Back Off, Fanboy: Dupree Review and a LOT more, BELIEVE IT

Well let's see, what do I have to talk about today?

This week is about to get crazy - the parents arrive on a plane from CT tonight, and are here until Sunday. My brother's USY on Wheels trip rolls into LA tonight as well. Most likely, I won't see any of 'em until tommorow though, as both the brother and parents are gtting in pretty late tonight. Tommorow I take off from work to spend some quality time with the fam', and then who knows what Thursday, Friday, and Saturday will bring.

- Also, gotta say Happy Birthday today to the G-Man himself, Brian, who is a true supporter of the blog and an all around good man. As a fellow member of the Jewish persuasion, a fellow member of the NBC Page class of January '05, a fellow believer in the sacred tenets of Hulkamania, and as a good friend - have a good one, Brian!

- This past weekend was a good time, as Saturday a bunch of us partied like rock stars in celebration of Scott's b-day (okay, rock stars is pushing it, but I've been looking for an excuse to say that for a while ...). Sunday a few friends and I gathered to take in a Kevin Smith View Askewniverse double feature of Clerks and Mallrats, the two bonafide K. Smith comedy classics, in my humble humble opinion.

- Man, those movies are so great - why is it that they still feel more cool and modern than just about any Hollywood comedies today, despite being more than ten years old? Maybe because they were written and directed by a guy who was never far removed from his subject matter. Kevin Smith was a young, slacker-ish, geeky fanboy stoner, writing about people just like him or people he knew. Hell, Jason Mewes is basically just playing himself to the nth degree as Jay of Jay and Silent Bob fame. It's just such a different vibe watching those movies compared to the latest processed Hollywood movie about teens or twenty-somethings written by a committee of fifty year olds. What they lack in polish, they more than make up in gritty authenticity - the overly-analytical diatribes of a new Lost Generation - smart, witty, self-concious - but stuck working behind the counter of the Quick Stop. Anyone who's been through the NBC Page Program should easily be able to relate.

Suffice to say, can't wait for Clerks II, which despite retreading all-too familiar ground, should still be a welcome return to form for Kevin Smith, and a return to the unique kind of humor that only a guy truly writing about what he knows (vulgar humor, fanboy geek debates, crappy jobs, and life and love) can deliver. Bring it on.

- On another note regarding influential voices in pop culture, RIP to one of the great writers of hard-boiled pulp fiction, Mickey Spillane. Spillane created the longtime detective favorite, Mike Hammer, a character who appeared in numerous movies and TV series over the years, played by a variety of actors in the 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's. Spillane wrote with that unique pulp style of terse language and violent imagery that made him the definitive writer for guys who liked to read about tough guys doing badass things. In college I was first exposed to the writing of Spillane, which was a pretty damn refreshing change from all of the "classic" literature I was reading for my English courses. I also first saw the best (if most divergant) adaptation of Mike Hammer - the classic film noir Kiss Me Deadly - a weird but highly entertaining mix of film noir and 1950's nuclear paranoia. They don't make 'em like that anymore.

- I also saw You, Me, and Dupree this weekend at a free Universal Studios screening. Not one I probably would have paid to see, but at the low, low price of FREE it was hard to pass up ...

YOU, ME, AND DUPREE Review:

- The disappointing thing with this movie is that it has one of those premises that we've seen before, but pretty much always has good potential for comedy despite how many times the same exact setup has been used. It's simple - three is a crowd, and therefore hilarity ensues. In this case, the Third Man is Owen Wilson, basically just doing a lot of Owen Wilson-y schtick. Funny in theory, but this is not really the quirky Owen Wilson character that was so funny in Meet the Parents or The Life Aquatic. What made Wilson so funny in many of his other movies is that you can't quite pinpoint where he's coming from. He looks like a stoned surfer dude, but he has this kind of cockiness as well, a real blue-blood type snobbery, almost. Usually, Owen Wilson plays some of the more complex comedic characters out there, which is why I've become a big fan of his over the years - I mean, I legitimately was a big fan of Shanghai Noon and Shanghai Knights, for crying out loud. How many people can say THAT? But, unfortunately, what we get here is total, cookie-cutter Owen Wilson as Hollywood's idea of Funny Man. Take one part of Owen's trademark stoned mock-sincerity as was so popular in the overrated Wedding Crashers, one dash of standard, Hollywood WACKINESS (TM Jim Carrey, TM Will Ferell), mix together and let the hijinks ensue. So yeah, You, Me, and Dupree never amounts to a movie where the actor's uniqueness shapes the movie into something great and hilarious, like, say, the similarly-themed What About Bob. Instead, this is a case of the actor struggling to retain his integrity and uniqueness while doing a pretty paint by numbers movie (think Jim Carrey in Bruce Almighty).

There are moments that are definitely funny. The entire climactic sequence with Owen as Dupree "blowing seven kinds of smoke" in order to create a distraction for his pal Matt Dillon is pretty hilarious. And there's a few other random moments that definitely bring the funny. But overall, we have an uneven mix of Owen Wilson shennanigans coupled with a totally bland couple of Matt Dillon and Kate Hudson, and an embarrasingly lame performance by Michael Douglass. Douglass tries his best to channel the inspired serious-guy-does-comedy stylings of Robert DeNiro in Meet the Parents, but let's face it, Michael Douglass is no DeNiro, in drama or comedy. His character here is just straining for laughs, and we, like him, become very uncomfortable whenever he's on screen.

But back to Dillon and Hudson as our main newlywedded couple. Yikes, talk about unlikable. Dillon for some reason plays his character here like he's the freaking Punisher or something, practically growling out his lines and looking at all times like he's about to pop a cap in somebody. In one scene he just unironically calls Owen Wilson a "homo." Okay ...

Hudson also is pretty stiff in this movie, partly because it's how her character is written. But she is just a typical stereotype here - the stern, good head on her shoulders wife who still has a soft spot for her husbands' goofy friend. So yeah, basically she is playing Wilma Flintstone. Nice.

Even Seth Rogen, so good in Freaks and Geeks, 40 Year Old Virgin, etc, is reduced to a lame role that is a combo of a few different sitcom characters we've all seen about 5 billion times. Like everything else in the movie, very paint-by-numbers.

Like I said, it's funny at times, but the two or three memorable lines get drowned out by the other two hours or so of derivative blandness. This movie never really takes things far enough, never pushes the envelope. Owen Wilson's character never does anything THAT bad, except burn down the house, but hey I saw Steve Urkel do that on Family Matters like 15 years ago. Give me something new here. Anything.

And, P.S. - those radio commercials really were annoying.

My Grade: C

- As far as the rest of the summer goes, what have we got in terms of movies? Clerks and Lady in the Water both hit this weekend, though Lady, man, I have a feeling this is going to be a real cluster of a movie, though possibly a highly entertaining cluster. Otherwise, there's Snakes on a Plane, of course, and then before you know it it's fall. Ahhh!

- As far as TV stuff goes, I am definitely curious about tonight's debut of EUREKA on Sci-Fi - love the concept, about a quirky, secluded town founded in the 50's by Truman and Einstein, filled with all kinds of weirdness, but we'll see how the execution is.

- One other thing -- thanks to all those who have pointed out to me over the last few days that Avril Lavigne is now a married woman (to some punk from Sum 41 no less). Still, two rock stars, married young .. gotta figure the chances of divorce are pretty high. Seriously, congrats Avril, from that guy who you once said "hi" to in the backstage hallway of the Tonight Show.

- And on a final note, let's all hope for the best for Israel as it continues to be bombarded with Hezbollah-fired rockets, in highly populated cities like Haifa. We need to give Israel our support as individuals and as a country. Funny, how Bush's expletive-inclusive talk with Tony Blair ("See, the irony is what they really need to do is to get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit." - re: the Middle East and the UN) may have been the most to-the-point and lucid thing that we've heard him say in a while. Let's hope that Bush can return from this summit and get some things done with regards to the Middle East situation, and that the UN can silence its more outspoken anti-Israel contingents and lend its support to the cause that all free nations should endorse: fighting terror and dismantling groups like Hezbollah. I think Bush should just roll with all this though and start cursin' up a storm - out with the H-Bomb, in with the F-bomb.

"Stay Cool, Mr. B."

Okay so yesterday I took a turn for the political in this blog, but I did and still do feel very strongly about this situation in Israel. In college I wrote a number of columns for Boston University's Daily Free Press about the Middle-East tensions going on at the time, and back then it was really amazing how those columns ignited such fierce debate on campus. It was a very interesting time, as it was exciting to see how many people responded in one way or another to my writing, but also shocking to see how many letters came in to the Free Press that were anti-Israel, anti-semetic, or just plain hateful. But because I realized how knowledgable and passionate many people were about the Middle East, I made sure that my follow-up article was heavily researched, something I never usually did for my mostly humor-oriented columns. Yesterday's blog was more just an insta-reaction to the day's news than a real editorial or anything, but hey that's the beauty of blogging ... still, check it out below or HERE and let me know what you think ...

- Otherwise, I am currently BEAT after a late night last night. Some friends and I went to see a show at the Laugh Factory comedy club in Hollywood, where it was "Hollywood Assistant Night." Oddly though, Thursdays are also usually college nights at the Laugh Factory. So you had a mostly entry-level assistant crowd, weary from a long day and dreading waking up early the next morning, at a long, drawn-out comedy show that didn't even begin until after 10:30 pm, and went until almost 1 am. Man, around Hollywood there's going to be a lot of bleary eyes and sluggishness today. The show itself was a mixed bag. It was free, for one thing, though that is kinda offset by the two drink minimum. I mean, who really wants two drinks at a comedy show on a Thursday? Especially a free one where a large part of the appeal is the lack of money being spent on the show. Stupid money-grubbing comedy clubs. Anyways ...

