Categories
Special Guests Text Reviews Theatrical Review

It’s Not about Joss: Concerning The Avengers, Science Fiction, and New York Times Critics

Note: I outright stole this from Tee’s blog. Tee is awesome. Read his blog.

The original is posted here.

Since 3 a.m. last night, I have been singing the praises of The Avengers, the über-anticipated epic directed by one of the deities of fanbois everywhere Joss Wheedon. Now while this may make me sound like I’m looking down my nose at fanbois and geeks, I disagree — I’m just practicing full transparency, just as I practice in my life a blatant display of geekiness. It’s part of my job. It’s part of my life. I have no shame being a geek. It’s who I am.

This morning (as in the midnight showing) Pip and I saw what I would argue is Joss Whedon’s second-best film (still not as shiny as his best) but his greatest triumph as a screenwriter and filmmaker. Whedon took four of Marvel’s heaviest hitters, threw in three more for good measure, shook well, and created a script and a movie that was balanced, entertaining, and good fun. And when I say fun, I mean “original Iron Man” fun. Already on IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes, the reviews are coming in and the movie will, as summer blockbusters do, raise the bar for other movies of its ilk…

I will go on to say, though, if Battleship breaks The Avengers records, I am seriously going to wrap up this blog and hide. For a decade.

There was, though, one venue that did not care for The Avengers: The New York Times. Perhaps the one voice against the film would have gone unnoticed had Samuel L. Jackson not channeled co-star Mark Ruffalo’s Hulk and gone on a Twitter rant.

The backlash, some of which I admit to piling on to, comes across as fanboi rage. It would be just one more incident of fanboi rage that makes geeks look like idiots playing World of Warcraft in the basement of their home, but what makes this fanboi rage different is Samuel L.M.F. Jackson (and you know what the MF stands for…) leading the charge. But why? It’s just a sole negative review, right, amongst a tsunami of positive ones, right?

I can’t speak for Nick Fury but I can speak for myself, and when I did on my Facebook page, comments continued to prod at my (apparent) opinion of theNew York Times review, the summer blockbuster, and how this movie really won’t in the long run further anything in the genre other than Joss Whedon.

Instead of ranting on Facebook, I decided to bring my rant here. Why? Because I feel the need to explain myself…again.

My own stand against the New York Times review is not because (gasp!) they didn’t like The Avengers, because there will be Marvel fans who will refuse to go mainstream and simply protest for protest’s sake. I take more umbrage in theTimes’ apparent disdain for the genre on the whole. Admittedly, the review could have been a lot worse, but it does come across a bit condescending. For example…

“The light, amusing bits cannot overcome the grinding, hectic emptiness, the bloated cynicism that is less a shortcoming of this particular film than a feature of the genre.”

This was the point of the review that made me blink, but not as bad as…

“The price of entertainment is obedience.”

Hold on — was the New York Times review telling me I was being manipulated to enjoy this film? “Obey — as this is a summer blockbuster…” or some such?

At this point, I was reminded of another review from the Times

“The true perversion, though, is the sense you get that all of this illicitness has been tossed in as a little something for the ladies, out of a justifiable fear, perhaps, that no woman alive would watch otherwise. While I do not doubt that there are women in the world who read books like Mr. Martin’s, I can honestly say that I have never met a single woman who has stood up in indignation at her book club and refused to read the latest from Lorrie Moore unless everyone agreed to The Hobbit first. Game of Thrones is boy fiction patronizingly turned out to reach the population’s other half.”

I have grown tired — very tired — of how Science Fiction and Fantasy is regarded as the red-headed stepchild of storytelling genres, and regardless of accomplishments like Game of Thrones or The Avengers, the NYT has fed into that with ongoing commentary, which I found to be a shallow look at what is a complex, well-written series. The snide remarks about The Avengers, a movie that was a real gamble no matter how you look at it…

And yes, before I get the pile-on about the formulaic summer blockbuster with all the pretty people in the leads, The Avengers was a gamble because Marvel started up the hype four years ago. This movie could have been a steaming turd ala Green Lantern because —Whedonites, prepare your own retaliations now — Joss Whedon isn’t perfect. Dollhouse, for me, was proof of that.

Whedon was given a challenge and he surpassed it. Four years of hype, of buildup, of expectation, all fell into place with this film; but leave it to the New York Times — just as they did with Game of Thrones — to pretend that the argument is invalid, and it’s just more of that Science Fiction and Fantasy crap, designed to appeal to the gamer crowds exclusively.

Perhaps I’m snapping in light of things like people who claim “Oh I don’t read that science fiction stuff, that’s just not my thing…” while they say only a moment later “Oh yeah, I’m reading The Hunger Games on my Kindle right now…” A great comeback to “That sci-fi stuff is too weird for me…” is “Really? What was the last title you tried reading?” To date, only one person has ever come back to me with an answer to that — it was Lani Tupu and the book wasStranger in a Strange Land.

Good on ya, Lani.

