see for fans of Al Pacino.

4. The Insider

The Insider is a gripping psychological drama that fans of this genre will really enjoy. Despite getting positive reviews from critics, the movie didn't become a big hit in theaters. It stars Russell Crowe and Al Pacino, who give outstanding performances that make it a must-watch.

The story of The Insider revolves around Jeff Wigand, a former employee of a big tobacco company, who turns to Lowell Bergman, a CBS journalist, to expose the shady practices of the tobacco industry. What follows is a nail-biting and intense series of events, with Wigand facing threats and warnings from the tobacco company. All in all, The Insider is a very well-crafted movie, featuring a standout performance by Al Pacino.

5. Panic In Needle Park

"Panic in Needle Park" is a movie about a guy named Bobby (played by Al Pacino) who's addicted to heroin and lives in an area full of other addicts. One day, he meets Helen, a homeless girl from the same area, and they fall in love.

Unfortunately, Bobby introduces Helen to heroin, and their love story takes a dark turn. They start doing bad things like stealing to get money for drugs. It's a really sad and tough movie to watch, but it's also a great film. Plus, it's the first movie where Al Pacino played the main character.

6. Dog Day Afternoon

Dog Day Afternoon is a really intense movie starring Al Pacino. In the film, Al Pacino's character, Sonny, and his two partners try to rob a bank in Brooklyn. But things go south fast when Sonny gets a call from the police, telling him the bank is surrounded. So, the bank robbery turns into a situation where they're holding people hostage, and Sonny is trying his best to figure out how to get out of there.

Even though the basic idea is simple, the story takes unexpected twists and turns. The movie is well-written, and Al Pacino and the rest of the cast give fantastic performances.

Go ahead and watch these if you haven't and let me know in the comments how you find them!

[maximumwobblerbanditdonut]

"Slow Horses,” Apple's TV highly acclaimed espionage drama returns for season three.

#GaryOldman returns to lead the Slough House team for a third season of #AppleTVPlus's #SlowHorses.

Slow Horses is a darkly humorous espionage drama that follows a dysfunctional team of British intelligence agents who serve in a dumping ground department of MI5 known un-affectionately as Slough House.

Slough House is an administrative purgatory for MI5 service rejects who have bungled their job but have not been sacked. Those consigned there are known as "slow horses”

In season three, a romantic liaison in Istanbul threatens to expose a buried MI5 secret in London. When Jackson Lamb and his team of misfits are dragged into the fight, they find themselves caught in a conspiracy that threatens the future not just of Slough House but of MI5 itself.

Oldman stars as Jackson Lamb, the brilliant but misanthropic leader of the spies, who end up in Slough House due to their career-ending mistakes as they frequently find themselves blundering around the smoke and mirrors of the espionage world.

The ensemble cast also includes Kristin Scott Thomas, Jack Lowden, Saskia Reeves, Rosalind Eleazar, Christopher Chung, Freddie Fox, Chris Reilly, Samuel West, Sophie Okonedo, Aimee-Ffion Edwards, Kadiff Kirwan and Jonathan Pryce.

Ṣọpẹ́ Dìrísù joins the season three cast as Sean Donovan, the former head of security at the British embassy in Istanbul, along with Katherine Waterston who plays Alison Dunn, an MI5 agent who uncovers a dark secret at the heart of the agency.

Adapted from Real Tigers, the third novel in the Mick Herron spy series, the six-episode third season of Slow Horses season three will begin streaming via Apple TV+ on Wednesday 29th November.

Slow Horses is produced for Apple TV+ by See-Saw Films and adapted for television by Will Smith (Veep).

Jamie Laurenson, Hakan Kousetta, lain Canning, Emile Sherman, Douglas Urbanski, Gail Mutrux, Will Smith, Jane Robertson and Graham Yost are executive producers on the series. Season three is directed by Saul Metzstein.

Apple TV+ previously announced a fourth season is set to be adapted from the fourth novel, Spook Street.

#SlowHorses #espionagedrama #SloughHouse #Britishintelligence #agents #MI5 #AppleTV #JacksonLamb

[weclassybouquetfun]

THE FLASH has arrived after being a tad delayed.

But what's 5 years and 3 months amongst friends.

Congrats to Andrés "Andy" Muschietti

for getting this film across the finishing line. A s though there's reportedly a sequel script in play and Muschietti said that he would dream of replacing Ezra Miller in a subsequent film his assurance may be moot as THE FLASH signals the end of the DCEU while BLUE BEETLE will usher in the DC Universe under James Gunn.

But good news for Muschietti; he had been tapped to direct BATMAN: THE BRAVE AND THE BOLD.

