Archive for March, 2009
26 items.
Have I entered into a phase where only visual gags will serve as the punchline? Perhaps after coming off such a long storyline, I’ve lost interest in having my characters actually speak for a while.
Even though today’s comic is a continuation of Monday’s comic, I really have nothing more to say about Watchmen.
The response to my review generated a lot of feedback in the comments area. People left some very interesting opinions. Some of you agreed with me, some of you didn’t. Some of you even exposed me to some new ideas and pointed out the hypocrisy of a few of my statements.
All things said, it was exactly the kind of debate I wanted to have about the movie and everyone was well behaved. So, thank you.
But, yeah. I’m all Watchmen’d out. We expressed our exhaustion a little bit during The Triple Feature on Monday.
After answering a reader question, I don’t think any of us were all that excited to start talking about the movie because we had spent the better part of the day hovering around the internet, explaining and defending our positions. It didn’t even help that we were largely aligned in our impressions of the film. I think we all felt beat about the head from it.
Still, I think we produced a very good show from our conversation. You should download it and give it a listen if you have time.
Something else you might be interested in… I’ve started to use Ustream to capture the comic-making process and recorded a session last night. You can download it here.
The set up is simple enough. My webcam captures the work I do on screen while a little picture-in-picture at the bottom right hand corner shows my ugly mug while I do my best to narrate what I’m doing.
The interface includes a chat field so people watching in real time can leave comments. I respond to some of what they’re saying there as well.
You can watch me work on the comic live every Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday evening. I don’t really have a set schedule for when I sit down and start working, but it’s typically after 10:00 PM CST. If you follow me on Twitter, you’ll likely see a notice to let you know when I’m broadcasting. Otherwise, if you miss it, you can watch the recording later from my Ustream account page, where everything will be archived.
If you’ve ever been interested to learn how I put the comic together, these recordings might provide you with some insight. And if you want to ask me questions about my process as I’m producing the comic, you now have that opportunity as well!
Just thought you might like to know.
No other news today so I’ll leave you with that. The weekend is almost here! Hang in there and I’ll talk to you soon!
[ 5 Comments ]
This week has been a weird amalgam for me. I haven’t quite shed the trappings of a story line, but have succeeded in omitting most of the dialogue. It’s been a fun little exercise in writing visual gags.
Truthfully, after Monday’s comic, I just went where my imagination led me and I like how things turned out. I like this comic a lot for the pacing, the action and the overuse of blue – which hardly seems to appear in Theater Hopper, now that I think about it.
I probably could have been making more jokes about Watchmen, but I was more entertained by the idea of people having a fight using spray paint instead.
Speaking of Watchmen – and I know I said I was all Watchmen’d out – have you guys seen this? It’s a letter from Watchmen screenwriter David Hayter begging people to see Watchmen in the theater a second time this weekend.
Long story short, it’s basically a call-to-arms of the geek nation. Hayter implores us to see Watchmen a second time not only because “everyone is watching to see how the film will do in its second week” but because if you don’t, you aren’t supporting “movies that have a brain, or balls.” Begs Hayter, “if it drops off the radar after the first weekend, they will never allow a film like this to be made again.”
Gee, I had no idea that the fate of the comic book movie as a genre hinged entirely on Watchmen. Ugh.
Hayter discloses that he doesn’t see any extra money from Watchmen doing extra business. So, taking the cynical view, one has to assume that he’s trying to save face or keep his name from being too closely associated with Watchmen’s potential failure.
Hayter says that he makes his plea on behalf of “people who love smart, dark entertainment, on a grand, operatic scale.” But let’s be blunt. Watchmen is nearly dead on it’s feet. It underperformed in it’s opening weekend against NO competition. Box office analysts were expecting it to take in $70 million last week and instead it limped across the finish line with $56 million. Divisive reviews and bad word of mouth caught up to it by Saturday night and now, faced with a potential 50% drop off (as most second week movies encounter), Watchmen is in danger of being unable to match it’s $150 million production budget in domestic box office. When you factor in the additional marketing and merchandising tied into this movie, a lot of people stand to lose a lot of money.
I’m not saying Watchmen won’t make it’s money back eventually. But compared to the juggernauts of ’08 – Iron Man ($98 million opening weekend) and The Dark Knight ($158 million opening weekend) – it’ll look like the red-headed stepchild of super hero movies if it doesn’t pick up the pace.
