The Legacy of J.J. Abrams and Rian Johnson on the franchise of STAR WARS

Mark Hamill in Star Wars The Last Jedi

In a new article on VARIETY, Rian Johnson states he is still proud of his STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI. To each his own opinion, I would say. You see, in my opinion STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI stank to HIGH HEAVEN and clearly indicated in what direction these new films would go. In the direction of the toilet !!!

Read the VARIETY article here if you want: 

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/rian-johnson-last-jedi-proud-star-wars-1235354410/

Even Mark Hamill at first did not want to play LUKE SKYWALKER as he was written by Johnson. He sincerely objected to Johnson's depiction of Skywalker having become a hermit who had shut himself off from the worlds around him. One can only respect Hamill's decision to still play him like that, because this series made him a well known actor and gave him a career. But it was clear, Mark Hamill had no real wish to see Luke Skywalker so vandalized.

And I have spoken to many, many fans who complained afterwards that Luke Skywalker dies at the end ! I point out to them that Skywalker does not die. He allows his physical body to expire so that his non-corporeal being can become part of the FORCE. This is How I Perceive The Ending of STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI. Why?

Because I too object to Rian Johnson's writing. His storyline does not fit with the story of the previous film and it is clear to me that Kathleen Kennedy had not considered this into her new trilogy, after George Lucas had been bought out. (The Biggest Mistake Ever !!!)

Mind you, I do not hold a personal grudge against Rian Johnson. I liked his LOOPER and I enjoyed KNIVES OUT. But what he wrote for his Star Wars film did not fit the big picture of what was going on after THE FORCE AWAKENS. With that, it may have received critical acclaim (to which I am immune: I will tell you here anyway what I think ) but it also served as a highly divisive film amongst fans. In total, that added very highly to my general appreciation of the Post George Lucas Star Wars films:

They SUCK BIG TIME !

On this blog, I have earlier also pointed to J.J. Abrams as a man I don't want to meet in person. (I just don't want to live the rest of my life in prison for having killed him when I met him. Is this exagerated? Maybe not. Ask the other fans !)

Rian Johnson does not need to worry. As long as he is also making other (good) films, I will give them all a serious look. It's just that I vehemently disagree with something he said: that he had something to be proud of. 

No, Rian, you don't.

Rest in Peace, Nichelle Nichols ( December 28, 1932 -July 30th 2022 ) !!!

Nichelle Nichols as Uhura in STAR TREK

As a fan of the Classic Star Trek show, I am deeply saddened we are now in a time period of great losses. Where we had earlier already lost DeForest Kelley ( he died in 1999 ), James Doohan ( died in 2005 ), Majel Barrett Roddenberry (2008) and Leonard Nimoy (2015), one month ago my world was again shattered by the passing on of Nichelle Nichols.  Nichelle Nichols played Lt Uhura in the Classic Series as well as in all 6 Original Trek Feature Films. 

Nichelle Nichols was not aware of it at the time but with her portrayal of Uhura, all of a sudden she was representing a minority group on a television show that was watched by millions of people worldwide. It was Dr. Martin Luther King who had to make her aware of this when he announced himself to be a fan of her, at a convention after the first season. Nichelle had told us she had intended to leave the show but Dr. King said she could not do that. Her symbolic value on this show was such that even Nichelle Nichols had to admit he was right and fortunately for us, she stayed on the show.

The show did not have all that much immediate success though. She worked for many years outside of the entertainment business on personal projects to call up new talent for NASA and was able to bring in a lot of women, as well as a lot of colored talent. But even if she would primarily be remembered for Uhura, her presence on the show meant something. Even I, watching them as a kid, sensed that.

 There are also a lot of other things that she can be remembered for. Other roles, her singing, other work that she engaged in. I myself praise myself lucky that I was able to see her live at several conventions. And she also always told us how much she appreciated that we, the fans, appreciated her and the show. I am also very pleased that she had the chance to see how Sonequa Martin-Green now honors her on Star Trek Discovery with her role.

There are not many left of those who were on the original Star Trek show. William Shatner, George Takei and Walter Koenig. Yes, these are sad times so the best thing to do is to remember her, to remember them at their best. And then, even now, STAR TREK LIVES !!!

A Personal Note to Kevin Feige

 

Personal Note to Kevin Feige,

People around me know me to be a fan of Marvel. Both in terms of the comics as well as the cinematic output. And yes, I acknowledge that. I do think Marvel presents us with Real Cinema.

Martin Scorsese said these films are not real cinema. Well, I can understand that from a celebrated filmmaker who has absolutely no background in comics. And I am also not offended by it. You see, having a background in comics also means you have read quite a few. And I have.

I have read a lot of the original Stan Lee & Jack Kirby Marvel Comics. They are now quite special of course, not only because they are worth a lot. But when Stan and Jack rebuilt MARVEL from scratch in the early 1960s, they created new worlds, new characters, new futures, new hopes. And with good stories and humor, you do get a long ways.

And of course the great art by people like Jack Kirby and later John Buscema. Those issues are very precious to me now, even if you can tell there are better stories and lesser ones. With some exceptions, I also find that Marvel has been able to really translate the comics to film rather well. With some exceptions.

I am not really that much of a fan of where Spider-Man is going now. Killing off Aunt May in my book is a BIG MISTAKE. But that's one thing. There's so much more.