No, not this cartoon beauty

The live-action adaptation of the Grant Morrison run.

For me, THE FLASH is the perfect swan song for the DCEU. Go out in style, Barry!

SPOILERS FOR THE FLASH (despite everyone and their grandmas posting spoilers all across social media to either trash the F/X or to spite an Ezra Miller fronted project). Yes, I have made hating spoilers a large part of my personality.

THE GOOD

-Ezra Miller was a delight. I loved the dual iterations of Barry. As current day Bruce says their scars (maybe he said traumas) are what made them. Of course a Barry who was raised by his parents ends up with a different personality than a Barry who was scarred by his mother's murder and father's incarceration. He had to grow up fast yet remained socially stunted as he was consumed with getting justice for his father. I think it would get tiresome real quick if the film were just quirky/awkward Barry. We got grounded Barry and that other side.

-It was a nice touch when he does the messaging to the nurse that she should seek professional help after such a jarring event but the JL themselves haven't figured that out for themselves yet.

-I don't believe I have ever read a Flash standalone so maybe all of these themes were covered in his issues but there were certainly strains of Booster Gold Vol. 2 and Flashpoint in this. Alt!Barry repeatedly turning back time to try to save Supergirl and Batman and failing was exactly like Booster Gold trying to save Barbara Gordon from being shot and paralyzed by the Joker. Each time she would still get shot and Booster himself would be pulverized by the Joker Gang until Rip Hunter stopped him and let him know that event was a fixed point that couldn't be changed. It had to happen.

And Flashpoint where Barry wakes up to a new universe and tries to get back to the standard timeline but instead ends up and remains in a new universe similar but different from his own.

Which leads to -

-Batmans!!! I still don't know what makes a good Batman, but I do know what makes a good Bruce Wayne and Val Kilmer and Ben Affleck is that for me so I delighted in seeing him again. So fantastic that all these years later Michael Keaton gets his swan song.

As Barry tells Bruce things change across multiverses but there are constants such as Bruce having a Alfred as it is fated. But there is also, seemingly, the constant that Bruce is defined by being Batman. In THE DARK KNIGHT RISES he doesn't return to Bruce Wayne but instead ducks out of society until Gotham is truly threatened and only bows out when he is assured that Gotham is in good hands. In THE FLASH Bruce cleans up Gotham and retreats to a hermetic existence until Barry coaxes him out. He dies happily in battle as Batman, a better death than just dying as the pedestrian Bruce Wayne.

And as I love reaching back to the past and closing circles seeing George Clooney as Bruce was amazing.

Talk about reaching back-

-I LOVED THE REIMAGING OF CHRISTOPHER REEVES' SUPERMAN! I bow down to poorly rendered CGI G.O.A.T Superman.

This is the man who said, "I think I was the right actor for the part at the time I played it, but I think the role is larger than any particular actor and should be reinterpreted from generation to generation."

How fitting that so many reinterpretations were presented, including the payoff of the Eric Stoltz BACK TO THE FUTURE jokes.

Just as Stoltz was the Marty McFly that never really was, we got Nic Cage's near Superman reference!!

He exists in the multiverse!

and yeah, we saw other Flashes but who cares when there is Supermen...and Helen Slater's Supergirl!

Another trip through the multiverse was done courtesy of TITANS where Gar

-The humour wasn't overkill. Loved how they did the slow reveal of Bruce being tied to the Lasso of Truth. It seemed OOC for him to be bashful around Diana but I went with it, but no need; he was just lassoed. I hope people caught him chastising himself for not donating his wealth to help the poor.

-Loved Sasha Calle's Kara. Would have loved to see more of her.

-Barry's stakes only work if the audience cares and how much did I love Maribel Verdú as Nora Allen. It would not have worked if we couldn't feel the depth of Barry's loss. Verdú was so loving and vibrant that my heart ached that Barry couldn't save her.

Verdú, Temeura Morrison (who appears), Jesse L. Martin of TV's THE FLASH and these hotties are the best parents in the DCEU.

-Nice seeing Muschietti's pal and MAMA lead Nikolaj Coster-Waldau play a rando who has his pizza snagged by Barry and Muschietti himself playing a man who gets his hot dog snatched by Barry.

-Speaking of dogs that end credits with the therapy dog in free fall was a perfect clincher to the prior mad scene with the babies in the forefront. And for those bashing the egregiously fake babies in that scene I think it would have created anxiety for plenty of people if they CGI'd actual babies. The comedic element of such lunacy works because they're so fake looking.

THE BAD

-Kiersey Clemons getting short-shrift.