The comedians themselves were decent. The highlight, overall, was probably Jim Gaffigan, of Broken Lizard / Super Troppers fame, who did a kind of Will Ferrell-lite act where he talked to himself throughout the act, responding to his own jokes with a running inner monologue. Pretty funny. A few younger comedians that performed were a mix of promising new talent with a few kind of lame, poser-ish types. Randomly, we also got the old Indian guy from 40 Year Old Virgin, who was so odd in his thickly-accented delivery that I found him friggin' hilarious, even if his jokes sounded like he was reading them out of a "Truly Tasteless" joke book or something. This one other comedian, Robert (?) Rodriguez I believe (not the director of the same name) was hit and miss, and then this other guy from Last Comic Standing had a kind of New Jersey macho asshole type of humor that was kind of grating after a while. Otherwise, the surprise of the night was a special guest cameo appearance by Dennis Haskens, aka Mr. Belding himself! I've actually run into the guy a few times since he is a common visitor at NBC in Burbank for whatever reason, but still - Mr. F'N Belding! He got on stage, gave us a little SBTB humor, and promted the whole audience to sing the Saved By The Bell themesong! Daaaaaaaaaaaaaamn!

Overall a fun night of comedy - but sooo long! I'm totally drained now and will likely spend my Friday evening in various states of sleep / immobility, unless I can somehow get home early and get in a nap!

PS - the traffic / parking in Hollywood freaking sucks! I've been there twice this week now, and both times it was a nightmare to find parking. Every day some new road is closed or blocked off, and almost every side road has permit parking only. Seriously, where the hell are you supposed to park when you got to someplace like the Laugh Factory? WHERE, I ask you? My friends and I ended up in a giant, maze-like underground garage (par for the course in LA, I guess) in a shopping complex down the street, which cost me $12 since I didn't get my parking validated. Dayum!

And it's been a while, but ...

TV REVIEWS:

I've barely watched any TV over the summer except occasional cable news and small doses of the Colbert Report or whatnot. Instead I've been catching up on my collection of unfinished PS2 games, reading, and getting out a lot more during the week, which is great. But one summer program really caught my attention, as I love sci-fi anthology type shows when they are done well, and of course The Twilight Zone is one of my all time faves. So I was very curious for Stephen King's Nightmares and Dreamscapes on TNT - a 4 week horror anthology event that seemed to be just what the TV doctor ordered.

NIGHTMARES AND DREAMSCAPES:

Episode 1 - Battleground:

Wow.

That was pretty damn cool. William Hurt against an army of living army men toys in a trippy, weird, funny, horrific, sadistic short-form horror story with ZERO spoken dialogue for the entire episode, directed by none other than BRIAN HENSON himself. Hurt freakin' ruled in this episode. I have been a huge fan of his from movies like Body Heat, Dark City, and recently, A History of Violence, and his acting here was totally captivating even without the benefit of any dialogue whatsoever. I also loved the f/x - the toys coming to life looked seamless, but also had this kind of exaggerated, creepy look that reminded me of something Jim Henson himself might have conjured up. I'm not sure what Brian Henson's been up to other than the occasional Muppet-related movie, but I'd LOVE to see him tackle something darker and bigger budget, as clearly, the man has a lot of his father's talent and imagination. This was definitely a lot of fun and a really great hour of TV.

My Grade: A

Episode 2 - Crouch End:

Talk about a tale of two episodes ... this one was awful! Somewhat interesting premise, even if it seemed almost like the backstory of the Rocky Horror Picture Show played straight or something ... but, man, the acting was just terrible. Look, I'll always have a softspot for Claire Forlani from Mallrats (hey I even briefly met her one time at NBC and she seemed great!), but I don't know, her acting can just be, um, well, questionable at times. Here she was just totally grating and over the top, as was the male lead, who was just terrible. I'll admit that I actually turned this one off a little over halfway through - I just couldn't tolerate the annoying characters.

My grade: D

Despite, the up and down nature of the Nightmares and Dreamscapes debut night, the first ep alone was enough to make me curious about future installments, esp. with some great character actors like William H Macy on deck. Should be interesting.

- Also caught the debut of PEE-WEE'S PLAYHOUSE on Adult Swim. Man, what a weird, trippy show. It really is even more odd watching it now as opposed to when I was little. It's so funny though - there is like some trace memory from that show that made me feel depressed. I think that when I watched it as a kid it was like the last show on Saturday mronings before it was time to get up and get dressed and stop watching TV or something ... but during Pee Wee's end-redits bicycle ride I had this weird "no, I don't wanna go to school!" feeling come over me. Any explanations from the peanut gallery? But yeah, the show is so random - that genie, man, scary looking dude - Mecha Lecha Hai indeed. Funny though, it def holds up and doesn't seem to dated, except for the oddity of Seeing Lawrence Fishbourne play a smiling cowboy. Yeah, weird ...

OTHER STUFF:

- Happy Birthday to the LJSurfer, aka Scott C. 23 - you've finally reached the big leagues. This weekend should be a fun time celebrating Scott's b-day, but next week, next week is going to be intense ...

- My parents are coming! Ahhhhh ... one whole week of family fun, Tuesday to Sunday. Matt will also be here Tuesday and Wednesday as his USY on Wheels bus rolls in. So, yeah, CRAZINESS. Oh god, I have some apt cleaning to do ... wake me up when it's next Sunday ...

- Free screening of You, Me, and Dupree at Universal this weekend. It looks pretty bad in my opinion, and those commercials are annoying as all hell, with the Movie Voice Guy stressing every syllable of "YOU ... ME! ... and .... DuPREE~!" Damn how annoying is that? Plus Owen Wilson is great when he does more quirky movies, but in standard buddy pictures (except Shanghai Noon and Knights, of course) he can be really annoying. But, hey, it's free.

- I love the fact that there was so much bad backlash to Lisa Schwartzbaum's EW review of Pirates 2, where she gave it a D+, that CNN.com had a whole article about it! The article tries to paint critics as having his big divide from popular opinion. Not really the point - it's more an issue of Lisa's review being downright terrible - no real reasoning for her negativity, as if she is just bashing the entire genre of blockbuster adventure movies and not even paying attention to the film at hand. I mean, the Onion gave Pirates a mediocre review, but their critiques were well-worded and actually made sense. Lisa's review was just a joke, and I think that the backlash is very justified.

- Still have more to say, but that's it for now. Keep reading, have a good weekend ...

On Israel -- Why it needs our Support!

By popular demand I'm back. Okay, I'd be back anyways even if it wasn't for popular demand, but the people have spoken: more blogs! And since I am "The People's Blogger," who am I to deny the people what they cry out for.

Okay, seriously, I want to talk very briefly about Israel. Anyone reading this should be outraged at some of the negativity currently being directed towards Israel by some of America's allies. And yet again, this current conflict in the Middle East is an example where, in the name of political correctness, everyone wants to place Israel and Lebanon on equal footing. All it takes is a quick listen to some of the representatives of the Lebanese government as they make the rounds on the cable news shows to know -- this government is not necessarily the target of Israel's military actions - Hezbollah is - but, I don't think there's any pretense that the Lebanese government has ever done anything to actively put brakes on Hezbollah or other terror groups. Every time there is a conflict like this, the Arab nations get up in arms and blame Israel for instigating conflict, and a whole laundry list of grievances spanning 60 years is brought up ad nauseum. And YET, the Lebanese government in this case gets up in arms, and talks about everything EXCEPT the issue at hand - the kidnapped Israeli soldiers. These kidnappings were unprovoked and blatant acts of hostility. Israel had EVERY RIGHT to respond as they did - lord knows the US would do AT LEAST the same.

Now - let's look at the escalation of events - tell me if Israel and Lebanon are on equal footing.

1.) Israeli soldiers are kidnapped.
2.) Israel, in response, conducts air raids that take out key targets valuable to Hezbollah, with casualties in the SINGLE DIGITS despite how extensive these bombings were. Because, as always, Israel conducts all military operations with the utmost respect for civilian life and efficiency, NOT high death tolls, as their top priority.
3.) Northern Israel, highly populated and NOT accustomed to attacks, is hit with Hezbollah rockets that because of their cowardice, no group or government takes responsibility for, allowing Lebanon and Hezbollah to keep plausible deniability even though they are practically declaring war on Israel, enabling them to act shocked when they are then counterattacked.

On one hand, I feel like this conflict is almost inevitable and events are just following their logical course. On the other, of course, I hate to see any kind of conflict or to see the Israeli people, or any people for that matter, put in danger.

But Israel's hand has been forced, and it finds itself in a ridiculous position where they are painted as the bad guys by many nations, even though Israel operates on a totally different moral plateau as compared to its neighboring countries which each harbor numerous terrorist groups and each make it clear that they'd like nothing more than the destruction of Israel. I find it funny that the Lebanese government is playing the Israel-as-Palestinian-Oppressor card when Palestine is in total chaos right now due to the inability of its OWN GOVERNMENT to lead -a governement where the ruling political party is also an acknowledged terrorist organization in Hamas.

Israel is DROPPING FLYERS telling civilians to clear out of certain areas. Do you think Hezbollah gives a crap how many Israelis they kill? Only so far as it affects their ongoing, ridiculous PR battle to try to be seen as the sympathetic underdogs in this conflict. But the media, even the American media, is just so frustrating in terms of what compromises they make in the name of being PC. Every time I read an article about the conflict in the Middle East, the writer takes the time to point out ANY casualty caused by the Israeli military, even if indirectly, as if to say that the Israeli's are not necessarily on any moral high ground, because they too have caused casualties.

Now - Bush has gotta get off his ass and step up and act as a leader here. As much as Israel has a right to defend itself, these are delicate times politically, and even if Israel in the right, America has to make sure that they tread carefully, yet still fully support Israel in principle. Bush has done precious little to deal with the Hamas-controlled Palestinan government, and now he finds himself with an Arab world that is about to come unglued. On a larger scale, the whole thing kind of exposes the hypocracy of both the US and these Arab countries. We are hypocrites because we go to war in Iraq, not necessarily an immediate threat, but shy away from dealing with the larger issues that plague the Arab world when they don't fit our diplomatic interests. Remember the Axis of Evil? Didn't that include all terrorist organizations like Hezbollah? These guys are firing rockets into Haifa - as far as Americans should be concerned this is simply one step removed from attacking an American city. Not the same as an attack on America, to be sure, but a serious red flag. Of course we have to be diplomatic and not seek out conflict for the sake of conflict, but we have to take a stand at some point. Hezbollah is not very far removed ideologically from Al-Queda - it's all the same form of radical Islamic terror. These are our enemies.

