Clay Enos interview

Wow, this blog has practically turned into a Watchmen fanboy site. Not that that’s a bad thing. Here’s something to chew on.

This past Tuesday, I had the great pleasure of interviewing Clay Enos, the photographer of Watchmen. He did all the still photographs of the production, so if you see something Watchmen, chances are it’s his stuff. Enos is also the man behind the new book Watchmen Portraits, a beautiful black and white “coffee table” book of, well, Watchmen portraits. Not only are the actors featured in character, but many of the extras are featured with equal poise on the page.

Clay Enos has known the Snyders for quite some time, so one would think it wouldn’t be too difficult for him to be selected as photographer for Watchmen. Well, that’s a leg up, but it wasn’t that easy. They had to fight for him which was “pretty cool” that they would do such a thing for a photographer, according to Enos. The production set him up with a studio space that came to be known as the “Clay Cube.” Makes me think of the Borg Cube from Star Trek. Surely the two aren’t comparable…or are they?

Anyway, the Clay Cube eventually became too cumbersome to work with, so he switched to a simple, more portable studio using natural light when available and a device to simulate natural light when it wasn’t available. “All the actors, everybody was willing and enthusiastic about helping with the photographs” said Clay. The photographs became a “casual, routine” and even “spontaneous” activity for those involved. The makeshift studio was on the side of the set and people just walked by and got their picture taken. “People” being the actors.

Watchmen Portraits is an excellent movie book, but has the potential to be an art book also, floating somewhere in that happy middle. Watchmen is a very atmosphere driven work and the unique thing about Portraits is its ability to capture that atmosphere without the background of the production. “Since the characters are pulled out of context, the atmosphere is in the faces” is how Enos describes the magic of his photos. The portraits are still able to capture the atmosphere, but they become something else as well. Each photo enables the viewer to look deeper into the character, especially with the extras and minor characters. They say the eyes are the windows to the soul, something Clay Enos has mastered in his photography.

Flat out, Clay Enos is a great guy with unbelievable skill and talent. Plus he’s a Star Trek nerd. It was truly awesome to have the opportunity to speak with someone I consider on the “god” level. If I haven't said it before, Clay Enos’ photography is magnificent. Check it out at clayenos.com. And check out his Nite Owl Coffee at http://www.organiccoffee.com/Nite-Owl-Dark-Roast/M/B001O2KSZA.htm. It’s a great movie tie-in after the fire rescue scene at the apartment building. A portion of the profit goes to charity and THEY'RE ONLY AVAILABLE FOR A LIMITED TIME. Only 10,000 cans were made. So buy some coffee because everyone knows college students need to drink more coffee.

Reflections on Watchmen

There really is not a lot to say about Watchmen that hasn't already been said in a million other articles, both online and in print. The consensus seems to be that Snyder made a very faithful film adaptation of the graphic novel, but maybe to a fault. Fanboys and those who have read the novel seem to enjoy the novel at least on some level, leaving those who aren't familiar with the graphic novel out of the loop.

Personally, I loved the film. The fact that Snyder was able to condense a 12 chapter graphic novel into a 2 hr 45 min film without losing most of the controlling ideas and denseness of the original work is incredible. The attention to detail while still having Snyder's flavor and style is an incredible line to walk, but this film does it with flying colors. Zack Snyder has made Watchmen jump off the page without losing what is essential. And in a society where we usually tear apart a film that digresses to far from the original work, I really don't understand how you can be 'too faithful', but I digress myself.

The point of this post is not to discuss why I loved the film. Despite whether you loved or hated or were indifferent about Watchmen, I think it's important to notice that Zack Snyder's film is a massive achievement in film on multiple levels.

The most obvious success of the film lies in its visual effects. For a film that is obviously shot almost 100% in studios in front of green screens, it looks polished and clean. The only even questioning element of the visuals is Dr. Manhattan. However, even Manhattan looks incredible once you get passed his first few scenes. The title sequence at the beginning is also another high point of the film's visuals.

If the visuals weren't the most obvious success, than it's the financial earnings that stand out. Whether good or bad critically, the film was a huge financial success. In its opening weekend, it grossed $55 mill., which is pretty substantial for a r-rated pulp film. Despite 55 mill not being nearly what analysts thought it would gross [most estimated around 70 mill], this is still a substantial earning. The film will make plenty in the box office, not to mention the money that the film will make from dvd sales and other merchandising. Hopefully Watchmen will help studios realize that a dense, graphic, r-rated film can make money. Along with The Dark Knight, these two films will hopefully be examples for future work of how to make a darker, grittier, pulpy comic film. Nothing 'grinds my gears' more than when a film gets watered down to a pg-13 just to assure profibility.