If there isn't a sequel it's very disappointing how little she has to do. I would have loved to see their friendship flourish.

Also, does this film retcon the deleted scene which was reinstated in the Snyder cut of JUSTICE LEAGUE?

Seemingly, no as she says she feels like she has seen Barry lately and he cagily denies it, but it's not as if Iris had a head injury or was knocked out during that scene. How can you not remember someone saving your life? Unless the implication is that Barry was moving so fast that she only got a glimpse of him, which...doubtful.

-Which brings me to my second issue..

THE REST

-The issue with the Flash as a standalone is that is really serves to showcase Batman and to a lesser extent Supergirl. They Captain America: Civil War'red the film!

But maybe that's just because as a character Barry isn't that compelling. His #1 enemy is just a reverse of himself. Barry is a hero but also an unwitting agent of chaos as his defining trait is not the speed force but upending the universe in a quest to save his mother,

so maybe there isn't enough meat on the bone so to speak character-wise to delve deeper but if they could do it with Aquaman then Barry deserved a deeper exploration.

-I don't think we needed the angle that Barry was at the scene of Zod's attack and he has kicks himself over not being able to save the kid's dad. He has enough of a complex.

-This could very well be because I have an unreasonable dislike of Ron Livingston but what a downgrade from Billy Crudup (who was too busy with AppleTV+'s THE MORNING SHOW to return).

Crudup's scenes in JL were infinitely more effective than anything Livingston eked out in this.

Just as Crudup had a minor role in JUSTICE LEAGUE, but made a big impression, Luke Brandon Field appeared in one ep of AMC+'s wonderful INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE but I clocked him immediately in his small role as a criminal Bruce takes down.

[tuttle-did-it]

Rewatched Timeless since the finale took place the week of Christmas, 2023.

This show frustrates me SO, SO much. So much.

They have Rufus, who is amazing. Especially when paired with Jiya. Seriously, Malcolm Barrett is a massive part of why this show went more than 6 episodes, and he has wonderful chemistry with Claudia Doumit.

They have Goran Visnjic who manages to play the villain with so much heart that you pay far more attention when he's on screen.

Goran and Malcolm are the two elements of why this show-- when it worked-- worked. The two of them had SO much charisma, so much put into their characters that no matter what was going on on the screen, you wanted to know what happened to them. You needed to know if they were okay.

They have Susanna Thompson, who aside from being a very compelling actor on her own, was stellar as the Queen Borg on Voyager.

They have Annie Wershching, who manages to play a villain without being absurd or over the top. (She also played the Queen Borg for Picard, but I really, really hate Picard. But I quite like Annie. RIP Annie.)

They had a main woman character who had agency, and a storyline of her own.

They have a creepy clandestine cult trying to destroy the world, that's always fun.

They had Sakina Jaffrey and Paterson Joseph, both of whom are enjoyable to watch.

They had Colman Domingo as a guest star playing Bass Reeves-- just before he exploded and became known to the world. As expected, he was brilliant every moment.

Sean Maguire guest starred in an episode, he was great as well. Karen David played a young Denise Christopher with excellence.

They didn't let Matt Frewer do an accent, so he was fine.

They have a time machine where they can go anywhere in time. How can you go wrong with this premise?

They have writers from Mad Men and The Walking Dead.

They have stories where they can focus on women, People of Colour and queer people who have all been forgotten in history. This is the key point on why the show should have worked-- the hidden histories.

This all could have worked. This should have worked. This fucking show SHOULD HAVE WORKED.

If they hadn't had a forced love story between the main woman character and the horrible, stupid, possessive toxic masculinity wrapped up in insecurity soldier boy.

Everything else about this stupid show worked. But they spent so much time focussing on a love story between the two most boring, most under-developed, worst characters on the show that they ruined it.

I don't know if it was Matt Lanter's acting, if it was the writing, the directing, I don't know.

What I do know is that every time Rufus, Jiya, Flynn, Denise, Connor and Emma were on the screen, I cared what happened. When Lucy was on the screen by herself, I cared less, but it was fine. When Lucy and Wyatt were on the screen, I zoned out. I came on Tumblr, I checked my emails, I replied to texts from friends. I could not care even a second every time they were on screen. When just Soldier Boy was on, I started to doze.

This show is SO frustrating. SO much of it worked. But not the bits they were so focussed on showing.

This show makes me mad sometimes. I'm mad at the lost opportunities, I'm mad for the moments that worked well and were never unpacked. I'm mad for all the episodes we could have had highlighting women, People of Colour and queer people forgotten through history. I'm mad that to get to all the great moments with Flynn, Rufus, Jiya, Denise, Connor and Emma, I have to sit through SO much crap with Lucy and Soldier Boy.