And then, the thing is that so many look at this as an extension of the Israel-Palestine conflict. In reality, Palestine has always been more a tool of radical fundamentalists - a rallying point for the Hezbollahs and the Al-Quedas to drive their dogma of hate. But we can't separate one from the other. Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Al-Queda, Hammas - all nearly the same entity, working to manipulate the world into an anti-Israel stance, working to eliminate Israel, the one beacon of democracy and freedom, from a middle east that they would have be one giant Radical-Islam-controlled power. That is scary stuff - so what the hell are Russian and France doing CONDEMNING ISRAEL?!?! Honestly, those countries need to grow some balls and take stances baed on more than sheer greed.

Obviously, with the war in Iraq being such a draw-out mess, nobody wants the US to enter into another large-scale conflict. But through leadership and support of Israel, we have to point fingers and hold these nations accountable for supporting terrorism. Bush has a way of saying th wrong thing at the wrong time - "Bring 'em on." comes to mind ... But right now may indeed be the time for some strong language and unshakeable stances to be taken.

This is our fight too, that much is clear.

Yo, Ho'. Pirates 2: The Review, and More

Ahoy matees! (how many blog entries across the 'net have started with some kind of lame, Pirate-y greeting over the last few days, I wonder ... A lot, I'd bet, but hey, gotta love it.).

I'm back from an eventful weekend, and am back at work, back to reality. Erica, who I've shared many adventures with in Boston and elsewhere, was in town this weekend, so from Thursday night to Saturday night much craziness ensued. Thursday we hit up Citywalk for dinner and other randomness, Friday we met up with Brian and Scott for a sold-out showing of Pirates of the Carribean 2, and Saturday saw us partake in an evening of late-night craziness in the middle of Hollywood proper. It was a good time all around, and always good to see my BU friends and relive the old days and catch up on all that is new in our worlds. With Erica staying in Santa Monica though and with her being car-less, I did a ton of driving this weekend, leaving me pretty exhausted. Sunday I was supposed to meet up with my brother's friend Aidan, who is spending the summer interning at Paramount, but I was totally wiped out and instead slept late, did a few errands, and played God of War for a few hours on Sunday (great game, btw). But yeah, lots of craziness this weekend and I hope I can recover for the week ahead, unlike last week where each of the three days between the holiday weekend and the next weekend seemed to absolutely crawl. Oh well, at least no court dates on the books for this week. At least not yet ...

Before I review PIRATES, just a few movie-related thoughts:

- First up, damn, Pirates 2 made a ton of money this weekend. No big surprise though, as far as I can see. This is a HUGE franchise that appeals to men, women, young and old. The first movie was a huge sleeper hit, and yet even though Orlando Bloom, Kiera Knightly, and of course Johnny Depp's stars have all risen since the first movie, they all came back for rounds 2 and 3, as did the writers and director Gore Verbinski, who as of now has gotta be on any action movie fan's map. Of course, Pirates' success came at the expense of Superman's, which made a pretty flimsy $21 mil this weekend. I am kinda torn about that one - I want the movie to do well because it's friggin' Superman - I love all things Superman (well, except this movie), and want the movie to do well. But I also hope that the poor second weekend gives Warners a kick in the pants and shows them the dissatisfaction that many felt with this movie, which probably led to damaging word of mouth. What is my ideal direction for this franchise? Well, me writing the sequel of course. But aside from that, I wouldn't mind if they kept the core cast and brought in a different writer - director team, going with a sequel that was more action-oriented and really distanced itself from the Donner movies. Of course - what to do about that pesky kid? It's going to take one hell of a writer to work around THAT little plot point. Hmm, what is the team from PIRATES doing? One other guy who'd be perfect for the job - Michael Chabon. Chabon is an amazing novelist who wrote a NY Times best-selling book - The Adventures of Kavalier and Clay, that is about two young comic book writers in WWII-era New York, with quite a few similarities to Superman's creators, Siegal and Schuster. But wait, what screenwriting experience does Chabon have, you may ask? Oh, just a little movie called SPIDERMAN 2, which he co-wrote with SMALLVILLE creators Alfred Gough and Miles Millar. Not a bad team for a new Superman movie - wouldn't you agree?

Do you hear me Warners? The perfect team for a new Superman is over at the Marvelous competition doing Spiderman! But as far as I know, these guys are NOT involved in Spiderman 3 -- so come on, get them on Superman ASAP!

- One other PIRATES rant -- what is with some of the insane reviews going around lately? I've never seen a summer season where the big movies are getting such completely mixed reviews. Nacho Libre, Cars, Superman, and now Pirates, for example, are all getting wildly differing reviews. For Nacho and Superman, I kind of understand. Both are love or hate type movies that either grab you or don't, depending on your particular sensibilities. With Superman, everyone I've talked to was either blown away, or else extremely lukewarm, as I was. I think some people just got caught up in the imagery and Superman-as-messiah grandeur and overlooked all of the movie's flaws in plot and tone. But, I can at least SEE how some people loved Superman, even if I have a feeling that in a few years there's going to be VERY FEW people who regard Superman Returns as a classic, as I think that repeated viewings will just expose its flaws more and more.

But, where are the actual people who hated Pirates? I have talked to none. EVERYONE I know at LEAST liked it, and most really, really liked it. So on WHAT BASIS does Lisa Schwartzbaum of Entertainment Weekly give this movie a D+ ...? I mean come on, that is absurd. You're telling me that Pirates, a fun, smart, visually amazing movie is worse than 90% of the other movies you've reviewed? I understand that critics operate on a fluid grading scale, but come on. The EW Pirates review just reeks of being attention-bating and possibly part of some kind of Time Warner agenda to derail the movie that would topple its own Superman from the Box Office chart. I hesitate to accuse EW of bias, because they are usually fair (even giving an against-the-grain C - to Through A Scanner Darkly this week as well, which is a WB movie), but something is definitely fishy with their Pirates review. There's just no way that this movie merits a D, no matter what your grading scale is like.

So what did I think of the movie? Well, here it is:

PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN 2: DEAD MAN'S CHEST Review:

Pirates 2 is like The Empire Strikes Back by way of The Mummy Returns. It's darker and more complex than the first Pirates, but also BIGGER! LOUDER! CRAZIER! - pretty much a non-stop thrill-ride from start to finish. But is all this sound and fury a bad thing? No Lisa Schwartzbaum, it's not. After my last summer blockbuster experience, filled with brooding, angsty heroes (cough*Superman*cough) and more moping than action, it was nice to see a true summer popcorn movie that thoroughly kicked my ass. Sure, the completely over-the-top, madcap antics of the movie prevent it from having the same gravity and weight of other, more serious-minded franchise like say, Lord of the Rings or even Star Wars. But you won't find a more fun or more entertaining movie that Pirates 2.

What makes Pirates rise above the similarly in-ya-face actioners of Steven Sommers (The Mummy, Van Helsing, etc - which I have always enjoyed as sugary, B-movie guilty pleasures), is a.) a clever, intricate, and surprisingly continuity-heavy script and b.) great, memorable characters played by a universally talented, charismatic cast.

As far as point A goes - the writers and director Gore Verbinski really mine every little detail from the first movie to create the illusion (I doubt they had this all planned from the beginning) that Pirates exists in a cohesive universe as grand and as interconnected as anything from the mind of JRR Tolkien, Stan Lee, or George Lucas. Seemingly inconsequential details from the first movie are painstakingly referenced and woven into the fabric of a sweeping mythology, and EVERY character, big, small, or simian, is along for the ride and gets their chance to shine. And the remarkable thing is that by acknowledging nearly every dangling plot point, no matter how small, from Part 1, the movie now gives instant credibility to Part 3 - we can now have complete faith that any dangling plot threads from THIS movie will eventually be addressed.

And again, speaking to Point B, even though this movie contains virtually nonstop action, it makes time for plenty of telling character bits that continue the main character arcs from the first movie and set things up for an epic conclusion. Some of the directions that the characters were taken in were surprisingly unexpected. Sure, we all knew that Johnny Depp as "Captain" Jack Sparrow was slowly becoming more heroic, but I didn't expect Kiera Knightly's Elizabeth to go to such dark places, or Orlando Bloom's Will Turner, for that matter. Every character is given more depth than they had in the first movie, so anyone who argues this movie skimps on character in favor of action is full of crap. There is a way to cram in character arcs organically in the midst of all hell breaking loose, and this movie does just that. As far as the main characters go - Depp is hilarious and yet strangely menacing and unpredictable as Sparrow, as always - and man, what an entrance the guy makes. Depp deserves his props for making Sparrow a totally original character far beyond, I'm sure, what he was originally intended as. Knightly and Bloom of course do run the danger of being a little bland at times, but overall they are given a lot more to work with here than in the first movie, and I liked the character of Will Turner a lot more given that he had a bit of depth to him this time around. Also, as I mentioned, each and every supporting character is given a moment to shine, and suddenly characters like the quintissential pirate Gibbs and the comedic duo of Pintel and Ragetti (hilariously played by The Office's McKenzie Crook) went from being just amusing in the first movie to beloved crowd favorites in the second. As far as villains go, Davey Jones was pretty awesome - a classic conflicted bad guy, tragic and grotesque like all the great movie monsters.

But speaking of Davey Jones, let's forget about the script for a moment and talk about the amazing visuals. I love the visual f/x and stunning character design of the movie - one of the first examples I can recall where CGI character and design work in a live-action setting truly conveyed a level of seamless imagination and artistry worthy of the likes of Jim Henson's hand-made creature creations. Davey Jones and his crew looked spectacular, and the sheer size and magnitude of the Kraken reminded me of seeing 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea as a kid and thinking that the giant squid was the coolest, scariest thing ever. When Davey Jones bellowed to release the Kraken, it reminded me of the coolness in Sky Captain And The World of Tommorow, when Angelina Jolie ordered for her amphibious squadrons to be readied - and I'm like, "yes, please."

Similarly, the action choreography in Pirates 2 is up there with anything from a Jackie Chan movie, using the same style of frenetic, kinetic stunts combined with animated physical comedy. I'm not ready to put Gore Verbinski on a level with Steven Spielberg or Peter Jackson yet in terms of ability to direct amazing and impactful set-piece action sequences, but the pure visual spectacle and non-stop energy of the movie's action scenes makes for few dull moments. The thrilling escape scene from the island of Tortuga and the three way sword-fight between Jack, Will, and Norrington (a rather generic villain in Part 1, here an interesting fallen nobleman looking to reclaim his prestige) were each just awesome to watch. And man, that near-final shot of Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow, in full pirate regalia, staring with sword pointed down the gaping mouth of the Kraken - damn, talk about a quintissential Pirate moment. Intense.