One of the aspects that I love about Watchmen is that exact fact: the almost complete faithfulness to the graphic novel, not just in content but in maturity level. No violence or sexuality has been tamed down. But even more important than this is the ending of the story, something that many critics have not addressed. [SPOILERS AHEAD] The ending of the film remaining faithful to the source material is an incredible achievement. Being very unconventional, it's truely astonishing that it was not changed to please Warner Bros/producers. or even to please audiences. The fact that Adrian Veidt gets away with his master plan leaves the viewer completely devastated, with the only hope for the future being Rorschach's journal. And all this squabbling about leaving 'the squid' from the novel out of the film is just superfluous. The differences from the novel that Snyder made were for obvious reasons; some elements of the graphic novel were just not suitable for film. Yet, this does not make the graphic novel 'unfilmable', just minorly tweaked. Admitting that a graphic novel is different from a film does not make one untranslatable to the other. Again, hopefully this will influence future films to be more daring with their stories. [END OF SPOILERS]

Years from now when audiences look back at the experience that was Watchmen the film, I think it will be seen as a modern classic. It takes time for a film that is as philosophical and dense as Watchmen to sink in. While it may be somewhat of a niche-sleeper with critics and audiences today, it will find its place in film history. Even so, more important than critical acclaim, Watchmen is a success. All who are a part of making this film happen are to be commended.

Watchmen Follow-up

The details on the Watchmen case settlement between Fox and Warner Bros. have been released over the past couple days and a correction to a previous statement has been made.

I got this from Slashfilm.com (where much of my film world news comes from) and they got it from The Hollywood Reporter. Here is the breakdown for those that would like to know (quoted from Slashfilm.com):

"According to Variety’s sources, Fox will receive an upfront payment totaling between $5 and $10 million, which will cover $1.4 million that the studio invested in development fees, plus millions of dollars in legal fees.

As already mentioned, Fox will not be distributing the film, but under the terms of the settlement, will get gross participation of between 5% and 8.5% depending on the film’s worldwide revenues.

The Hollywood Reporter, our source for the original settlement story, incorrectly reported that Fox would not be entitled to any rights for Watchmen spinoffs and sequels (they have since corrected the error). Fox will, in fact, participate as a gross player in any future Watchmen-related properties, although Snyder has already denied that he will participate in a prequel/sequel.

Allegedly, other options for the settlement were discussed recently, according to Variety’s sources. These included moving WB’s Terminator Salvation release date from May 22nd, to avoid competing with Fox’s Night at the Museum 2: Battle of the Smithsonian. The studios have denied that these scenarios were ever evaluated."

I'm glad the March 6 release date is still on schedule. I can't imagine the uproar or the amount of advertising money that would have been lost had the date been changed.

On a side note, I don't think I would be very pleased if any studio decided to make a Watchmen sequel/prequel. Would anyone really want that?

Gran Torino review

I forgot to write a review for Gran Torino. Dammit. How could I forget that? Anyway, here's a quick something for you since it's been about a week since I saw it.

The Ford Gran Torino is a beauty of a car, a gem not seen too often amongst the new Mustangs and such of today. Clint Eastwood's movie is the same way. It uniquely blends cultural barriers, family, life and death and dealing with age themes together. It's a coming of age story in more ways than one.

I'm an Eastwood fan, although I'm used to seeing him as a younger tough guy. Nonetheless, he is superb in Gran Torino. The dialog is over-the-top hilarious, not because it's racist, but because it's a crotchety old white guy. His delivery is never off. The story is very well done. [MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS] The symbolism of the car is very good: how it's old like Walt, but in practically new condition and handing it off to Thao. It kind of combines the essence of both characters into one symbol. [END POSSIBLE SPOILERS]

I liked Bee Vang for most of the movie. There were a few spots of acting that bothered me near the end, but other than that I thought he did a nice job with his character. Ahney Her also did a nice job, but seemed a little flat sometimes. Christopher Carley as the Father was great, although his tone changed very little throughout the course of the movie which kind of bugged me. The minor characters like the barber shop guy and the construction guy were great additions. Obviously, Eastwood is the star of the film.

Gran Torino is an excellent film and is on my top 10 list for the year.

