Posts Tagged ‘Zack Snyder’
3 items.
This is kind of old news, but I’m playing catch up this week, so bear with me.
On Monday, rumors started flying that Kevin Costner had been cast in Zack Snyder’s reboot of Superman. It didn’t take very long before Latino Review reported that he would be playing Jonathan “Pa” Kent – Superman’s adoptive father.
I think this is a mistake. When I think of Costner, I don’t think of him as a father figure. Nor do I ascribe a nurturing moral center to his list of character attributes.
I think Costner would have been better utilized playing Clark Kent’s brassy Daily Planet Editor Perry White. It’s a bit part, sure. Probably not worth Costner’s time. But it’s a better fit.
Costner is one of those actors that everyone WANTS to like, but he’s got a bit of an a-hole streak in him. I put him in the same category that I put Hugh Grant in – an actor who tried to win people over with charm and good looks but who is ultimately more effective playing self-centered rouges.
I can easily see Costner wearing a vest, chewing on a pipe and barking orders at a grown up Clark Kent than I can see him wearing bib overalls, chewing on a wheat stalk and giving the teenage Superman advice about doin’ what’s right.
Costner has a slow, considerate nature in his performances that I think might have blinded Snyder to the opportunity right under his nose and made him think he was better for Pa Kent. But in my view, Perry White would have been the more interesting father figure for Costner to pursue.
What are your thoughts? Leave your comments below!
[ 4 Comments ]
First, my apologies for the lateness of this strip. If you’ve been following me at all on Twitter or Facebook, you know that I’ve been struggling with it.
I put a lot of pressure on myself to make this comic special because it actually has roots in something I posted on Twitter back in November. After seeing the teaser trailer for Sucker Punch and bearing witness to the cornucopia of geek-approved iconography, I tweeted what became the punchline to this strip. “They should have called it ‘Stuff The Internet Likes: The Movie.'”
That off-handed comment was picked up by the good people over at Topless Robot and included in their write-up of the trailer. And, well, I’ve basically been sitting on my hands, waiting to use it ever since.
Fast forward to last Sunday night and I am wracking my brain trying to figure out how to cram everything I want into my usual four-panel setup. I think I sidestepped the issue pretty well with the large diagonal panel in the middle. But it didn’t solve the problem of actually having to DRAW things that are normally way outside my comfort zone.
Do you have any idea how hard it is to illustrate and color a spinning propeller blade? REALLY HARD! Especially when you’ve never done it before.
There were moments when I was drawing this comic that I absolutely hated it and wanted to throw it away. I finished this one in baby steps, that’s for sure.
I will say that after figuring out the problem with the layout, it gave me just enough momentum to start the pencils. And while I hated the pencils when I was drawing them, finishing them gave me just enough momentum to start the inks… and so on.
After nearly 9 years of producing this comic, some things fall into place very easily. NOTHING about this comic was easy. So I really hope you enjoy it!
Feeling guilty yet? Let’s ignore the comic for a minute and talk about Sucker Punch.
I think most people are familiar with my stance against Zack Snyder. He might be the victim of studio marketing trying to position him as the Next Great Visionary Director, but he’s also not shying away from it and I find his hubris off-putting.
Did 300 and Watchmen look good? Sure, they looked good. But how much of that was organic to Snyder – especially when he basically had storyboards from some of the world’s best graphic artists at his fingertips for reference (iconic images that he relied on heavily).
Sucker Punch will be the true test of Snyder’s visual acuity and – begrudgingly – I have to admit, from the trailers, it looks like he will pass.
I do think he’s leaning pretty heavily on the geek iconography, though. It’s like he went to Comic Con and started cherry picking idea from the most popular booths. “Ooo! Girls in short skirts and too much make-up? Okay! Samurai swords? Toss that in! Mech battle suits? I’ll order ten!” Cynically, I believe Snyder’s little shopping spree was set up as a distraction so he would get a pass from Geek Nation.
What’s worse I that I think Snyder is justifying this with mock analysis. In a photo gallery on Entertainment Weekly, Snyder talked about the costuming of the actresses in the film and how the short skirts and plunging necklines reflect objectification.