This show is like two different shows-- an interesting one with lots of great characters in interesting situations, and a horrible soap opera with the dumbest, most selfish, most bland white people ever that I wish would just die.

And then two minutes later, Rufus or Flynn is on scene and I care again.

This show makes me mad.

[briangroth27]

Look! Up in the Spinner Rack!

It's a bird! It's a plane! It's Action Comics #1!

Yesterday (April 18, 2023) was the super-impressive 85th anniversary of Superman & Lois Lane's first appearances! These two are among my absolute favorite characters in all of fiction & it's amazing to see them continue to flourish & inspire today. There's something indelibly timeless & iconic about the Superman mythos & visuals that makes me feel like a kid again, fully believing a man can fly & wishing I could too.

I vehemently disagree that Superman's outdated & needs to be "cooler." He is cool, he's just not the angry power fantasy some people wish he was. There are other characters for that, but that doesn't mean Clark's one-dimensional or stagnant. He's not an unrelatable god either: he's an immigrant, an adopted son, a husband, a father, a friend. I also prefer him choosing to be a hero in the face of corruption–and because he himself was helped when he was most vulnerable–to being sent here on a mission to save & inspire us; he’s inspirational without being issued a mandate. Whether you prefer Clark Kent or Superman as the primary guy--I've come to think neither is a mask & they're both exaggerated yet honest sides of his personality--he proves power doesn't have to corrupt, that no matter where you're from you can help make things better, and that no matter how weak we seem or powerless we feel, we can all be someone's greatest hero in the fight for truth, justice, & a better tomorrow.

A long time ago I saw someone say Lois is such a strong character that she could've existed without Superman & been just as great, & that's absolutely true. While I love the screwball comedy tenor of their romance, the fact that she's Clark's equal in the fight for justice (& his superior in journalism) makes her every bit the hero he is. Sure she gets into danger a lot, but usually it's her tenacity to stop criminals & get the story that lands her there, not a plot requirement for Superman to rescue someone. I don't buy that Superman's humanity & goodness rests entirely on Lois--he loves people & that should be why he pursues journalism, to hear & share their stories, so if he did lose her he wouldn't lose himself--but the two of them absolutely evolve each other's worldviews & arcs brilliantly. Her cynicism & jaded view of the world fading when confronted by both Clark & Superman--but never losing her wit or edge--compliments Superman's never-ending battle challenging his optimism & faith in people perfectly.

Smallville is my absolute favorite version of Superman because of the writing, directing, acting, characters, relationships, & brilliant balance of Clark's dual heritages culminating in his ability to fly. It also didn't hurt that it hit at exactly the right time for me, as I was a year older than Clark when it aired & am still finding commonalities between us (both positive & regrettable hahaha) as I rewatch it again in tandem with Tom Welling & Michael Rosenbaum's Talkville podcast. Smallville also had a tone that allowed for relationship drama, horror-tinged villains, campy fun, & heightened comic book adventures, all grounded by human relationships (& it's my favorite show ever; the one that makes me want to be a writer), but there are so many other great iterations of the Man of Steel out there for everyone! Christopher Reeve (whose acting hands-down proves the glasses & demeanor change works), Superman & Lois, Superman Smashes the Klan, Superman: Miracle Monday, Superman the Animated Series, & Superman: Secret Identity are just a few of the best ones. Take time to check some out this week!

Despite all we've gotten in film, TV, animation, radio, & comics over the decades, there's a beautiful scene in Miracle Monday I've never seen adapted anywhere & I hope we finally get in Superman & Lois, My Adventures with Superman, or the newest iteration in Superman Legacy: at an especially low point, Clark flies to the arctic & just listens. He hears something no one else can--the sounds of the entire planet harmonizing to form the "song of the Earth"--and his heartbeat completes the song, showing him this is where he belongs.

It's insane that we're just 15 years out from Action Comics' 100th anniversary. How will the Man of Tomorrow meet our actual tomorrow? I can't wait to find out & see what's next for Lois & Clark (& Kara, John Henry, Jimmy, Jon, Natasha, Kong, Connor, Krypto, Lana, Martha, Jonathan, Perry, Lex, Brainiac, Bizarro, Parasite, Mxyzptlk, Metallo, Livewire, Silver Banshee, and the rest)!

[stewblog]

Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning, Part One

It’s time to fully acknowledge the Mission: Impossible series as one of the great achievements in action cinema, and with it Christopher McQuarrie as one of the medium’s great action directors.