M

Slumdog Millionaire review

Truly a brilliant work of art. Danny Boyle has created a masterpiece of the cinema. Everything about Slumdog Millionaire is nothing short of amazing. Every shot is beautiful in its own way, the dialog is great, the score is very well constructed and the story is superb. I especially like the way the subtitles are done. There is not one thing in this movie that I can complain about. Not one.

As a camera guy, I absolutely love the cinematography. Seriously, every shot is beautiful. And that's the way it should be since India hosts a beautiful people. I don't think the story would have worked had it been based anywhere else.

I could go on and on (I've rewritten this review like 3 times already) about the story, editing, soundtrack, etc., but I'm not going to. Take my word for it and go see it: everything about it is amazing. This is the best movie of the year. I don't know what else to put in my review. Just go see it so you can agree.

M

Watchmen Settlement!

The current news on the Watchmen case between Fox and Warner Bros. is this: they have reached a settlement. Fox and Warner have resolved it and, in short, it looks like we'll be seeing Watchmen on March 6th as originally planned. Hoorah!

BUT (huge but), according to Slashfilm.com, "THR says a Fox spokesman said "no final deal had been reached." So keep your fingers crossed and hope for the best tomorrow.

I have a feeling that everything will pan out and the movie will still be on schedule (seems like that's pretty much locked in now) as this all gets wrapped up. Here's the claim from The Hollywood Reporter regarding the settlement:

"Warner Bros. and Fox have resolved their dispute over Watchmen, with the studios scheduled to present the settlement to Judge Gary Feess on Friday morning and request that the case be dismissed. Terms of the agreement will not be disclosed, but it is said to involve a sizable cash payment to Fox and a percentage of the film’s box office."

Fox no longer holds the rights to Watchmen and will not hold any future rights.

Wow. This all seems like a nice turn of events in light of the Christmas decision. I have to wonder if it really is over. We'll see in the days ahead.

Destiny - Slumdog Millionaire

The end of this year seems to be filled with 'art house' films that I am just dieing to see. Unfortunately, Kansas City/Lawrence doesn't get the first run of these films. The likes of Doubt, The Wrestler, and Let the Right One In are just a few that have recently reached a larger audience. Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire is another film that falls in that very same category.

I had heard the incredible buzz around Slumdog awhile ago, and to be honest I really doubted that it could live up to the hype. A lot of littler Oscar-contending movies get so much hype that they won't live up to your exceeding expectations when you actually come around to seeing them. I have to be 100% honest when I say that Slumdog Millionaire is everything that everyone says about it. And now since it has swept the Golden Globes [best film, director, screenplay and score] it will hopefully get the attention of mainstream audiences that it rightfully deserves.

Slumdog encompasses everything that makes a great all around film: great storytelling, intriguing characters, beautiful cinematography, honest acting, an incredible score... I could go on but there's no need, upon viewing it speaks for itself. Danny Boyle has honed in on every little aspect of Indian life and culture. He has given us an incredible love story that takes us through the slums of Mumbai to the harsh lights of television fame. Our 'slumdog' Jamal has found himself being accused of cheating on India's version of "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?". Through flashbacks during Jamal's interrogation, we get the story of Jamal's life and his pursuit of the love of his life, Latika. At its heart, Slumdog is not only a love story, but a fairy tale. While the love story of Jamal and Latika is the heart of the film, it is really the story of 'the three musketeers' of Jamal, Latika, and Jamal's brother Salim. Through the highest highs and the lowest of lows, these three give the audience a breathtaking and truely heartfelt story. It succeeds at telling a truthful love story more than the recent The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which is in its own right a solid movie, but it still doesn't come close to Slumdog.

To tell anymore of the story would be robbing a new viewer of the wonderful discovery and surprises of Slumdog Millionaire. Despite what Danny Boyle may say, he has an incredible style and a very uniqure way to tell a fresh, new tale. Plus, any film that ends with a Bollywood-style dance sequence is just fantastical.

Maybe this isn't so much a review, but a plea for everyone to see this film if they can. It's something new, it's something fresh, it's something the likes you will never see again. My favorite film of 2008 [thus far, I still have just a few to check off the list...].

4 out of 4

[EDIT]

On a side note, why is this film rated R? It has a few torture scenes and a few 'fucks', but seriously? I didn't have much hope/respect for the MPAA to begin with, but I'm really losing everything now...

Terminator Salvation, Watchmen and Dante's Inferno video games

Video games in general haven’t really excited me in the past couple years, at least most of the new ones. I also find myself inching away from as I get older. Of course, there are the classics that I’ll always love and play like Smash Bros. and the old MegaMan cartridges (yeah, cartridges). But for the most part, there just doesn’t seem to be anything new that’s worth my time. Or maybe I just don’t want to spend my time like I used to.