Pirates 2, is, as I said, a throw-it-all against-the-wall type of movie, sometimes to its detriment. The plot is pretty convoluted, and there are a number of McGuffin-y plot devices that don't get fully explained or elaborated upon. Some of the shifts in character are a bit sudden, as are some of the shifts in location. I'd say that most of the confusing details actually hold up upon analysis, but I agree with some of the complaints that certain plot points could have been made easier to follow. The humor is great, but i'd say the movie almost overdoes it with the wackiness-factor, sometimes detracting from the darker direction of the plot by filling up so much of the movie with over the top humor. As I said in my opening paragraph, the movie almost overtly tries to emulate Star Wars, but the tone is too light and joke-y to carry the impact of Lucas' original trilogy. But on a sidenote, the parallels between this movie and Star Wars, especially in terms of how the plot and characters, almost to a T, mirror the Empire Strikes Back is kind of uncanny. But hey, if the formula works ... And as for my final complaint - I think that in getting so wrapped up in the fantastical aspects of the story, the movie does lose a slight bit of its original edge. At this point, the series is really more Fantasy than pure Pirate fiction, and in that genre shift it loses a bit of the grit, the darkness, the atmosphere of a movie solely focused on pirates and not on mystical monsters and magic. But I'm sure we'll get a movie like that down the line -- that's not what this franchise is about - it's big, fun, over-the top, and I can't really fault it for going in that direction.

Dead Man's Chest is a damn good movie in and of itself, yet now suddenly part of a larger tapestry that should make for a kickass trilogy in the final summation. It's a pure adventure story, filled with imagination and action, but also character and wit. Just as people complained about X-3 giving short shrift to character though, I'm sure a vocal minority wishes that their Pirate movies, like their Superhero movies, would be filled with riveting talking heads and edge-of-your-seat soap opera romances and heroes who mostly stare at things longingly and doubt themsleves. Sorry folks, but this is a movie about PIRATES, a movie that took me to exotic locales, presented non-stop action, memorable characters, humor, an applause-generating cliffhanger ending, and all the plank-walking, rum-drinking, pillaging, plundering, high-seas sailing, sword-fighting, wench-fighting, sea-monster-fighting adventure that one could want from such a movie. So drink up me hearties, yo ho. And bring on Part 3.

My Grade: A -

- Alright, that's all I've got time for now. But let me know what you thought of Pirates, and have a good one. Forget corporate America - a Pirate's life for me (except with less sailing and more hygiene, I think).

The Trial of Danny Baram ... Guilty or Not Guilty?!?! Plus: Emmy thoughts

Consider for a moment, if you will, the man behind this blog. A common man, a man of the people, a man who Fights the Good Fight. A nice Jewish Boy, raised by two upstanding parents in a small suburban town. A guy who may have a slight, emphasis on SLIGHT, rebellious streak in him, sure, but someone who most would call easygoing, unassuming, and all around, a good person.

So how does a guy like me manage to get into so many predicaments like I went through back in March, where I was unceremoniously pulled over by an ill-tempered cop, given a ticket for an illegal U-turn, and then, to top it off, slapped with a MISDEMEANOR for driving with a CT driver's license rather than the required CA-issued variety.

Read all about my knee-jerk reactions and incensed ranting about the events of that fateful night here.

But anyways, these kinds of things just don't happen to anyone else I know. They don't happen to people I know who legitimately ARE rebellious, who DO push the limits, who often set themselves up for these kinds of things. And YET, there I was at 8:30 this morning, at the Van Nuys courthouse, sitting in a large courtroom filled with all manner of criminals, miscreants, and generally sketchy people. Me, wearing a blazer and khaki pants, surrounded by shabbily-dressed repeat offenders, most of whom had no alibis, no legitimate excuses, and no ability to speak English.

I'm not trying to sound condescending towards the other people in that courtroom, I'm just trying to point out that it was pretty crazy sitting through hearing after hearing in the courtroom's open format, listening to a parade of people who had racked up multiple failures to appear in court, multiple unpaid violations, and who often had long criminal records. I felt like I was taking one for the team, like I was the token guy who moved to CA from out of state after college and was being held up as the example of how not immediately registering for a CA license is serious business. Of course, over the last few months, as I've told people the story of my misdemeanor charge, all I ever here is "oh, yeah, I drove for years without a CA license," or "hmm, I've lived here three years and have yet to get a CA license."

Well here I am - I'm the posterboy. Congratulations, Hollywood, you've found your fall-guy. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving fellow.

So there I am, sitting in the courtroom for what seemed like forever, listening to the gruff judge's various attempts at dark courtroom humor, not laughing because I'm mostly trying to figure out what the hell is going on, what do I say, what am I supposed to be doing, and all that good stuff. On one side of the room were all the non-English Spanish-only speakers, who had the benefit of translators. Amazing how a courtroom has an entire section, just as big as the other half, for people who barely speak a word of English. On my side were a number of rough-looking types, and this one young-looking girl sitting next to me who was obviously prepping to turn on the charm once she had her chance to speak to the judge. (She did, actually, and amusingly the judge and other officials actually LAUGHED when she said how she had failed to appear earlier because she "was in school and her parents said she shouldn't leave because her grades were most important." Which led the judge to reply: "What kind of school do you go to, a monastary?") For some reason I pictured a situation where you'd sit before the judge and have a minute or two to kind of state your case. I didn't realize that you get called up before a podium with everyone else watching and listening, are immediately asked if you plead guilty or not guilty, and can only really get a word in by interjecting while the judge is telling you his decision. As I sat and waited for my turn, I thought of all kinds of different things to say, but mostly just concentrated on a few key points that I wanted to get across:

a.) that I was driving with a valid CT license - it wasn't as if I had no license at all
b.) that I was essentially participating in a year long, non-full time internship program, and did not realize that I was considered a a permanent resident, since for all I knew I would be out of CA after that year as an NBC Page was up
c.) that following the citation, I immediately applied for and got my CA driver's license, scoring 100 % on the application test
d.) that while I accepted the charges for the illegal U-Turn citation, I sincerely hoped for a dismissal or reduction of the misdemeanor charge due to the reasons stated above

Luckily, I was able to pretty quickly rattle off these points, kind of. The weirdest moment was when I presented my now-invalid CT driver's license to the judge, and for a second it's validity was brought into question, since the hole punched in it to show that it's invalid obscured the date of expiration.

Haha, like after all that I was going to present a fake or expired driver's license?

Luckily, the judge saw fit to dismiss the misdemeanor charge "in the name of justice." (damn right in the name of justice ...) But I was still slapped with a hefty $236 fine and the option to complete traffic school to have the infraction erased from my driving record. Fun, fun, fun, but yeah, it could have been worse. But, then again, that cop could have been nice in the first place and not slapped me with a CRIMINAL OFFENSE. Jerk.

But going to court today was both an eye opening and somewhat terrifying experience. It really was amazing, for instance, how many of the cases came down to whether or not the person managed to win over the judge's sympathy, and not any real, concrete legal precedent. Most people had their fines or whatever reduced because they had taken steps to correct their problems, taken a class, or whatever. Some people seemed to receive similar penalties for totally varying issues. One guy whose only crime was driving a motorcycle without a helmet (dangerous, sure, but more self-destructive than anything else), seemed to get the same treatment as a woman who drove with her infant without the proper child-seat (much more careless, to be sure).

The legal system is just such a crazy thing, and going to a court and seeing how different kinds of people are treated differently makes me wonder ... And also, it's just amazing how some laws are just so reliant on people somehow knowing what is and isn't illegal. Like, how is the average person supposed to know what is and isn't legal in terms of specifics and technicalities? Say I move here from CT, don't know may people, and don't immediately meet many other out of state transplants. How am I supposed to even KNOW what the required time frame is to get a CA license, for example? Word of mouth? I mean, there has to be a better system in place.

So yeah, quite the experience. It also didn't help that the courthouse was in Van Nuys. Now sorry if anyone reading this is from Van Nuys, but man, the part of the town where the courthouse is located is just like the absolute toilet bowl of Los Angeles county. I mean, sure, Burbank has some dingy and slightly sketchy areas, but once you start driving into North Hollywood things take a turn for the crappy. You drive though NoHo's "arts district" which is like a smaller, sketchier, far less cool version of Allston outside of Beantown. Then Van Nuys is just like this industrial wasteland - an endless parade of rundown automotive shops and tiny Mexican restaurants. Everything is dirty and smoggy and grey. The courthouse itself is actually in this large, attractive plaza, but it's surrounded by just a complete mess of a neighborhood. No wonder Jack Bauer is always driving around Van Nuys on 24 -- it's a totally bleak, industrial sprawl of a craphole. Once again, aplogies to anyone reading from Van Nuys - I'm sure there are nicer parts than what I drove through today.

Anyways ...

Speaking of 24, some quick thoughts on today's Emmy nomination announcements:

- Overall, I think that Emmy did a better job than usual of picking its nominees, I guess possibly because of the new voting system they implemented or whatever. And yet, there were still some notable snubs, most notably for me is Veronica Mars, the best drama of this past season other than 24. Kristen Bell did outstanding work as the lead this year, and has got to be one of the few clear-cut dramatic female leads on TV who carries a show as she does. If the show survives past this coming season, then hopefully get her due, and Veronica Mars will be recognized as one of the best dramas on TV. Of course, Lauren Graham on Gilmore Girls is a perennial non-nominee. I felt that this past season she wasn't quite as sharp as during previous years of Gilmore, but still, she is long due for some recognition for bringing to life one of TV's most original and fun characters, Lorelei Gilmore. And seriously though, what about the OUTSTANDING supporting cast on Gilmore? Rory's grandparents are seriously due for some Emmy love.

But, at last, my man Brian Cranston, aka Hal on Malcolm in the Middle, finally gets his due. Cranston as Hal has made me laugh as much as any other TV character over the last several years, and it's about friggin' time that Cranston's classic blend of comedic timing and physical-comedy antics get some recognition.