Knowing what little I do about McQuarrie as a person (via podcasts and various interviews), it’s a label he would likely brush off, content to merely cast himself as still a novice. And while such modesty might be expected given he only has five directing credits to his name, the visible results of his talent and proficiency at the art of crafting kinetic, white-knuckle action sequences speaks for itself. He might claim he’s merely paying homage to the works that inspired him and standing on the shoulders of the cinematic giants who came before him (and he wouldn’t be wrong), but the ways in which he has raised the bar for blockbuster action filmmaking simply cannot be ignored. His latest opus, Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning, Part One, all but sets this in stone.

Before Dead Reckoning, I was certain John Wick Chapter 4 would run away with the title of “The Year’s Best Action Movie.” Now I’m not so sure. Because while Wick 4 unquestionably contains a cornucopia of stunts, shootouts and car chases (sometimes in the same scene), it lacks the grandness and the overall scope of Dead Reckoning, which also is no slouch when it comes to punching, shooting and driving. Wick 4 lacks a jaw-dropping fight atop a speeding, runaway train in the Swiss Alps. Nor does it have one of the most creatively handicapped vehicle chases since Tomorrow Never Dies. And while Keanu Reeves has proven himself beyond capable at being a fully convincing action hero, there’s truly something to be said for the raw audacity of Tom Cruise’s death-defying antics as he quite literally throws himself into the wind to perform stunts that few people in the world (much less in their right mind) would do.

All of that to say, Dead Reckoning Part One is a symphony of action filmmaking that has nearly everything you could want out of a four-quadrant crowd-pleasing blockbuster as this now-familiar team of secret agents trots across the globe and does what they do best: Navigate their way through white-knuckle mayhem and save the world. And they do it with the flavor of classic action cinema fully spread across its surface. This is McQuarrie once more pushing the boundaries of practical stunt work while keeping his mind set firmly on the genre-defining works that came before. There are moments here that would make John Frankenheimer, Buster Keaton, Steven Spielberg and William Friedkin equally proud.

But for as much as its action is rooted in the past, the thematic core of the film has its gaze dead-set on the near future. If Top Gun: Maverick was Tom Cruise’s defiant stance against the aloofness of digital visual effects and its proliferation in the medium, then Dead Reckoning Part One is him standing against the threatened onslaught of artificial intelligence usurping the role of writing and design. And it does so in a much more blatant manner. Top Gun: Maverick communicated this stance through a few lines of dialogue. Dead Reckoning makes it the entire plot.

Dead Reckoning is less a spy movie and more an international chase sequence. It’s not unusual for Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) and his crew to be chased by agents of his own government, but it’s a little different this time since they’re not just out to keep him from doing something crazy. They’re out to stop him because the people at the top of the food chain want control over the very fabric of truth. The artificial intelligence entity known as, you guessed it, The Entity, threatens to eradicate the lines between fact and fiction, throwing the world into chaos unless it can be controlled. It probably can’t, but that’s not stopping the U.S. government from trying and they’re not about to let Ethan Hunt get in their way. The twist, though, is that The Entity has become self-aware and has enthralled an acolyte to serve its interests: Gabriel (Esai Morales).

Gabriel is one of nearly half a dozen newcomers and he almost immediately establishes himself as Ethan’s most formidable nemesis of the series. This is augmented by Morales’ confident performance, making Gabriel suave and slick and charismatic, but in a subdued, dangerous manner. Hayley Atwell’s fast-fingered thief, Grace, is the other major standout. She quickly finds she’s in way over her head after stealing and re-stealing the film’s MacGuffin: A key that grants access to The Entity. She becomes entangled with Ethan and the team, who are then pursued by a pair of government enforcers played by Top Gun: Maverick’s Greg Tarzan Davis and consummate “That Guy” character actor Shea Wigham.

The ensuing mayhem is, effectively, a nearly three-hour long chase that spans the sands of Abu Dhabi to the canals of Venice to the mountains of Switzerland. It’s breathless and exhilarating and moves so fast I was actually shocked to find out its actual runtime. McQuarrie has paced this one to near-perfection, transferring the blistering momentum he so superbly captures in his chase sequences and infuses it into the film writ large.

If there’s a chink in the armor of the film, it’s that the freewheeling process that McQuarrie and Cruise employ in crafting these films threatens to buckle under the weight of the approach. The pair are notorious for rewriting characters on the fly as filming goes on, often abandoning whole arcs or concepts entirely in favor of a new approach inspired by a cast member’s comment or line delivery. The collaborative nature of the approach is laudable, and on the whole it works far better than it should given how roundly entertaining McQuarrie’s entries have been thus far. But there are specifics at play here that can feel muddled, particularly in regards to when certain characters know what or how, that is either confusing or outright nonsensical. Thankfully, McQuarrie, the cast and crew are nimble enough to never fall through the cracks, but the cracks show perhaps more than in past entries.