Anyway, I’ve had my eye on a few games that are in development recently: the new Terminator, Dante’s Inferno and, naturally, the Watchmen game. The Terminator 4 movie looks beast and the game could be, too. Christian Bale rules and the story sounds pretty legit as far as I know. The whole semi-reboot of the franchise seems like a good idea and, if anything, Bale should be able to pull much of the weight. Plus, they finally decided to get into what everyone’s been waiting for: the actual judgment day. Nobody’s trying to pork John Connor by going back in time or postpone some shit that happens. Back to the game. It looks a little like Terminator mixed with Call of Duty. I don’t know if I’ll ever get around to playing it, but it looks pretty badass. Nerdy, but badass. Probably something I wouldn’t tell my friends I played, but badass. Who wouldn’t want to play as Christian Bale and stomp some Terminators?

The Dante’s Inferno game looks utterly stupid. The original text is good as it is. I haven’t read it, but I know the story. This begs the old adage: Why fix something that’s not broken? Better yet, why break it in the first place? Even if you can, that doesn’t mean you should. Unless it’s Christmas tree ornaments. And Dante’s Inferno is definitely not a Christmas tree ornament. Another thing that bothers me about this whole ordeal is the fact that a number of movie studios were vying for the rights to make a movie of it before the game was made. Yeah…what? According to SlashFilm.com, Universal won. Haven’t studios figured out yet that movies based on games generally stink like an unwashed dick? {see Street Fighter, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, Mortal Kombat, Mario Bros., Hitman} Personally, Resident Evil 2 is one of those guilty pleasure video game movies for me…very guilty. When I first heard about a Dante’s Inferno game, I thought, “Hmm, that could be…cool.” Immediately after, I thought, “But how do you make a game out of that?” From what I can tell, the creators of the Dante’s Inferno game have added a hero character to the story. What? Yes, added a character. I’m guessing he goes through the nine circles of Hell and kills stuff. I’m all for brainless hack-and-slash, but it seems like the creators took the most basic concepts of Dante’s Inferno and the name and ran with it. This is probably how it went down:

Couple guys meet for lunch at a Steak N Shake. One guy brings up classic plays to sound smart. Another guy, the tool of the group, brings up Dante’s Inferno to sound smart. Another guy, to make the tool feel like he brought up something worth discussing at Steak N Shake and to cover up the fact that it isn’t a play, says that it would look pretty cool as a 3D computer-type game. A third guy, currently a computer analyst and part-time program writer, says he could probably make that happen. The fourth guy, a hack fantasy writer and video game blogger, says it would need more swordplay and dragons.

Next thing we know, we’re looking at a dumpy transcription of Dante’s Inferno. I predict flashy graphics that are unoriginal, repetitive gameplay, and probably crusty controls. Guess how many levels it’s going to have? If you guessed anything other than nine, feed your hands into a paper shredder. If Constantine and 300 had a baby, Dante’s Inferno the game would be their offspring. If you can’t already tell, I don’t have high hopes for this game.

Another disappointment, sadly, is the Watchmen game. As much as I want everything Watchmen to succeed and be awesome, I can’t honestly say the game looks much good. Parts of it may be cool, but that slight chance doesn’t offset the greater chances of my Watchmen experience being farted on. The game is probably going to be a shoddy, rushed piece that was made to capitalize on the emerging franchise. Want a piece of that Watchmen video game ass, Fox? Well, too bad for you because from where I’m sitting, it doesn’t look very big or hot. Pregnancy may increase size as we get closer to [the movie’s] birth, but it doesn’t look promising.

Unsettling metaphors aside, I really don’t feel the need to play as Rorschach or Nite Owl. Unless I get to crash the owl plane into buildings and/or people. Or shoot Rorschach’s grappling hook through a dude’s chest. I hope the game’s creators haven’t added (which they undoubtedly have) a bunch of useless backstory to the Watchmen characters. For one, listen up Fox and Warner Bros. (but more Fox), it’s not their story to tell. Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons created Watchmen over twenty years ago. Not you.

One last thing that turned me off of this game was when I was watching the trailer for it. It shows a clip of Nite Owl shooting electricity out of his body like he’s Thor god of thunder. I’m guessing it’s supposed to be from some gadget he has in the game, but it made me grimace like someone just barfed right in front of me and maybe it splashed on my shoes a little. “My shoes” meaning my Watchmen experience.