Also, nice to see Arrested Development get a best comedy nod again, and of course you gotta love the hilarious Will Arnett getting recognized for his role as wannabe-magician Gob Bluth. Most years I'd pick this season's The Office as the best comedy on TV, and compared to his competition, Steve Carell is a shoe-in for Best Comedic Actor, but Arrested's 3rd and final season was just absolutely, ridiculously amazing. The only oddball thing is that Jason Bateman, who probably had his best season yet on Arrested, got no nom in favor of the likes of Kevin James and Charlie Sheen? Hmmm, okay ...

People are talking about why no love for Lost. But I don't think this season's Lost really deserved much acclaim. If Veronica Mars can't even get any love, than Season 2 of Lost, which had its moments but was pretty inconsistent, shouldn't really be in the running. This year, many of the strongest actors were overshadowed in the plot, or burdened by poor writing. For example, no single episode this season really spotlighted the amazing acting of Terry O'Quinn as a few did in Season 1. The character of Jack, a charismatic leading man who everyone could root for in Season 1, became mostly unlikable in Season 2. The standouts, character wise, were probably Sawyer and Michael, though probably not standout enough to really make a dent in the Emmy considerations. Michael Emerson as Henry Gale had some great performances, but he was only featured in a handful of episodes, so how do you categorize him? In any case, this wasn't a year that Lost really made a strong case to be in the running for the top awards.

But in my mind and in Emmy's mind also, apparently, this was the year of 24. It's cool to see the awesomeness that is 24 get so much recognition - it's one of the few cases of a show that was originally a cultish favorite become a mainstream and critical phenomena. Mr. and Mrs. Logan justifiably got supporting nods, and I also have a feeling that Kiefer will finally be presented with his GRAVITAS TROPHY, I mean, Emmy award. Now if only we could give some kind of special award for badassity to the late great Tony Almeda. I vote the Soul Patch for best supporting facial hair.

So yeah, overall, the only major issues I have with the Emmys are no love for Veronica Mars / Kristen Bell, yet again no love for Gilmore / Lauren Graham, and a weird snub of Jason Bateman despite Arrested being nominated for best comedy. But at least I have plenty to root for with 24 getting so many nominations. Let's hope the Chinese don't have a say in this year's awards ...

- Okay, I gotta jet. But more coming soon, I promise ... my Superman sequel ideas are on the way. As for this weekend -- Erica's in town, Pirates 2 is out ... should be a good one. Happy Friday everyone. PEACE.

Blogged on the 4th of July ...

Hey everyone -- Happy 4th of July!

I don't know why but I've been feeling oddly patriotic lately for some reason. Maybe it's just that I am kind of getting over the whole "America sucks" phase that seems to have been so prevalent in our public conciousness since a certain President took office, but again, the great thing about America is that in a few short years some new priveleged white guy will be there to take his place. Wait, see, now I went and got myself all cynical again. What I mean to say is: "America f'n rocks!" See, all it really takes is a quick listen to Rick Derringer's "Real American" and I'm waving an American flag, chanting "USA!", and ready to roll up my sleeves and go kick some Commie ass! Wait, it's NOT 1985 you say? Seriously, look at how messed up all of these countries around the world are, and look at America where I can have this blog and write whatever the hell I want. I mean, in China this blog is banned, along with half the internet. I'd take this opportunity to diss China, but this past season's 24 finale has made me too fearful of swift, Chinese-induced retribution.

Overall it's been a very good weekend. But today, the actual 4th of July, is one of those weird days where I am basically sitting around wondering what I should be doing. I'd be somewhat content with just hanging out and taking it easy, except my apartment is currently a sweltering sauna that is just way too hot to be in for too long. Many of my friends though are either out of town or otherwise occupied with family or whatnot, so there's not too much going on today.

But in spite of today's uneventfulness, this long weekend has been good times. Friday I was exhausted from work and from the week, so some friends and I just kicked back and watched movies. Saturday was a great time and a nice change of pace - my old BU video production partners Amanda and Jason hosted a huge Independence Day party at their Hollywood apartment, and it was really great to see so many fellow BU grads in one place, many of whom I hadn't seen in months, or at all in some cases, since moving to LA. The party was brimming with BOSTON pride, and a good time was had by all. Then, it was even more BU reunions, as I saw the man, the myth, the legend - Aksel, for the first time since December. Aksel, always quite the character, met up with Brian and myself (Brian finally met the Axe-Man after hearing so many of my crazy Aksel-related stories) at Downtown Disney, where we had a fun dinner at the Rainforest Cafe. Aksel also brought along his new (well, new to me) girlfriend Lisa who was very cool as well, and within minutes we were laughing and reminiscing about old times. The reunions should continue throught the summer, as Eryka is scheduled to visit LA later this week, and Chris should be stopping by sometime soon as well. While I've been lucky to meet some great people since coming out to LA, it is great to see my college peeps with whom I've really been through it all.

And then, it's back to work tommorow. I guess the nice thing is that it's only a three day work week, but man, I feel like I'm living two lives lately. There's me - the normal, 23 year old me, and the other me who is going to work in a corporate office every day and trying to act is if I know what I'm talking about while surrounded by people at least ten years my senior, for the most part. On Friday, I found myself in one of those awkward situations where I was invited to have lunch at Morton's next to my office with a few senior-ranking NBC-Uni men and women. It turned out fine, but on a Friday where I was basically just counting down the minutes to the long weekend, it was a surprise social situation with my superiors that I wasn't quite prepared for. I guess in a way I am pretty luck to have this job though -- talking to all these BU people this weekend who are between jobs and unsure about their future definitely made me value what I have going with I-Tunes right now ... and hey, at least I'm not having to put up with the full-blown Office-Space-like world of Aksel's mortgage lending job.

Meanwhile, my brother is off touring around the country on a bus full of teenagers, doing his second annual go-round as a counsellor on the USY on Wheels bus trip across America. Every time I call him he's in a new state seeing some new attraction. Not a bad way to spend your summer vacation, and Matt will be stopping in LA in a few weeks, not so coincidentally at the same time that my parents will be flying down from CT for a visit as well.

- On another note, it's pretty ironic that what is in theory, the perfect July 4th movie - Superman Returns - has practically zero hints of patriotism or American iconography. In the first two Superman movies there was a lot of overt Americanism, and even Spiderman, released shortly after 9/11, had prominent images of Spiderman posing with the American flag. And yet, America's greatest hero, Superman, gets a movie released on July 4th weekend with no real political overtones and no real sense of patriotism, going so far as to have Perry White ask if Superman stands for "Truth, Justice, all that stuff," conspicuously leaving out any mention of "The American Way." For my part, I think this just showsa kind of obliviousness on the part of Singer and his writers to the current zeitgeist. Sure, many of us have long been cynical of some of our country's leaders over the last few years, but I think that there is still a lingering desire from 9/11 to see a depiction of a real American Hero. Normally, I am oppossed to heavy-handed politics in light superhero fare, but if there was ever a hero who justified having a little overt patriotism in his movie, especially post 9/11, it's Superman. I know that many of us wondered, post-9/11, what that day would have been like if there was really a Superman, and just as Superman fought Nazis in the comics during WW2, I think there would be a real fantasy fulfillment factor in having Superman acknowledge the political climate in his latest movie, or at the least do something inspirational from a patriotic point of view. Look, I can be as cynical as anyone about our country sometimes, but it's larger than life characters like Superman, who is in a way the ultimate example of the American Dream, who remind us of the great ideals and ideas behind America.

Don't worry, I still have more to say about Superman Returns and how I'd approach the inevitable sequels. But I think I'll hold off on that for now.

Until then, have a Happy 4th of July, pray that North Korea's missle-testing is the last we see of North Korean missles, pop in some Rick Derringer and be a Real American, brother!

USA! USA! USA! Hoooooooooooooooo!

SUPERMAN RETURNS: The Review

So last night I saw Superman Returns ...

And man, I have been going back and forth on what I think of it. I think I'm suffering through a little bit of Star Wars: Episode I syndrome, where just the sheer spectacle of my first ever all-new Superman movie on the big screen made me want to love this movie so badly. When the movie began, when the DC Comics logo flashed on-screen, when the old-school opening credits rolled as John Williams' majestic score blared in the IMAX theater - I had chills, I was more pumped than I'd been in a long time at the movies. I forgot all about every reservation and bit of anxiety I had about the movie going in. Bryan Singer had me in the palm of his hand and I was freaking ready to have my mind blown. This was IT. This was something I've literally thought and dreamed about my entire life - a concept whose very potential has probably been a driving force in getting me to where I am today professionally - a Superman movie on the big screen.

At least with Star Wars Episode I, the process of coming down from that initial high took me days, even weeks. With that movie, only on second viewing was I really able to shut off the geek-out center of my brain and look at the movie objectively in any way and kind of sober up so to speak from the drunken euphoria of seeing a new Star Wars movie.

With Superman Returns though, all it took was that first scene.

The credits end, I'm pumped, the adrenaline is flowing - bring on Superman! We get a little opening title card explaining Superman's absence from Earth for five years. He heard Krypton might still be around or something. Okay, kind of lame, but whatever. Bring on Superman.

Cut to a gothic mansion. Lex Luthor, wearing a wig for some unfathomable reason, is forcing an elderly woman on her deathbed to sign away her fortune to her lover, Lex Luthor, who had apparently "shown her pleasures she'd never known," in a bit of reverse Anna-Nicole Smith-ery.

What. The. Hell. Is. This Crap?

Okay, okay, so the movie opened with a weird sort of gothic camp. Odd, okay, but whatever. Bring on Superman.

Things started to get a little better. We're in Smallville, Kansas. Sweet. Ma Kent does Ma Kent-like things, when a rocket crashes. She runs out to see what happened ... and there's her son! Clark! In the black Kryptonian regeneration suit from the comics! Very nice, cool imagery. I love the whole idea of Superman REALLY just being a down-home farmboy from Smallville who is who he is because of two adoptive parents who raised him right and made Clark, an alien, more human than most regular people, despite not exactly being from around here.

But sadly, this was all we saw of Smallville, or of the real Clark Kent - the real guy who isn't a bumbling idiot but who isn't quite Superman. I guess the only place to find THAT guy is on TV's Smallville, which can be very hit and hit and miss quality-wise, but provides a great overall take on the Superman mythos that Bryan Singer sadly never really acknowledged.