But for however many cracks do show, the strength of what is accomplished far outweighs nits to be picked from the details. In a macro sense, this is one of the most impressive, thoroughly entertaining tentpole blockbusters of the last decade, easily, and I can’t wait to see how it all comes to a final head in Part Two.

[the-influx-of-film]

Documentary Analysis and Review:

Side by Side, 2012

Directed by Christopher Kenneally

Is celluloid film dead? What does the influx of digital cinema look like now and what will it become in the future? Actor and producer Keanu Reeves delves deep into the debate, interviewing an array of experts to gain their perspectives on changes to the art of storytelling.

I have recently revisited Side by Side because I had a conversation with my dad about celluloid film. He showed me how he would make his own little projector as a child using a torch and a magnifying glass. He then demonstrated by finding old negatives and attempted to project them onto the wall using those same materials. It was a cool moment, leading me back to the documentary.

Firstly, Side by Side is a well-made piece, showcasing an array of artists, including cinematographers, directors, producers, actors, colorists and editors. Each artist convey different perspectives on celluloid film and, digital cinema. Hence the name, Side by Side.

These people are more than experts, they are living, breathing storytellers who know how to evoke emotion in an audience. How to use lights, shadows and angles to convey these messages. These artists know how to use special effects to represent something unreal, but make it feel like it exists. They manipulate shape, texture, colour, sound and analyse movements humans and other creatures make to create an authentically believable image. They are the brave ones who go above and beyond to convey the stories sewn into our culture. So, to those who want to learn more about the evolution of film, hearing what these artists have to say is invaluable.

Titanic, 1997 dir. James Cameron

The Matrix, 1999 dir. Lilly Wachowski and Lana Wachowski

Lana Wachowski predicts at the beginning of the documentary, that storytellers and their audiences need to be prepared to “mourn the loss of film.” This means there will be a grieving process to remember what was the beginning of storytelling and how we influenced culture. Moreover Wachowski’s comment speaks to a difficult transition for film makers who are accustomed to celluloid. This means using large celluloid cameras, filling and replacing the magazine and waiting to watch the final product of what was filmed the previous day. All these processes disappear with mourning the loss. And this means moving in a new direction, that being digital. This means a director may use a smaller camera, not needing to change the magazine because the capture is through pixels, and being able to watch the take immediately after shooting. What does this all imply? It implies a resistance, like with all other types of changes.

Celluloid camera

Digital camera

Some storytellers are resistant to changing the way they tell stories. The materials and processes involved have become just as important as the final product to these artists. Wally Pfister summarises this in an interview, saying, “It’s really sad right now to see cameras cording imagery in an inferior way starting to take over film.” Pfister speaks to new methods failing to live up to the standard of the twentieth century. However, it also speaks to his passion and appreciation for celluloid. This is because some film makers prefer seeing granularity, colour and texture of celluloid. Providing something that cannot be captured by the ones and zeros on a digital camera. Hence why Pfister will not “trade my oil paints for a set of crayons.”

We can see the granularity talked about in the documentary in the image below:

So, we have the process of mourning the loss, and a resistance? What else is there to consider? The artists each talk about what they think is better and why…celluloid or digital? But who can really be the judge of what constitutes better? One approach to this question is summarised by filmmaker, David Lynch who says, “people like great stories… how they get there, it doesn’t really matter.” Lynch suggests that the story is the important component in the film-making process rather than how the information is captured. This leads us back to the belief that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A cliche really, but it does hold true to this debate. Applying this logic here, we can then say, beauty is collected in the lens of the camera, no matter if there is an electronic sensor or film behind the lens. One step further, if we were talking about 3D capture, beauty is collected in the lens of the cameras. The story is then presented to the audience, who are able to draw upon the information and make connections and form new perspectives.

With all of this considered, there is also another element… nostalgia. In the era we live in today, people are seeking nostalgia. This is the longing for the recreation of the past. This is because things do not feel the same as they once were, such as the way we shop, the way we parent and the way we communicate with each other.

Social media has had a big influence on change in our culture. It has altered the way we communicate with each other, creating new dynamics between human beings. It has also produced an influx of data for us to consume, from the present and the past… nostalgia.

This reminds us of nostalgia and the role social media has in communicating it. One example is the Tik Tok algorithm. It seems to distribute videos featuring songs from the 80s and 90s. Most of the consumers on Tik Tok were not even born when these songs were released… myself included.