It would be cool if…
· Terminators were made playable in the upcoming game
· The Watchmen game played like The Warriors game
· In Dante’s Inferno you could be Dante and summon Chaucer to aid you in battle
· Dante’s Inferno wasn’t going to be made into a game or a movie

Always remember, as a rule of thumb, games based off movies and vice versa are rarely ANY good. Period.

M

Hancock and Yes Man

Yes. Yes. YES. Happy new year to all. Cheers to a new chapter.

I’ve got a little catching up to do. Maybe I should try to stay on top of things.

[THE FOLLOWING MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS] Last night I saw Hancock. I know, a bit late in the game, but whatever. Here’s my take: First act good, second act sucky, third act good. I liked the story and the concept, but it got really stupid when you find out about Charlize Theron being a superhero. Everything leading up to it was nice and smooth. I liked the different take on superheroes and how real the story made them. I’m not talking about how they could be transposed off the screen and into real life, but that their actions actually had reactions. This was kind of taken away in the second act, making it crappy.

Theron’s character’s transition from stay-at-home mom/wife to god-like superhero was bumpy, too. One second she’s throwing Hancock through a wall, the next she has a tone of stupid superficiality that wasn’t apparent in previous scenes. Her stealing Hancock’s line also adds to the second act’s lameness. I’m also unsure how much I liked her scenes with black eye liner or whatever it is, although it does add to her hotness. The third act combined her mom/wife and superhero roles, subtracting the harshness of the black eye shadow and adding back in the maternal softness.

Will Smith is just pretty good in Hancock. He hardly overplays his character and I like that. I think he got that all out in Fresh Prince, which is good because I like his serious stuff {see I Am Legend}. There were a few too many unnecessary verge-of-tears scenes, though, and some of them seemed out of place. One or two of his lines were a little stupid, but I blame the writers.

I like Jason Bateman. He’s funny and his delivery is spot on and he makes an otherwise uninteresting character much more fun. That’s about all I have to say about him in Hancock.

Most of it looked like the film crew for The Office did most of the camera work. The action sequences are visually impressive, but the CGI is a little iffy sometimes.

Hancock shows how everyone can lose direction sometimes, even screenwriters, but that everyone has the ability to find that direction.

Worth a viewing.


Quick review of Yes Man. I saw it a week ago, so here goes.

Yes Man is simple and lighthearted, just the kind of viewing I need at Christmas.
I’m not a huge fan of Jim Carrey, but I still like him. He’s predictable, but still funny, and he proves this yet again in Yes Man. His delivery is still great but what sets his acting in Yes Man apart from other Carrey movies are the long jokes. There are scenes with Allison where he’ll start a borderline joke/not joke and carries it until it ends up being funny (Jim Carry? Yeah, mega-lame pun…). What I like most about these jokes that carry on is the reaction from her. Zooey Deschanel’s reactions are more like how a real person would react in such situations: wondering whether he’s joking or kind of serious or retarded.

I found the characters and plot in Yes Man likeable but not too deep, which I have no problems with since Yes Man is, again, simple and lighthearted. I do like that it showed how absurd some “programs” can be, even when not taken to the extreme.

There are a few scenes that bother me. One in particular (and the only one I can really remember) is when they’re at the airport about to go to L.A. (I think) and Carl/Carrey is worried for no apparent reason. Either this isn’t fully explained or I missed something. Is he worried about getting too close to Allison, is he running out of money, what’s the deal? And where does he get all this money anyways? Do bank employees make serious coin? If so, I should probably think about changing career paths…again.

Yes Man is a great, simple movie that plays much like an updated Liar Liar. It is worth a viewing, whether in theatres or at home. Solid.


Before I wrap this up, something caught my attention in both of these movies: the word "fuck." I must say, I was a little surprised to hear it in both of these. Both movies only used it once, and neither of the situations seemed to call for it. Plus, both movies are family oriented. And Hancock is a superhero movie so, naturally, kids are going to want to see it. I grew up and still live in the Midwest and most parents cringe at any language harsher than the word “poop.” Not that I care, because I don’t, but won’t parents be a little more cautious about taking their kids to a movie where the main character, someone you’re supposed to like, drops an F bomb? And couldn’t such a reaction, possibly caused by other Bible belt parents seeing the movie and passing the word around, hurt a movie’s turnout? I don’t really pay attention to movie ratings anymore, but I think both Yes Man and Hancock are PG-13. I don’t remember any PG-13 movies using “fuck” when I was younger. Maybe it’s just a sign of times achangin’. Or my memory failing.

M