Watchmen has been labeled “the greatest comic book of all time.” If it can’t make money, what does that say about the quality of the film or – in Hayter’s assertion – comic book fans, in general.
When you think about it, it’s kind of insulting to put the success or failure on the backs of comic book fans. Hayter claims that if Watchmen isn’t successful in it’s second week, you’ll never see such an uncompromising, harsh and gritty vision of super hero antics on screen again. But my assertion is that his plea just put a big, fat target on the back of comic book movies but assigning more importance to the adaptation of Watchmen than it deserves. Now there is a greater likelihood that people will be looking more closely than they would have for a movie that did $56 million on it’s opening weekend. Instead of studios saying “Well, it underperformed, it must not be very good.” Now they’ll look at Hayter’s plea, see Watchmen tank after the second week and say “Well, it was the comic book nerds’ fault. They didn’t come out to support this movie.
Incidentally, did Hayter miss the memo about The Dark Knight’s $1 BILLION dollar world wide gross?
Granted, people are a little more familiar with Batman than they are with Rorschach, but Nolan’s version of The Caped Crusader wasn’t exactly piffle. It dealt with some pretty lofty issues, too. The duality of man, the nature of good and evil… high test stuff. It wasn’t (for lack of a better comparison) Batman & Robin or Superman III. And it was also JUST AS LONG as Watchmen, so do cry to me about there being less opportunity to show the film and claiming that impacts box office.
If people want to see the movie, they’ll see it. But begging comic book fans to see it a second time out of some misplaced sense of duty? That’s just desperate and insulting. Bad form, Mr. Hayter.
Truth be told, I might see Watchmen a second time. But only if I can catch it in IMAX. Maybe if they can get the directors cut into theaters – the 5 hour version promises a more in-depth analysis of the characters- I’d see it. Otherwise, I’ll wait for it on DVD when it’s loaded down with extras and packaged with the animated Tales of The Black Freighter (because you know that’s coming.)
But I’m not going to see the Watchmen a second time as-is. Because, frankly, I didn’t think the theatrical cut was all that good.
I’m a card-carrying nerd. Will be for life. But don’t exploit me for your short term gain. I’ll stand up for a movie that I think deserves it. I’ll stand up for quality. But standing up for Watchmen at this point would not be a defense of “uncompromising vision.” It would be a permission slip for directors with more style than substance to run roughshod over future properties and ultimately short change the genre. Sorry, I don’t want to see a version of Y: The Last Man with slow-motion explosions and awkwardly staged sex scenes. I’ll stand up for quality.
That’s my two cents. I’m sure some of you will disagree. That’s what the comments section is for. Leave your thoughts below. Does anyone plan to see Watchmen a second time this weekend? Did Hayter’s plea have anything to do with your decision? Let us know.
[ 34 Comments ]
I just wanted to take a moment and send kudos to Paul Southworth whose comic Ugly Hill ends today after 3 years of tearing it up on the interwebs.
Paul is a standup guy and one of the more consistently funny people I know. If you haven’t read Ugly Hill before, you’d do yourself a favor to start at the beginning and read through his archives. It’s well worth your time.
[ No Comments ]
When I told Cami I was doing a comic about Miss March, she had no idea what I was talking about. I think this teaches us an important lesson about marketing. Whereas I seemed to encounter a commercial for this film every four seconds on MTV and G4, it’s evident that the studio was not doing much by way of advertising on HGTV or TLC.
Just an observation.
Then again, considering Miss March came in 10th this weekend, maybe they didn’t advertise enough? I’m not even sure why I’m going out of my way to make a joke about it except I couldn’t think of anything funny to go along with Race to Witch Mountain.
This has nothing to do with the movie, but writing a joke about Playboy got me thinking about the first time I encountered the magazine. I was 8 years-old and was over at a friend’s house. He broke out a few copies that belonged to his dad. It couldn’t be a more cliche telling if you tried. Although I remember this kid was maybe a year older than me and, even at my own young age, I found it unfair that he had access to this kind of stuff when I didn’t.
In hindsight, I kind of have to wonder what kind of Dad leaves nudie magazines somewhere easily accessible for his 7 year-old son to find them.