My ire is not against the Times’ review. It’s the Times’ attitude about Science Fiction and Fantasy being beneath them. There’s a lot more to this genre than death rays, swords, and magic. When done right, it is about people and the extraordinary challenges they face; and if we are really given a terrific story with amazing characters, it is how we can learn from their struggles and face our own. The NYT critics apparently do not see it in that same light, and as they fail to understand it simply think it’s tiresome.

And to my friends on Facebook who drove me here, no, I’m not angry on you disagreeing with me. That’s not my style. I was growing punchy in my own failure to make clear what I was reacting to. Disagree with me all you want, so long as we’re having the same debate. Right?

Maybe it’s sleep depravation and not fanboi rage that is currently driving me. I’ll take a nap. Let you know how I feel tomorrow…

Categories
Back Seat Box Office Shows

Back Seat Box Office #85

Picks:

Tony and Andrew:

  1. The Avengers
  2. Think Like a Man
  3. Pirates!
  4. The Five Year Engagement
  5. The Hunger Games

Jonathan:

  1. The Avengers
  2. Think Like a Man
  3. Pirates!
  4. The Hunger Games
  5. The Five Year Engagement
Categories
Back Seat Box Office BSBO Results Shows

Back Seat Box Office #84 Results and Voice Mail

Thanks to Tad for the voice mail.

Congrats to Tony, BD and Andrew… who all scored higher than 13.  OUCH!

Categories
Back Seat Producers Season 07 Shows

BSP Episode 225: Almost Famous

Part 2 of our 5 part Rock ‘n Roll series

Release date:                           9/15/2000

DreamWorks and Columbia Pictures

Directed and Written by         Cameron Crowe

Produced by                            Cameron Crowe

                  Ian Bryce                   

Cast

Billy Crudup                           Russell Hammond

Patrick Fugit                           William Miller

Frances McDormand              Elaine Miller

Kate Hudson                           Penny Lane

Jason Lee                                Jeff Bebe

Initial comments by the hosts:

Before discussion of the movie began, the hosts talked about how difficult it was to find Almost Famous in streaming form.  It’s available for rental, and even that is limited, and the movie is also broken up into 12 parts on You Tube.

This is a semi-autobiographical movie of how Cameron Crowe got his start and you really get the sense that this movie feels a biopic, even though it’s a fictional story.  Darrell points out that there are lots of little inside jokes in the movie (some of these will be listed at the end of the notes).  Darrell thought it was funny that, only in the 1970’s, could a 14 year-old boy get a job with Rolling Stone Magazine, go on tour with a band and his mother does NOT completely freak out over this.

Lena (from the chat room – watcher of the You Tube version) noted that it was nice to be reminded that Kate Hudson is actually talented.

Tony thought Frances McDormand was fantastic; her character was a force in this movie.  He also was impressed with the acting talent throughout the movie, not only of the main stars but also of the background/secondary characters, such as Fairuza Balk and Anna Paquin (The Band Aids), Zooey Deschanel, Jimmy Fallon, and Phillip Seymour Hoffman, to name just a few.  Every character had a distinct voice and Crowe did a very good job at capturing and realizing these different people.

Billy Crudup did a very good job at portraying Russell Hammond, the lead guitarist of Stillwater, who struggles through his ascent from musician in an up and coming band to a Rock God.

Two of the favorite “quirks” of controlling single mom Elaine Miller (McDormand) was her referring to Simon and Garfunkel as the devil’s music and her making her kids celebrate Christmas in September, “when it’s not commercial.”

Jason Lee was good at portraying Jeff Bebe as the leader of Stillwater, both insecure and someone who knows what to look for, what can (and eventually does) cause a rift in the band.

Patrick Fugit, as William (Billy) Miller, was able to capture the innocence of a teenager in the 70s, the excitement of a fan travelling with a band and the eye-opening breaking through from adolescence to adulthood as he begins to see what life is really like outside of the world his mother created for him.

The critical scene, near the end of the movie, shows not only the band members crumbling under the threat of their plane crashing, but also Billy Miller’s transformation from boy to man when he confronts the band about how they treat their fans… specifically their biggest fan, Penny Lane (Kate Hudson).

Trivia notes for this movie (this is only a small selection):

This film was Cameron Crowe’s semi-autobiographical account of life as a young Rolling Stone reporter. The actual group that Crowe first toured with was The Allman Brothers Band (Gregg Allman kept asking him if he was a narc).  The near-fatal plane crash happened while traveling with The Who, and the character of Russell Hammond is based on Glenn Frey (Eagles).

The roles of Russell Hammond and Penny Lane were originally offered to Brad Pitt and Sarah Polley.  Polley dropped out to work on her own project, and Pitt worked with Crowe for months before finally admitting, according to Crowe, “I just don’t get it enough to do it.”  Kate Hudson, who took over the role of Penny Lane, had been originally cast as William’s sister.

Crowe wrote the liner notes (at age 18) to the “Frampton Comes Alive!”, and Peter Frampton returned the favor by acting as a music consultant for the film.

Frampton taught Billy Crudup how to play the guitar for the concert scenes.