What we got from this point on in the movie was an odd sort of homage to the original Richard Donner movie, mixed with a number of strange and conflicting elements and tonalities. And strangely, I actually kind of agree with Roger Ebert's review in some respects - it seems like Bryan Singer had a very specific movie that he wanted to make - a tragic romance between Superman and Lois Lane with the central theme of Superman as being alone and an outsider - and that everything else seemed mostly tacked on and workman-like, in what amounted to an overly serious and mostly joyless affair.

Before I commence the bashing though - let me first say this: Superman Returns, as many have pointed out, is a beautifully filmed movie, with a number of epic shots that are pretty breathtaking. In fact, I think that where this movie most succeeded was in an area in which I worried it might fail - its visual representation of Superman. Brandon Routh, mostly, looked the part. And the action and flying shots in particular looked spectacular - this was simply the best, most seamless, and most visceral depiction of superheroic flight that we've seen captured on screen. Some of the shots were suitably iconic and memorable -- Superman floating in space looking down on earth, Superman literally doing his best Atlas impersonation and carrying the Daily Planet globe on his shoulders, Superman flying into the Sun to absorb its energies and recharge, Superman falling from the heavens ... all of these were beautifully-filmed, grand, sweeping shots worthy of an Alex Ross painting. They even included a very nice representation of the classic, Superman-lifting-a-car pose from the famous cover of Superman's first ever appearance in 1938, Action Comics #1.

The problem is that all of these amazingly-done pieces of cinematography were ultimately about all that the film had to offer. For a hero who appears in Action Comics, there was precious little action in Superman Returns. Superman barely DID anything except for lift a lot of really heavy stuff, which to me kind of negates the whole point of Superman. To me Superman is all about the "never-ending battle." He's about taking the worst that the world can throw at him and coming back for more. Here, he was by no means the man of action that I was expecting. I mean, the Man of Steel does not throw a single punch the entire movie!

SPOILERS AHEAD







This lack of action is taken to almost absurd levels, to the point where it really detracts from the story-structure. There is a pretty intense scene about 3/4 of the way through the movie where Superman, weakened by Kryptonite, is beaten silly by Luthor's thugs to the point where you as an audience member are almost gasping in disbelief at the sight of seeing this group of muscleheads kicking the crap out of the World's Greatest Superhero. One of the best, most effective dramatic scenes in the movie. But then, what the hell happened? Superman is thrown to the ocean, saved by Lois, and does ... NOTHING?!?! The Superman I know would save as many people as he could and then promptly return to give Lex Luthor some payback, or at THE LEAST, to take him into custody. Just this week, I read the great conclusion to Geoff Johns' and Kurt Busiek's latest Superman storyline, where a powerless Superman goes mano e mano with Lex - no powers, no tricks, just two rivals duking it out after a long and drawn out battle. In the comic, this scene was great. Why? Because it showed that the powers are NOT what make Superman a hero - it's his never-say-die attitude, his sheer willpower, and his overwhelming selflessness and dedication to fight the good fight.

Here, we had the perfect setup to an amazing scene. Superman is weakened, beaten to a pulp, maybe even near death. BUT HE KEEPS ON FIGHTING. But wait, that's not what happened. He is a total pushover, a wuss, a nobody. Bryan Singer's Superman is, apparently, able to get soundly thrashed by a group of hired muscle without even getting in a decent punch. Singer never gave us what we were all waiting for - he never gave us the big comeback or the climactic confrontation - he never gave us a reason to stand up and cheer.

And that kind of touches on a larger problem with this movie. Tonally, it was just, well, OFF. It was dark in all the wrong ways and light and campy in all the wrong ways. I appreciate that Singer tried to bring a real sense of gravitas and almost biblical grandness to the movie, and the film's sweeping, epic cinematography that I just mentioned earlier helped give it that sense of bigness. But almost never did Superman Returns look or feel like a SUPERMAN MOVIE. Instead, the whole thing looked and felt like a BRYAN SINGER MOVIE. It was dark, gloomy, shadowy, and it just felt wrong. Look at what Sam Raimi has done with the Spiderman movies - he's perfectly captured the look, the feel, the essence of the old Stan Lee and Steve Ditko universe. It feels like those movies take place in the bright, colorful, crazy world of Marvel Comics. Superman Returns just feels cold and bland. Metropolis has no real character as Gotham did in Batman Begins. Smallville is only briefly glimpsed. The one scene that gets it most right is the semi-spectacular airplane / baseball stadium scene, which offered an all too brief promise of bigger and better things that never quite materialized.

But even as the movie FELT too dark and grim and cold and bland, it inexplicably kept the ONE element of the movie that SHOULD have been dark and cold light and campy and well, LAME. Because I'm sorry to say it, but ...

... Kevin Spacey is terrible as Lex Luthor in Superman Returns.

Sure, those merely expecting a reprieve of the Gene Hackman, used-car-salesman Lex Luthor will be amused by Spacey's antics. But anyone who knows how evil, manipulative, cunning, and BADASS Lex Luthor is and has been in the comics, cartoons, or on Smallville, where he is expertly played by Michael Rosenbaum - hell, anyone who wanted Superman to have a decent, formidable nemesis in this movie, is going to be supremely disappointed in Spacey's Lex Luthor. I mean, think about it: Lex Luthor is just a human being, yet he is the ONE guy on the whole planet who isn't a monster, alien, or Batman who can really pose a threat to Superman. And so you'd think that this one guy must be one hell of a smart, evil, cunning bastard to be Superman's greatest enemy. Look at the animated JLU to see a version of Lex that IS that guy. Look to Superman Returns for a version of Lex that is a total joke. In a way, it's almost worse than Hackman in the originals, because at least Hackman you knew upfront was a joke character played for camp value. Singer's vision of Lex is totally schitzofrenic, alternatively hammy and over the top one minute, yet cold and sadistic another minute. But mostly, this Lex is just goofy, and it's clear that little to no effort was made into building him up as a proper villan. We never get any real sense of rivalry or hatred between Superman and Lex, it rarely feels personal between them. And Lex's scheme? Absolutely stupid. Makes no logical sense, is lightweight, and by no means worthy of a Superman movie, let alone of Lex friggin' Luthor. While a few moments of sadism HINT at an attempt to make this Lex darker than Hackman's version, this Lex is still rather pathetic. He wears wigs, he lives on a boat, he is a known criminal, he has a crew of two-dimensional, worthless flunkies, and his evil schemes involve freaking REAL ESTATE. This Lex utterly pales in comparison to nearly EVERY OTHER INCARNATION. The John Byrne businessman-as-villain from the comics, the young heir to Lexcorp of Smallville, the former President of the United States and hero-to-the-public Lex of current comic book continuity, and the cold, driven supervillain of the seminal JLU animated series.

Yes, Lex Luthor was the single worst thing about this movie, which is amazing because fanboys everywhere were excited about Keyser Soze himself taking a stab at Lex Luthor. But let's be real here (SPOILERS FOR USUAL SUSPECTS) - Kevin Spacey didn't PLAY Keyser Soze in The Usual Suspects - he PLAYED Verbal Kint. All of his horrible deeds as Keyser were merely implied. Spacey does sniveling, creepy, meek well (see Usual Suspects and Glengary Glenn Ross). But has he ever done evil genious badass? Can he effectively do evil genious badass? My impression from this movie is no, he can't. Spacey has a rep as a great actor, but this movie needed its own equivalent of Ian McKellan and Patrick Stewart in X-Men, who brought that classical and powerful sense of gravitas to every scene they were in.

Bottom line: the writers totally missed the boat with Lex Luthor in this movie, and Kevin Spacey was not the right actor for the job.

And just a quick mention of how useless and derivative Lex's flunkies are in this movie. Two great comedic actors, Parker Posey and Kal Penn - both utterly wasted and pointless, serving only to detract from Lex's character. At the least they could have been funny comic relief, but they are pretty much just THERE as some kind of weird homage to the campy Lex of the original Donner movies.

Otherwise, I thought the casting was okay. I was surprised that I didn't mind Kate Bosworth as Lois Lane, overall. But she lacked that certain something, that sense of spunk and moxy that Margot Kidder kind of had, that Teri Hatcher had on Lois and Clark, and even Erica Durance on Smallville kind of has going for her. Her Lois was decent, but just not all that likable - it is hard to see why of all people Superman loved HER. Which lead me to another problem ...

... the movie's whole outlook on Superman / Clark Kent is just wrong, and kind of makes you wonder how Clark could really be in love with Lois. Because essentially, Superman IS Clark Kent - he grew up as Clark, was raised as Clark, and in the comics, he always wanted Lois to fall in love not with Superman, but with Clark. How can Superman in this movie pine for Lois when she essentially ignores his REAL self? In the first movies, it was okay - that was the early stage of their relationship, Clark was the oddball new guy who was easy to brush off. But now, after all this time, Lois refers to Clark as "just some guy she works with?" If that's the case, how can she have any real, deep connection with Superman if she still has no clue that he is Clark and that, in all likelihood, Clark is closest to his real personality? This in my view is a fatal flaw in the movie, and really undermines the believability of the Clark-Lois romance in the film. In the modern comics, John Byrne and his successors in the 80's and 90's got this essential point - that for the romance to work Lois has to fall in love with Clark Kent, not Superman. Even Lois and Clark got this right. So it's just odd to have a movie that is basically telling us that Lois is in love with a guy who she knows nothing about to the point that she is oblivious to his alter ego, and not only that, but she had a kid with the guy.

So basically, the entire movie is centered around a romantic plot makes little sense, and gives no real reason for us to believe that Lois ever really legitimately loved Superman beyond the level of a schoolgirl crush.