I never really got into Playboy. I remember thinking when I got to college that I would get a subscription. But I didn’t have a credit card to get a subscription and I didn’t have the nerve to go to a magazine shop and to one. So, instead, I read Maxim for a year. Then I realized that Maxim is basically Playboy for guys that don’t have the nerve to buy Playboy and gave up entirely.
Maybe it didn’t matter. I had a roommate in college who had a poster of a woman taking her top off and he positioned it opposite the door so that you were greeted with it every time you waked in the room. It was a real crowd-pleaser on Parent’s Weekend. Nevermind asking Cami to come over. I didn’t spend very much time in my room that year. Seriously – where do you even buy posters of topless women? Even Spencer’s Gifts draws the line at underboob.
You may have read the news that Watchmen wasn’t able to hold on to the top spot at the box office this weekend. In fact, it was down 67%, which is kind of shocking for an event film like this. Or at least for a film with so much hype surrounding it. Even Speed Racer only dropped of 53%.
What does this mean? Well, I think it means that negative word of mouth not only caught up with Watchmen, but it dragged it into an alley and suffocated it. I guess David Hayer’s plea fell on deaf ears.
I don’t take in particular glee in reporting Watchmen’s failure. If anything, I’m disappointed that it might keep Warner Bros. from releasing a more thorough Director’s Cut.
But I’d be lying if I didn’t admit some satisfaction for keeping my expectations at a level where I wouldn’t end up feeling hurt by an inferior product. For better or for worse, Zach Snyder delivered pretty much what I expected him to.
And that’s all she wrote.
That’s about all she wrote for me, too. Incidentally, if you visited the site over the weekend and left a comment on any of the blog posts, they were probably tied up in Feedback Purgatory as I was out of town over the weekend on a little mini vacation. I went with Cami and my sister-in-law to the Lincoln Presidential Library in Springfield, Illinois.
This is how we kick off Spring Break in the Brazelton family. Not with warm-weather destinations, cocktails or wet t-shirt contests. We keep it educational.
At any rate, if you left a comment over the weekend, they’ve all since been approved. Most of them revolved around Watchmen. So you can either go back into those blogs and continue the conversation or pick up where you left off here!
Talk to you soon!
[ 18 Comments ]
Does anyone out there have a website that uses ad networks? Ever since I redesign the site back in January, I’ve been trying to tweak my ad set up. Right now I have a couple of networks I serve ads from and I use OpenX to deliver the ads through the site. But I need some help refining things. If you have any experience, please leave your comments below or send me an e-mail at theaterhopper@hotmail.com.
Incidentally, individual advertisers can have their ads placed on Theater Hopper ahead of the network advertisers by purchasing ad space based on impressions. Click here to learn more about advertising with Theater Hopper.
Thanks.
[ 1 Comment ]
I have deeper thoughts about I Love You, Man. More so than what the comic might suggest.
When I saw the trailers for this a few months ago, I was really pumped to see it. Mostly because I am nurturing a serious man-crush for Paul Rudd and will watch anything he’s in.
But as time went on, I started asking myself “What is this movie?” The plot is simple enough. A man (Rudd) is getting married and realizes that he doesn’t have any guy friends to stand up on the altar with him. So he goes on a series of “man-dates” to find a new best friend and a Best Man for his wedding.
If you stop and think about it and if the genders were the opposite… wouldn’t this be a chick flick?
Both Rudd and co-star Jason Segel have gone on record stating that they don’t like how their film has been categorized as a “bromance.” But what else can you call it? Personally, I think it’s more fitting to label I Love You, Man a “bromance” such than other films that have been identified in that way. Knocked Up or Pineapple Express, for example.
Here’s another question… It’s shown in the trailer that Rudd’s character has both a brother and a father who is still alive. Why does he not ask either of them to be his Best Man. I don’t mean to judge the film based on the trailer (and hopefully they acknowledge the issue in the movie) but give us something to hang our hat in during the preview so we’re not asking dumb questions like that. A throw away line. ANYTHING!
“Hey, brother. Wanna be my best man?”
“No.”
“Dad?”
“No.”
#smash cut to a hilarious montage of “man-dates”#
Whatever. I’m totally seeing I Love You, Man this weekend anyway. Like I said, I have a man-crush to tend to.