“…But Snyder says his intention was to make a movie about the very subject of female objectification,” writes Entertainment Weekly. “The look of Babydoll (Emily Browning) was designed to be ”the personification of innocence and vulnerability,” says Snyder, causing the skeevy men in the movie to both target her and underestimate her.
‘The women in the movie take control of the sexual trappings foisted upon them, even turn [that iconography] into their own weapons. The challenge was to confront the concept of exploitation of women without creating exploitative imagery.'”
So, yeah… I call shenanigans on that.
This is off-topic a little bit, but did anyone catch last week’s episode of 30 Rock where they were parodying The Real Housewives series on Bravo? I hated that episode and here’s why… Even when you’re parodying trash television, you’re still MAKING trash television. You dig?
If Snyder thinks he is confronting the concept of exploitation without creating exploitative imagery, he’s failed. Sucker Punch is exploitation PERSONIFIED. It’s 2 hours of explosions and eyeliner. If it doesn’t exploit the women in the film specifically, it is certainly exploiting the audience, their expectations and their passions.
Not that it will matter all that much. Geeks are only fickle when you get the thing they love wrong by getting it mixed up with something else. But the elements of Sucker Punch are non-specific enough that it looks like it’ll push all the appropriate geek response buttons without any of the negative backlash. It’s kind of sinister and brilliant, when you think about it.
Against my better judgement, I might actually end up seeing Sucker Punch this weekend. If I do, I know I’ll be going by myself. This might as well have “NO WUMANS ALLOW’D” stamped on it with big, red letters.
All I know is that it’s been another long winter with dud after dud being dropped into theaters throughout January and February. I might think Zack Snyder is a first-rate hack, but I could be watching Season of the Witch.
And no one wants that.
What’s your take on Sucker Punch? Are you excited to see it this weekend? Are you at all wary of the flotsam of geek iconography that is littering the landscape of this film or am I a completely paranoid jerk?
LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW!
[ 51 Comments ]
I’m not exactly sure where the idea for today’s strip came from. Except that I read the headline that Lindsay Lohan was in talks to join Zack Snyder’s Superman reboot, potentially being cast as Lana Lang- Clark Kent’s high school crush.
The casting news seemed so out of place to me, the only was I could reconcile it in my mind was to presume Snyder wanted someone on-set with access to good drugs.
Y’know… because Lindsay Lohan… has a… has a drug problem.
She takes a lot of drugs, is what I’m saying.
I didn’t really think this one through. I was probably more focused on the reversal in the punchline, if I’m being honest with you.
Something I won’t do in this space is use this news as an opportunity to bash Zack Snyder again. Even I know that I’m sounding a bit like a broken record on that front.
Although I will admit that I’m somewhat curious about the casting decisions so far. For example, Diane Lane and Kevin Costner as Ma and Pa Kent are interesting choices. Individually, the casting makes sense. Amy Adams as Lois Lane makes a little bit of sense if you’re going for the spunky reporter angle. Less so if you’re trying to portray her as a hard-nosed journalist. Then again, Bryan Singer cast Kate Bosworth as Lois, so I suppose there is no where to go but up.
I guess my concern is that all of these casting decisions sound fine on-paper. But I wonder how they are going to perform together as an ensemble? Tossing Lindsay Lohan into the mix would be a real wild card – and I don’t mean that in a positive way.
Truthfully, Lohan is rumored to be in consideration for SO many movies today (as she tries to bouy her sagging career), I’m not convinced this isn’t a little bit of campaigning on her part. Would anyone put it past her to cravenly beg for the park like Sean Young did for Catwoman in Batman Returns?
I tried to find video from when Young went on The Joan Rivers Show dressed as Catwoman before sitting down for an interview about how she’d be perfect for the part. But the clips I found didn’t have any audio. Reportedly, Young also showed up at Warner Bros. Studio in her costume and was thrown off the lot after she tried to meet with Tim Burton.
I guess it’s wait and see with Lohan. I’m not exactly against the idea of her playing Lana Lang. It’s a bit part, a fun cameo, probably. I’m just more confused by the reports than anything else.
Had you already heard the rumor? What was your reaction to it? Does anyone want to grab a Coke with me? LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW!
[ 12 Comments ]