As far as Brandon Routh goes, he was in a way a pleasant surprise because he was, I think, pretty good as Superman and Clark Kent. I say pretty good because he had very little to do here. I was able to transplant my own ideas of who Clark and Superman are onto his portrayal, but for a newcomer, I don't know if they ever get a real sense of Clark's true personality here. At one point Perry White asks his reporters if Superman still stands for Truth, Justice, All That Stuff (conspicuously leaving out "The American Way .."). And I found myself wondering the same thing. Does he? I never really got an answer - instead I got the most emo version of Superman ever - a brooding, mostly silent, celestial figure whose dialogue mostly consisted of recycled lines from the first movie. And watching those original movies, Christopher Reeve really did an absolutely remarkable job of shifting his whole demeanor when he transitioned between Clark Kent and Superman. Routh never really gives us those same seamless yet jarring transitions in his performance. Routh SEEMS like a decent actor, and looks the part (though he still looks kind of lanky and effeminate from some angles) ... I just got no real sense of his range of acting skill from this movie, since he was mostly stoic and expressionless. Singer played him up as being distant, alien. Again, that's too bad because it contradicts the recent and best and most relatable interpretations of Clark vs. Superman - that Clark is the reality and Superman a role that Clark had to reluctantly grow into and accept as his destiny - a theme that Smallville has been steadily exploring throughout its run on television.

Again, the supporting cast was pretty good, but rarely given anything fun or substantial to do. One of the best aspects of Batman Begins was the way in which every side character had their moment to shine. In Superman Returns, there's never, for example, that one Jimmy Olsen moment that makes you think "sweet, Jimmy Olsen rocks!" No signal watch, no unlikely acts of heroism, nothing except a few comic-relief lines of dialogue from Superman's Pal. Perry White is not given much substance either, except an utterance of "Great Ceaser's Ghost" that had my audience cheering at the Daily Planet editor's classic catchphrase. On a sidenote, I was pleasantly surprised to see Peta Wilson of La Femme Nikita show up, only to do approximately jack #$%& in her small cameo.

And then there's the addition of some new characters to the Superman mythos - a controversial move on principle alone, but something I was willing to accept if done right. Unfortunately, nothing about Richard White as played by James Marsden or Lois' young son was so great as to justify the tough narrative corners that their existence paints this franchise into. I've heard reviews that call James Marsden as Richard the standout character in the movie, but frankly I don't see it. He comes off as the same semi-annoying, alpha-male type as he did as Cyclops in X-Men, and he again was just kind of there - once again, no real chemistry between him and Lois, and no real sense of rivalry between him and Clark.

As for the kid ... the child actor was mostly fine, but I just don't see the real narrative value of placing this kid into the mythos. I could see it as something that happens later on down the line -- the logical conclusion of the Lois-Clark romance is that they have a kid. But a kid, now, when realunching a franchise? Raise your hand, folks, who is looking forward to the further adventures of Papa Superman and his nuclear family in parts 2 and 3? And if you're going to have the kid in this movie, at least give him something to do - give him his big moment, put him in danger, something. As it stood, he was, again, just kind of there.

Which is why, structurally, this movie had problems. Way too long by at least a half-hour, and shoddilly edited, this film made a number of baffling narrative choices. Why start on that weird scene of Lex and the old woman? Why have the best set-piece action scene by far (the airplane rescue scene) so early in the movie, and then have nothing in the second half that could come close to topping it? Why insert a number of overly long, visually bland, been-there-done-that scenes of Superman stopping rather ordinary crimes? Why end with Luthor stranded on an island, with Superman happily flying into space and not even giving a damn that his supposedly greatest enemy, who just gave him the beatdown of his life, was never brought to justice? So much of this movie was simply Superman flying around, brooding and floating like some kind of super-powered voyeur. Cool to look at sure - as I said the cinematography was often spectacular. But ultimately, the story, what little there was, moved forward at a snail's pace.

Where Singer excelled, again, was in the visual imagery and iconography. The arc of Superman returning and the public's reaction was done well. The crowd scenes captured the feeling of awe that seeing a Superman in real life would evoke. The sense of scale and motion and power and grandeur of Superman's various feats of strength made for some captivating scenes. But the plot that tied all of these scenes together, ultimately, was weak. This was not a well-scripted movie by any means. And tonally, it was too glum, too self-serious, and too tied down by the outdated representation of the Superman mythos as presented in the Christopher Reeve movies. In addition, Singer really missed an opportunity to revamp Lex Luthor from the earlier movies, instead, sadly, sticking to the lame, cheesy version that Gene Hackman portrayed. Finally, the whole movie is centered on the Superman (not Clark) and Lois romance, which never felt convincing enough to really make you believe in it beyond the power and iconography of the characters themselves. To that same point, I think most of the legitimate thrills that I did get from this movie had to do with the power of simply seeing Superman on the big screen. Take away the Superman character from this movie, and you have nothing. But give Brandon Routh those red and blue tights, play that classic John Williams score (nicely arranged by John Ottoman), and you have yourself something that has weight and symbolism and pathos - a character who embodies our hopes and dreams and ideals. Superman is the best, the original. Now Singer - give him something to do! Challenge him! Put him in the fight of his life! Show us something we've never seen before! Make us care!

I came away from this movie with an overflow of conflicted emotions. I was excited but dissapointed, hyped yet already anxious about future sequels. I mean how do they do the Superman movies we all really want with this Richard character running around and a kid for Superman to watch over who may or may not be developing super powers? I say bring on Darkseid, Doomsday, Brainiac, Bizarro, bring on Superman vs. Batman (for the first time DC has both in viable movie franchises) -- but now I don't know if I trust this franchise to deliver on the promise of those storylines. I don't know if Singer is the right guy for these movies, and I am pretty confident that screenwriters Dougherty and Harris are completely wrong - they clearly are not big on the source material and are reluctant to draw on any interpretation of Superman other than the original movies. Spacey as Luthor shocked me in terms of how much I disliked his interpretation of the character. You have a solid Superman in Routh, a solid Lois in Bosworth, a solid Jimmy and Perry. Now get these beloved characters a story befitting them, and get Superman a villain that does him justice, whether its Lex with an attitude adjustment or someone else. Man, I kind of wish DC had stolen away Sam Raimi from Marvel rather than Singer. I know that Raimi could do Superman right - the fun, dynamism, and depth that he brings to the Spiderman movies would be perfect for Superman.

What we have with Singer at the helm though, is a visually stunning but ultimately unfulfilling movie. Singer chose to focus on his central theme of alienation at the expense of all other aspects of the movie, to the point where the action, characters, and plot seem tacked on and forced - an afterthought, for the most part. Some of the action scenes are indeed quite spectacular, noticeably that one plane-crash, made all the more visceral in IMAX-3D ... but I was left wanting more, left asking "is that all you've got?" The power of Superman is that I am still buzzing from those opening credits alone, and I still feel like I'm sitting here, waiting for the REAL Superman to return after the infinite promise of those opening credits, those credits that promise a bright world of super-powered heroism and idealism, of dastardly villainy, of monsters, aliens, spaceships, romance, and great adventure - a world where you can believe in truth and justice and the American Way, where you can believe that a Man Can Fly. I wanted THAT movie so badly, and what I was left with had its moments, but was weighed down by too many glaring flaws to overlook. Don't believe the hype - this is not quite the Superman we've been waiting for.

My Grade: C+

NEXT: What I would do for Superman Returns: The Sequels ...

Blog of Steel: The Best Ever Superman Writers and Artists, as Superman Week Continues

Man, finally, a day to just come home and chill after a long day of work. Gotta rest up, because tommorow is gonna be huge. Work, dinner with the visiting Yanofsky family from CT, and then over to Universal Citywalk, to take in Superman Returns in full-on IMAX 3-D, baby.

The reviews for Superman have been pretty interesting. I notice that those who hold Donner's movies in the highest regard - aka those who were between 5 and 15 when the first Superman was released in theaters - have almost always given Bryan Singer's latest effort excellent reviews, often invoking nostalgic feelings for those old films that the new one evoked. Roger Ebert today gave the movie a fairly mediocre review, although at this point, Ebert's opinion is almost hard to take at face value - the guy seems to just be kind of marching to the beat of his own drummer at this point, and I don't mean that in a good way. Harry Knowle's hyperbolic review on Ain't It Cool was predictably laced with over the top fanboyish love for Superman Returns. His reviews are always fun reads, especially as a way of getting hyped up for a movie, but Harry's reviews are often totally written within such a specific context - in line with his own unique fetishes and sensibilities - that rarely on a movie like this one do you get a balanced review. Which is, often, great. I wish more reviewers would allow themselves to geek out on occasion and just rave about the utter coolness of a movie when appropriate. But with Superman Returns, I knew right away that Harry Knowle's love for the Donner movies would put his sensibilities in conflict with my own desire to see a reimagined Superman for the big screen that reflects the post-John Bryne/Man of Steel comic book era - the era that I've grown up reading and the one that taught me to love all things Superman.

So I have a pretty strong feeling that my own opinion will line up more with that of Aint It Cool's most balanced and sensible reviewer, Moriarity, who liked the movie but found a number of issues with its plot and overall direction that it set up for the relaunched franchise. I doubt I will dislike it as much as Ebert, but I already have enough issues with the characters and plot (Lex Luthor played for camp, the son, ties to the Donner movies, Bosworth as Lois, lack of action / superheroics, etc) that it will take a lot to win me over completely.

But dammit all, it IS Superman. When I hear that iconic John Williams score and suddenly believe again that a Man Can Fly, in 3-D IMAX no less ... well, that alone is gonna freakin' rock.

So anyways, as I did with Batman last year in honor of the seminal Batman Begins, I wanted to run down some of the best ever Superman writers and artists - pay tribute to the men who kept the Superman legacy going strong all these years. Unlike Batman, may of Superman's most memorable stories were published well before I was born, and many have a particular fondness for the strange and often surreal Superman stories of the 50's, 60's, and 70's (see Grant Morrison's current All-Star Superman for a modern spin on this era). So this list will definitely have more of a modern slant to it, though I will try to acknowledge some of the greats of the past whom I am familiar with.

THE BEST SUPERMAN WRITERS OF ALL TIME:

10. Joe Kelly - While Joe Kelly's early 00's run on Superman could almost be said to be more miss than hit, Kelly skyrocketed to the top of the Superman canon with the insta-classic Action Comics 775, one of the Best Superman stories -- ever. Kelly is a global thinker, interested in politics almost to a fault, but he created Manchester Black, the best new Superman villain of the last decade, and a worthy ideological opponent for the Man of Steal. With Action 775, he singlehandedly reminded us why we should give a damn about Superman in a post-9/11 world.