Perhaps a relevant example to the current topic is the reels feature on Instagram. A reel on this platform only lasts for a maximum of 90 seconds. A short burst of material. If we think about celluloid film cameras, they can only capture approximately 10 minutes of material, also a short burst of material. The name itself, ‘reel,’ speaks to maintaining a connection to the original way of filming within the new era, suggesting digital platforms haven’t lost touch with traditional methods of storytelling. It’s a friendly nod to what came before. An acknowledgement. It’s as if we hold celluloid film to be the pinnacle of storytelling. Having that connection makes users feel professional and creates another space for serious content creators. This reminds me of what Reed Morano said in the documentary, “when you run a film camera on set everybody seems to take things a little bit more seriously,” suggesting artists put their best foot forward when they know the money is rolling on the reel.

In a way, there is a greater appreciation for celluloid film because it’s inevitable rarity, considering major companies have ceased producing and distributing celluloid film cameras. This rarity increases the nostalgic effect all the way down the production line, from making a film all the way to the consumer. So even though celluloid is fading away, it is the people that will keep it alive, through consumption and reminiscing within culture.

However, it is mentioned in the documentary that transferring to digital is important because it’s in its infancy and needs to be developed. George Lucas is a firm believer of this. James Cameron elaborates by saying “I’m not sure I ever want to feel that we’ve arrived technologically. I always want to feel there is something we can do better.” Lucas and Cameron speak to the continuation of movie making and, understanding it is important to not only embrace this new mechanism, but develop it, refine it and redefine it. These artists see the potential and are curious about the unknown possibilities, which motivates their work. One doesn’t have to go far to see the lengths Cameron went to to create the first Avatar movie, using special effects and 3D cameras.

In conclusion, changes to storytelling in our culture brings forth an influx of relevant and necessary processes, including mourning, resistance, nostalgia, and excitement for the future. But celluloid is not dead and some artists will continue to make a conscious choice to use it…to keep the essence of it alive, but to also pay respect to what was the only way to capture images, emotion, sound and overall a story in the first place.

[shree3redranger]

I'll never understand why anyone wants another Christopher Reeve. His portrayal was great for Superman at the time his first two films were made. They reflected the time period and naivete of the people. Also the hope and optimism of the time. And while those movies will always be classics - why do we want a rehash?

Why do we want the same thing over and over again? Why can't we go in a different direction? Reeve's portrayal of Superman was not the only way to interpret Superman. I don't want anyone who dons the tights to be a carbon copy of any other portrayal. I want something new and fresh and reflective of its time. Doesn't mean that hope and optimism can't exist. It can just be shown through newer obstacles. We don't need the same old villains and landscapes. Superman is so much more than that. But people calling for a Reeve clone in portrayal only seem to know that version of the character. Explore the comics as source material. There is a vast and rich history to Superman where there are numerous shades to his character beyond smiles and being the, "Big Blue Boyscout". That's just one facet to him.

Let's just hope David Cornsweat can make it his own and stand out from that. Let's hope to get something we've never seen before that will electrify us enough that we don't have to draw comparisons. And please, let's stop declaring who knows and doesn't know the character. There are so many versions and adaptations of Superman that the argument is pointless. If you happen to like a particular version over others that's fine. But your version is no more the definitive version as the next.

[redsnerdden]

Super/Man Documentary Focuses On The Life of Christopher Reeve

"You'll Believe a Man Can Fly" Super/Man Documentary Focuses On The Life of Christopher Reeve #Superman #DCComics #Comics #ChristopherReeveStory

Warner Bros released a brand-new trailer for the upcoming Documentary, Super/Man, focusing on the life of Christopher Reeve, better known to many as Superman. Directed by Ian Bonhôte and Peter Ettedgui, the new documentary follows the late actor’s rise to stardom as the Man of Steel, which also includes his fight to find a cure for spinal cord injuries after he became a quadriplegic following a…

[newsshoesbluesanddudes]

The History of Superman: The Man of Steel's Journey Through Time

Superman, the iconic superhero, has stood the test of time as one of the most beloved and enduring characters in popular culture. Since his creation in the 1930s, Superman has become a symbol of hope, justice, and the quintessential American hero. His journey from comic book pages to the big screen is a fascinating story of evolution, adaptation, and cultural impact. In this article, we’ll explore the history of Superman, from his origins to his role in today’s world, while naturally integrating some informative links for those who want to dive deeper into specific aspects of his legacy.

The Birth of Superman: 1930s Origins

Superman was created by writer Jerry Siegel and artist Joe Shuster, two high school friends from Cleveland, Ohio. The character first appeared in Action Comics #1 in June 1938, published by Detective Comics, which would later become DC Comics. Superman was an instant hit, introducing the world to a new kind of hero—one with superhuman strength, the ability to fly, and a moral compass that was unshakeable.