Incidentally, while I was researching information about I Love You, Man, I came across this video of a performance in Rudd’s cannon I’m sure he’d like to forget. It’s from the Hong Kong action movie Gen-Y Cops (a sequel to the popular movie Gen-X Cops). In the film, Rudd plays F.B.I. Agent Ian Curtis (paging Joy Division!) who walks around with awesome feathered hair and highlights.
The video is a little more than 8 minutes long, but I encourage you to watch it in its entirety. You won’t be disappointed.
Gen-Y Cops came out in 2000, a few years before Rudd became more of a mainstream talent but a few years after he made his splash in Clueless. I am begging for some late night host to find this clip and show it to him when he’s making the promotional rounds for I Love You, Man. Not to make him uncomfortable, or anything. Just to hear him explain it. Rudd has a very winning self-deprecating sense of humor. I’d like to hear his take on it.
I had a couple of other things not related to the comic that I wanted to talk about today, but I think I’m going to quit while I’m ahead. It’s kind of hard to follow up with anything else after watching a video like that.
So… anyone holding out for a follow up with Gen-Z Cops?
[ 13 Comments ]
Tom’s really being a sarcastic jerk in today’s comic, isn’t he? I think I will hide behind the “making my characters unlikable gives them depth” defense, Your Honor!
Julia Roberts bashing aside, I’m actually interested in seeing Duplicity at some point this weekend. It’s written and directed by Tony Gilroy and this is his follow up to the brilliant and tightly wound Michael Clayton. Duplicity looks to be a little more effervescent, but it still swims in the waters of dubious corporate behavior.
Post-economic meltdown, I wonder how that will play? Roberts, along with co-star Clive Owen play ex-spooks and full time lovers representing two corporations who team up to con their respective bosses and steal a profitable new product. Will the audience find tolerance for a movie about corporate shenanigans – even if it’s the corporations (not the consumers) getting screwed at the end?
Maybe it doesn’t matter. Maybe they just want to see Roberts flash that ivory billboard she calls a smile. Ms. Roberts? The Joker called. He wants his mouth back.
Ya’ burn!
I keed. I keed. Hey, Duplicity looks like a lot of fun. And even though Cami and I will be seeing I Love You, Man this weekend instead, I’d still like to try and squeeze this one in – if for no other reason than to see Clive Owen put on the charm.
Owen has been locked down by a lot of serious drama’s and thrillers lately. I like him best when he’s self-effacing. I mean, Shoot ‘Em Up was a real turd of a movie, but he made it a lot of fun by putting on the airs of an afflicted, tough guy anti-hero.
Real quick, some site news.
I haven’t mentioned it yet, but I’ve moved the ShareThis application under the comic and above the comic navigation (before it was hidden in the lower left hand corner of the blog posts).
If you’re not familiar, ShareThis gathers up the links to nearly every social networking site there is and offers you, the reader, the opportunity to share links to Theater Hopper among your friends and peers.
I’ve been trying in vain to get some traction with social networking and I realize not everyone is on board with it yet. I also don’t want to mention it too much, lest it come off like begging.
But if you’re already on board with the social networking bandwagon, it would be really great if some of you could get into the habit of spreading links back to Theater Hopper around a little bit.
The ShareThis app has connections to StumbleUpon, Digg, Reddit, Del.ico.us, Furl, Technorati and more. It even has connections to Facebook and MySpace – and I know a lot of you have accounts out there.
Anyway, using ShareThis to link back to Theater Hopper is something really easy that you can do to help the site. I appreciate those of you willing to test it out. Thanks.
In the meantime, it looks like a pretty strong weekend for movies. In addition to Duplicity and I Love You, Man, Nicolas Cage is starring in the new apocalypse thriller Knowing. It’s directed by Alex Proays who directed The Crow and also wrote and directed Dark City. So I’m always kind of interested to see what he’s up to even though Knowing kind of looks like it’s covering ground that Jim Carrey movie – The Number 23 – covered a few years back.
What do you guys think? What looks interesting to you? Leave your comments below and I’ll talk to you soon!
[ 13 Comments ]
Mar23
HIS HAIR IS A DEMON AND YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID
March 23rd, 2009 |
(13 votes, average: 7.62 out of 10)
At this point there have been so many B-grade thrillers starting Nicholas Cage and his mighty-morphin’ hairline, it’s almost become a sub-genre within the comic!