9. Mark Waid - Waid hasn't written much Superman - he is better known for his lengthy, acclaimed run on The Flash. But Waid went from cult fave to bonafide superstar with his work on Kingdom Come - the best Superman story ever, in my opinion. Waid wrote Superman as conflicted, losing touch with the times, but ready to reassert himself and reclaim his greatness. His Superman was, simply, awe-inspiring.

8. Jeph Loeb - After writing one of the best modern Batman stories in The Long Halloween, Loeb did the same for Superman with For All Season, one of the most heart-filled, character-driven, simple-yet-powerful Superman stories ever. While Loeb's widescreen, action-packed run on the mainline Superman titles had its ups and downs, his For All Seasons was a testament to his full potential as a writer able to humanize a character as iconic as Superman.

7. Karl Kessell - Kessell on Superman was simply rock solid. For years in the 90's, Karl Kessell was the most consistent, the most imaginative, the most fun to read of any of the many Superman writers of the era. With a love for the old Kirby-created characters, Kessell embraced Superman's crazier elements and ran with them. His ability to reinvigorate old characters like Guardian and the Newsboy Legion, while creating fan-fave new ones, like the cloned Kon-El, the latest version of Superboy, was unmatched. And in his great Final Night series, Kessell did one of the best ever depictions of a powerless Superman who was a hero with or without superpowers.

6. Dan Jurgens - Say what you will about Jurgens - his clunky dialogue, his participation as writer of a number of lackluster, event-driven "events," but the man knew what made Superman, and us as Super-fans, tick. Few others could have driven the Death of Superman and made it as epic, as attention-grabbing, and as, well, huge, as it was. It's funny though, because soe of Jurgens best work was in his smaller-scale, one-off stories. But he'll be remembered as the man behind the revival in Superman's popularity for the modern age.

5. Roger Stern - Like Kessell, Stern was simply a rock-solid writer. He was the lead writer of Superman comics for much of the 80's and 90's, and after John Bryne's departure he basically shaped the modern Superman canon. The modern takes on the Eradicator, Supergirl, Superman's first forays with time travel ... hell, Superman's relationship with Lois Lane and eventual engagement / marriage -- all stemmed from Stern's steady guidance of the superman mythos. For an excellent non-comics look at Stern's grasp of Superman, check out his great novelization of the Death and Return of Superman - the man knows his Superman, plain and simple, and knows how to make modern mythology in comics form.

4. Elliot S! Maggin - I admit that I haven't read a great deal of Maggin's work. But what I know of him tells me that he is one of the great writers of Superman from the 70's and 80's, a guy who wrote the kind of simple, iconic tales that kids will forever remember as being their favorites long into adulthood. Maggin was a real story guy, a guy who for years put Superman in new situations, introduced him to new and strange characters, and was a real creative force that elevated Superman stories to an as-of-then unprecedented quality and sophistication.

3. Jerry Siegal - What can one say about one half of the team who started it all? The writer of the Siegal-Schuster duo, Jerry Siegal crafted one of the most enduring characters of all time, up there with Odysseus, Zorro, and Moses himself.

2. Alan Moore - Again, what can one say about Alan Moore? The man is bar none one of the best WRITERS of the 20th century, and we as Superman fans are lucky to have his contributions to Superman. Moore simply understands good storytelling - how to conjure emotion, to draw on nostalgia, and yet how to give us something we've never, ever seen before. Moore's "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tommorow?" is an amazing piece of storytelling - for many the best Superman story ever told. In fact, the handful of Superman stories Moore has written are all among the character's best and most memorable. If you've never read "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tommorow" or "For the Man Who Has Everything," go to a bookstore, buy the Best of Alan Moore DC Universe collection, and enjoy.

1. John Byrne - Byrne is a controversial guy of late. But in the 80's, the man could do no wrong. As a writer and artist, he came off of the definitive run on X-Men and then made it his mission to reinvent Superman in 1986. And twenty years later, John Byrne's Man of Steel miniseries is still THE definitive template for the modern day incarnation of Superman. Who is Superman vs. Clark Kent? Lois Lane? Lex Luthor? Lana Lang? Jonathan and Martha Kent? How does Superman feel about Batman? Byrne gave new answers to these questions and totally reshaped Superman ... for the better, giving us a more relatable, cooler, Superman - where Clark Kent was the real guy and Superman the facade. Where Lex Luthor was a power-hungry businessman. Where Lois was a modern woman who could hold her own. Without John Byrne's Man of Steel, there'd be no Lois and Clark, no Smallville, and Superman would still be stuck in the 1930's.

Honorable Mentions: Mark Millar, Grant Morrison, Marv Wolfman

THE BEST SUPERMAN ARTISTS OF ALL TIME:

10. Stuart Immonen - In the 90's on Action Comics and to this day, in works like Superman: Secret Identity, Stuart Immonen presented an almost photo-realistic Man of Steel with a hint of painterliness. With realistic forms yet almost etheral textures, Immonen is one of the defining modern artists when it comes to Superman.

9. Ed McGuinness - Combining traditional American comicbook style with the exaggerated proportions and kinetic energy of Japanese manga, McGuinness has been a breath of fresh air to Superman in te last several years. Often teaming with writer Jeph Loeb, Ed's over the top style suits Loeb's blockbuster action-movie storylines to a T.

8. George Perez - As penciller of the original Crisis on Infinite Earths, Perez drew hundereds of characters with an unprecedented, almost insane level of detail. But he also got to draw some of the all-time iconic and memorable Superman scenes and covers. His Crisis cover with Superman holding a slain Supergirl, as tears roll down his eyes, is one of the greatest and most imitated comic covers of all time. And his depictions of Supermen of multiple earths are classic. Perez's classical, quintissential comicbook style is perfectly suited for the quintessential comicbook character in Superman.

7. Max Fleischer - not a comicbook artist, but one of the artists responsible for some of the most amazing Superman art of all time - the original Superman animated series from the 1940's. using ahead-of-its-time rotoscoping techniques, Fleischer gave his Superman ultra-realistic animation, but infused his cartoons with an ultra-stylized, art-deco aesthetic that to this day, is simply mesmerizing to behold.

6. Joe Schuster - Again, what can you say? The man created one of the most iconic images of our time - the classic red and blue costume, the spit-curl, the origin, the green planet krypton with its red sun. Superman was the artistic template by which countless other heroes come. Visually, Schuster pretty much invented the modern superhero - one of the great American artistic creations of all time. Though his art could be crude and simple, Schuster's skill as a cretor and artistic visionary is indisputable.

5. Tom Grummett - Grummett, in my opinion, is one of the great underrated artists. Perhaps it's because his style isn't particularly flashy, almost a throwback to an earlier era - but for my money, this guy along with Dan Jurgens is perhaps not only the definitive Superman artist of the 90's, but maybe the definitive DC Comics artist. Look at his work. It's so smooth, so seamless - with the pristine qulaity of a Disney animation cell, yet the detail and cool factor of the best modern comic artists. His Superman is just right - traditional yet modern, realistic yet perfectly cartoony. During the 90's, Grummet had to draw all kinds of crazy stuff, yet always brought a workmanlike consistency and quality. It's a testament to how good the guy is that he was literally the ONLY artist who could actually make the electro-blue Superman suit look cool, and THAT is quite the achievement.

4. Dan Jurgens - Like Grummett, Jurgens was consistent as hell in the 90's. But Jurgens gave his superman that little extra oomph that Grummet lacked - a little more muscle, a little more energy, and a real sense of kick-ass coolness. Superman never looked cooler than when Jurgens drew him in the 90's. Jurgens made Supes' fight to the death with Doomsday a truly epic event, all because of the larger than life art and sense of scope it brought to the story. Jurgens' art was just crackling with power. When he drew Darkseid preparing to fight Doomsday in Superman / Doomsday, Hunter / Prey - it was a real holy $#&% moment. And Dan Jurgens did those huge, intense moments better than anyone.

3. Alex Ross - At this point, for me, THE definitive image of Superman is Superman as painted by Alex Ross. Ross' dramatic, iconic style is perfect for the Man of Steel, and his paintings of Superman in works like Kingdom Come and Peace on Earth are simply awe-inspiring. PErhaps my all-time favorite Superman comic book panel was the Alex Ross painting on the last page of Kingdom Come # 1. Talk about Superman Returns - if there was ever a moment in a comic that gave me chills from the ART ALONE - this may have been it. Nobody does Superman like Alex Ross - he paints Superman with the same reverence and gravitas that the great renaissance painters reserved for any of their subjects.

2. John Byrne - Yup, not only was Byrne the reshaper of Superman's mythos as a writer, he also drew those same stories himself and was one hell of an artist. For many, Byrne's cleanly drawn, dynamic version of Superman from the 1980's is THE definitive rendition. Byrne redefined Superman, Lex, Lois, Smallville, and Metropolis not only as a writer but as an artist - putting a modern, yet timeless, sheen on the classic characters. Take a look at the Man of Steel by Byrne ... the bold design, the iconic character designs, the clean lines, the personality inherent in the characters -- this is a canonical version of Superman, no question - an artistic template that would stand for years and stands to this day.

1. Curt Swan - Think Superman. Think classic. Think of Superman talkign with Jerry Seinfeld in that TV commercial from a few years back. More than likely, you're now thinking of Superman as drawn by the late, great Curt Swan. Swan just had that classic sense of dynamism and motion - that simple, elegant, yet instantly identifiable take on Superman that became closely associated with Superman to the point of practically being THE artistic depiction most recognized around the world. Before I discovered Alan Moore's "Whatever Happened to the Man of Tommorow," I mostly though of Swan as an old-school penciller whose Superman was dated and not for me. But after seeing how amazingly Swan's art fit Moore's dark yet nostalgic, hopeful yet melancholy epic, I changed my tune ... this guy was the real deal, then or now - THE Superman artist of the 70's, 80's, or any age for that matter. Curt Swan's Superman is a classic that will forever be associated with the world's original superhero.

Honorable Mentions: Dick Giordano, Jerry Ordway, Jim Lee, Bruce Timm

PREVIOUS SUPERMAN WEEK ENTRIES:

- THE BEST SUPERMAN STORIES EVER TOLD

- WORST AND MOST UNDERRATED OF SUPERMAN

Alright - good times. Tommorow is the day, Superman Returns.

Can't wait.