Siegel and Shuster’s creation was inspired by a mix of influences, including science fiction, mythology, and the political climate of the time. The idea of a powerful being coming to Earth to protect humanity resonated with readers, particularly during the tumultuous era leading up to World War II. Superman quickly became a symbol of American ideals, embodying the fight against tyranny and injustice.

Evolution Through the Decades: The 1940s to the 1960s

As Superman’s popularity grew, so did his mythology. In the 1940s, Superman expanded beyond comic books into radio shows, animated cartoons, and even serial films. The Adventures of Superman radio show introduced new elements to the character’s lore, such as his vulnerability to Kryptonite and his famous catchphrase, "Truth, Justice, and the American Way."

By the 1950s, Superman was a household name, thanks in part to the television series starring George Reeves. This era also saw the introduction of iconic characters like Lois Lane, Lex Luthor, and Jimmy Olsen, who have remained integral to Superman’s story.

During these decades, Superman’s character continued to evolve, reflecting the changing societal values and fears. The Cold War influenced many of the stories, with Superman often facing threats that mirrored the real-world concerns of nuclear war and espionage.

The 1970s: Superman on the Big Screen

Superman’s transition to the big screen in the 1970s was a game-changer. The 1978 film, Superman: The Movie, directed by Richard Donner and starring Christopher Reeve, set a new standard for superhero films. The movie’s success solidified Superman’s place in cinematic history and introduced him to a new generation of fans.

Christopher Reeve’s portrayal of Superman is still widely regarded as one of the best, capturing both the hero’s strength and his humanity. The film’s tagline, "You’ll believe a man can fly," perfectly encapsulated the sense of wonder that Superman brought to audiences. The movie also helped to cement the iconic imagery of Superman, particularly the Superman S logo, which became a symbol recognized around the world. For more on the logo's significance, check out this article on the Superman S logo meaning from Northamptonshire News.

The 1980s and 1990s: Challenges and Reinvention

The 1980s and 1990s were a period of reinvention and challenges for Superman. The character faced declining comic book sales and a changing landscape in the superhero genre. To stay relevant, DC Comics took bold steps, including the controversial "Death of Superman" storyline in 1992, where the Man of Steel was killed by the monstrous Doomsday. This event was one of the most talked-about moments in comic book history and had a significant impact on the industry.

Despite the challenges, Superman’s legacy endured. The character was continuously reimagined in various media, including television shows like Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman and the animated Superman: The Animated Series. These adaptations kept Superman in the public eye and introduced him to new audiences.

The 21st Century: Superman in a Modern World

In the 21st century, Superman has continued to evolve, reflecting the complexities of the modern world. The character has been portrayed in a range of media, from the critically acclaimed Smallville TV series to the more recent DC Extended Universe (DCEU) films, where Henry Cavill took on the role of the iconic hero.

The DCEU films, including Man of Steel (2013) and Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016), presented a more conflicted and darker version of Superman, reflecting contemporary issues and the changing nature of heroism. These films have sparked much debate among fans and critics alike, illustrating how Superman remains a relevant and dynamic character even after more than 80 years.

The Enduring Legacy of Superman

Superman’s legacy is undeniable. As one of the first superheroes, he laid the groundwork for the entire genre, influencing countless other characters and stories. His symbol, the famous Superman S logo, has become synonymous with heroism and hope. This logo's meaning, as discussed in Northamptonshire News, goes beyond just being an emblem on his chest; it represents the ideals that Superman has stood for since his inception.

Superman’s influence extends beyond comics and films. He has become a cultural icon, representing the best of humanity and the enduring belief in justice and goodness. This influence can be seen in various aspects of popular culture, from academic discussions on mythology and heroism (as explored in this Smithsonian article) to the ongoing debates about the role of superheroes in society.

Conclusion

The history of Superman is a testament to the power of storytelling and the enduring appeal of a character who, despite his alien origins, embodies the very best of humanity. From his humble beginnings in the 1930s to his current status as a global icon, Superman has remained a symbol of hope, strength, and the unyielding pursuit of justice.

As we look to the future, it’s clear that Superman will continue to inspire and captivate audiences around the world. For more insights into the superman S logo meaning and other fascinating aspects of this legendary character, be sure to explore the resources available on Northamptonshire News.

Superman’s story is far from over, and as he continues to soar through the pages of comic books, the screens of cinemas, and the hearts of fans, his legacy will only grow stronger, proving that the Man of Steel truly is a hero for all ages.