I’m kind of fond of the idea that Cage is host to some kind of demonic, mousse-infused demon hairpiece. It would certainly justify a lot of the decisions he’s been making lately.
Knowing was the big box office winner this weekend, bringing in almost $25. I know some people who liked it, but the general consensus is that the film is not good. I’m intrigued by the concept, but it looks like a rental to me so long as no one spoils the whole number thing. I have to admit I am curious to see what happens when they run out.
…But not so curious that I have to run out opening weekend and drop $10 on it.
What’s been interesting is reading the articles about Cage that basically said he’s sold out. Jeffery Wells from Hollywood Elsewhere suggests some kind of virus has gotten into his system, “like a pod was placed next to his bed in ’05 or ’06 and another life form took over.”
John Anderson from The Washington Post cuts to the bone when he suggests that “Cage, once held up as an example of the intrepid artistic impulse, has become something of the poster boy for blind ambition, cynical role selection, questionable judgment and, worst of all, humorlessness: He glowers, he hunches, he looks meaningfully into the distance without it meaning anything at all.”
Owen Gleiberman from Entertainment Weekly doesn’t even attempt to hid his contempt, asking in his article’s headline: Nicholas Cage: Artist or hack?
This could very well be a case of critical dog-piling. These guys could all be feeding each other in terms of their theories. But could the also be reflecting a sense of general disappointment with Cage and his choices?
Not that it’s any business of ours, I suppose. But I think Gleiberman is onto something when he points out that Cage makes movies that people want to see. But Gleiberman is quick to point out that, for some, “Cage has become something of a joke, a proud I don’t give a f—! hack-for-hire who sells out his gifts with such unabashed promiscuity that it’s almost as if he were daring you to call him on it.”
I’m curious what the rest of you have to say about this topic. Personally, I fall somewhere in the middle. I cringe when Cage shows up in movies like Bangkok Dangerous and Next. But I won’t front when I say I really enjoyed him in straight-up-the-middle family entertainment like the National Treasure movies.
What’s your opinion about Cage? Is he selling his gifts short? Has he been doing these B-grade films for so long that you can barely remember his Oscar winning turn in Leaving Las Vegas? Leave your comments below.
In the meantime, don’t forget to tune in to The Triple Feature tonight at 9:00 PM CST over at TalkShoe.com. We’ll be talking about Knowing and the other box office winner this weekend, I Love You, Man.
I managed to see I Love You, Man over the weekend and I liked it. But I spent a lot of time cringing at the awkward social situations Paul Rudd’s character puts himself in the middle of. I saw a little bit of myself in that character. I don’t have a lot of guy friends and I can certainly identify with the challenge of trying to cultivate friendship in adulthood. It’s friggin’ hard! Seriously – I’ve you don’t set yourself up with at least one or two guy friends early on in life, you’re kind of screwed.
To be notified of when The Triple Feature is about to start recording live, start following my Twitter feed. I always make sure to post an announcement about 5 to 10 minutes before we start the show. If you’re online, you can join in the conversation! We hope to see you there!
[ 15 Comments ]
Just because it’s impossible to do a comic about Nicholas Cage without referencing it, here it is once again…
The best scenes from The Wicker Man.
“How’d it get burned? HOW’D IT GET BURNED! HOWDITGETBURNED?!!”
[ 11 Comments ]
You know, I was working on a big blog post this morning to talk about Monsters Vs. Aliens, but my browser crashed before I could post it, so I lost everything.
I’m kind of frustrated at the moment, so I’ll give you the Cliff’s Notes version instead:
- I used to think Dreamworks Animation sucked.
- Kung-Fu Panda changed my mind about that.
- Now I’m really looking forward to Monsters Vs. Aliens.
I know that doesn’t give you a lot to hang your hat on in terms of discussion, but I was literally just about to hit the “SEND” button when I lost the whole thing. So I’m just gonna roll with this.
I think I might be back a little later in the day with some more news. But in the meantime, let’s see if we can generate some conversation around Monsters Vs. Aliens. Are you guys excited for it? Dare I say I might be anticipating this one a little more than I was Watchmen! It just looks fun! Leave your comments below!
Thanks!
[ 14 Comments ]