Stillwater’s songs were written by Frampton, Crowe and Nancy Wilson (Crowe’s wife and member of the band Heart).  This was mentioned early in the credits, although the music acknowledgments credit Russell Hammond and Stillwater as if they were real authors/performers.

Mike McCready (Pearl Jam) provided the guitar track for Stillwater’s songs.

Not only did Patrick Fugit’s voice break during filming, but he also grew three inches, forcing Billy Crudup to wear platform shoes.

Your Producers for this episode were:

  • Tony
  • Darrell

This episode was recorded: 4/4/2012

Note: Six years ago today, we released the first episode of Fanboy Smackdown… which became Back Seat Producers.  Thanks for 6 great years.  Let’s ROCK!

Categories
Back Seat Box Office BSBO Results Shows

Back Seat Box Office #83 Results and Voice Mail

Show notes to follow

Categories
Back Seat Quickies Shows

Back Seat Quickies #43: Quadrophenia (supplement)

Do scooters really have a backseat?

Hosting:
  • Scott
Recorded: 04/24/12
Categories
Back Seat Box Office BSBO Results Shows

Back Seat Box Office #82 Results and Voice Mail

Thanks to Art and Tad for their voice mail.

Congrats to Tad and Jonathan for their 25s!

Categories
Back Seat Quickies Shows

Back Seat Quickies #42: Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

Hoopy Frood:

  • Scott
Recorded: 04/16/12 with a towel.
Categories
Back Seat Producers Season 07 Shows

BSP Episode 224: Quadrophenia

Part 1 of our 5 part Rock ‘n Roll series

Release date:  9/14/1979

The Who Films

Directed by

  • Franc Roddam

Written by

  • Dave Humphries
  • Franc Roddam
  • Martin Stellman
  • Pete Townshend

Produced by

  • Roy Baird
  • Bill Curbishley

Cast

Phil Daniels

  • Jimmy Cooper

Leslie Ash

  • Steph

 

This recording starts with a discussion about the finale of The Walking Dead.  It contains spoilers so… fair warning… if you haven’t seen the finale yet and don’t want to know what happened or if you don’t watch The Walking Dead and want to skip forward, the section runs from the beginning to 9:55.

 

Initial comments by the hosts:

David likes The Who (or other “old British bands – The Doors, Led Zeppelin, Rush” but I’m not really keeping score) but this movie makes him not like The Who.  Darrell said it was hard to watch but he made his way through it and kind of liked it, or at least liked the movie.  Tony found the movie almost unwatchable at points.  He thought the movie was trying too hard to be A Clockwork Orange and it was a failure.

There was also a general consensus… or was that confusion… that there was a great deal of naked males but NO naked females.  Even during the sex scenes, there were no female bits and pieces to be seen.

Some of the scenes were much too long, with 360 degree tracking shots and some scenes that seemed more like time fillers.  The hosts thought that the movie could have easily been cut down to no more than an hour (running time is 117 minutes) and been more interesting.

Tony thought that Phil Daniels (Cooper) looked and acted like Christian Bale and David thought that this movie should have won an award for the “most actors who look like other people.”  He thought that one of Cooper’s friends looked like one of the Weasley twins (doesn’t matter which one).

Scott (from the chat room) summed it up with the statement, “This is a cast made up of ugly British people.”

David admitted to jumping ahead in five minute intervals out of sheer boredom and correctly assumed that he really wasn’t missing much.  Tony didn’t understand the angst that the movie was trying to convey.  Cooper comes from a working class background and he has a job.  Given, he doesn’t really like his job but he still HAS a job, which is a hell of a lot more than most of his friends have.

When the discussion turned to the Steph character, Tony thought that the character was written to be a hated person.

Tony admitted that the hosts made the conscious choice to watch Quadrophenia as part of the Rock ‘n Roll series over Pink Floyd’s The Wall… at least he’s proud enough to admit that this might not have been the wisest choice!

 

And now on to… The Hunger Games! (Starts at 32:07)

It was widely agreed that the best parts of The Hunger Games were Lenny Kravitz (Cinna) and Woody Harrelson (Haymitch).  Tony thought the movie overall was good, David thought it was great (your happy note-taker agreed with David).  They also liked the characters of Rue and Thresh, but David’s only complaint was the District 11 scene (after Rue is… ) because they broke the 1st person immersion.

David thought that the Katniss character was a strong female heroine that hasn’t been forced into a female “gender” role.  She’s all business throughout the movie and she doesn’t break out of that role.  He also would have liked to have seen more of an interaction between Peeta and Haymitch.

Tony didn’t think the movie lived up to the hype.  Neither did David, but that didn’t change his opinion that he really liked it.

Also listen to Tony’s idea for an earlier story line on Cinna and Haymitch.

 

Your Producers for this episode were:

  • Tony
  • Darrell
  • David

This episode was recorded: 3/28/2012

Categories
Back Seat Box Office BSBO Results Shows

Back Seat Box Office #81 Results and Voice Mail

Thanks to Art and Tad for their voice mail picks and to Tad for clarifying his Axis and Allies strategy.

Congrats to BD, Scott, Monty, Marc, Jonathan and Art for their 25s!