But I do have a slight note to make with THOR: LOVE and THUNDER. You see, Thor is a really powerful God of Thunder and makes a formidable warrior. In hundreds of comics he has been seen fighting villains in ENDGAME style battles. Drawn by Kirby or Buscema, this looked awesome. 

But with Taika Waititi at the helm, you only get THOR the buffoon. Thor, the Butt of the Joke God. I also had some big notes to give about the earlier THOR: RAGNAROK. I objected to the PLANET HULK storyline being downsized to a meagre 20 minutes in this film, while this could have been a Great Mini-Series for the HULK. It could then have been followed with a film about WORLD WAR HULK that could have been awesome !!! But no, Taika Waititi was selected to direct and he chose to inject humor. 

I don't oppose humor but there is STAR TREK IV THE VOYAGE HOME humor (refined, sophisticated and genuinely funny) and there is STAR TREK V THE FINAL FRONTIER humor (dumb, crass, silly shit) and Waititi chose the latter to be used on THOR and make him the butt of the joke. Okay. The film was funny. 

But destroying all of ASGARD so fast??? We had hardly seen any of it in the earlier 2 films. Okay, at moments the film was exciting. But Thor was downgraded from a GOD to a Joke. I objected to that.

And now we have THOR: LOVE and THUNDER, again directed by Taika Waititi. And again, Thor is being treated as a comedy star, as a cosmic powered Mr. Bean ! 

I will grant that the Storyline for JANE FOSTER was well handled. I shed a tear for her when she passed into Walhalla. And Christian Bale is wonderfully fresh as a very different kind of Villain ! He was very good ! My Compliments to both Christian Bale and Natalie Portman: they represent the GOOD in this film.

But the jokes have worn off. And as for Russell Crowe as ZEUS, this was a horrendous skit, not even worthy of a Saturday Night Special comedy show. Enough with those goats already !

Mr. Feige, the numbers and the reviews are in for this film. The jokes have run their course. Once was enough. Do we have to keep kicking the dead dog? 

May we now PLEASE see THOR come back in a SERIOUS movie with battle scenes equalling or surpassing those of AVENGERS: ENDGAME, please ? Bring in PLUTO and his hordes to invade Manhattan or have Ulik come in with his trolls to invade New Asgard ! Have BETA RAY BILL fight alongside THOR against Zarrko, The Man From Tomorrow !! Sure, HERCULES could also fight Thor in a movie but in the end, they end up as FRIENDS so that is not what the whole film should be about.

This is what THOR is created for: GLORIOUS BATTLES FOUGHT WELL ON AWESOME BATTLEFIELDS ( be that on Earth or on another planet ). Come to think of it, THOR would make an awesome Klingon. 

But PLEASE don't let THOR become the Joke of the Marvel Cinematic Universe !

Thank You

Armentus

THE BATMAN : Robert Pattinson plays Bruce Wayne and Batman in a 3 hour Action Extravaganza, or so they say !

 

Matt Reeves' new film THE BATMAN is not one to take its subject lightly. The film takes 3 hours to explain us who this character is that is denying himself a normal life and takes on these criminals with nothing more than his protective suit and a souped up car.

The film THE BATMAN stars Robert Pattinson as Bruce Wayne and BATMAN but his characterisation seems to be that Batman is his true identity and Bruce Wayne his secret identity. As something rather new, Matt Reeves's film does show off Batman as a detective, which is something that we never saw before in any of the films. But where Pattinson is fairly interesting as Batman ( I think he comes across better than Christian Bale did at the time in the Nolan films), his Bruce Wayne leaves something to be desired.

I am not really impressed with the action. Not that we've seen it before but it is not really novel. Okay, this is a new look for the Riddler as well as a new look for Catwoman, (and Zoe Kravitz is quite interesting indeed as Selina Kyle) but three hours of rather relentless action, and the same continously droning noise that has to pass for music, no, thanks. Michael Giacchino is a composer who has done some memorable scores in the past (anyone???) but here, all he creates is 'mood noise' that does not give us any themes for the characters whatsoever. Give me DANNY ELFMAN any day !

But whatever I might be thinking of this film, it has its fans. And my opinion, even though that is the reason I am writing this, is not really of importance to those who like this film. Yes, there are good elements in this film. But if I recall properly, I was not particularly impressed with BATMAN BEGINS either. So if a sequel will be made, I hope it will be better than this film. I hope it will be of normal length and I hope Bruce Wayne will look like what Bruce Wayne should look like.

In the meantime, I have read that a sequel has already been greenlit. That means Pattinson and Reeves will be back for a Part 2. But I suppose that will take a good 2 to 3 years to make. I, for one, am not holding my breath. I do not see Pattinson as the future of Batman on film. Personally, I feel no one has yet surpassed Michael Keaton as Batman and I don't care what you say: I think Ben Affleck was terrific as both Bruce Wayne and Batman. But okay, I will see The BATMAN 2 when it comes. And You ???

ENNIO : a new documentary by Giuseppe Tornatore !

 

This is what we were waiting for all along. Director Giuseppe Tornatore has finally made his documentary ENNIO available in the cinemas and on streaming services. And what a treat it is! Not just for film music lovers, this documentary deals also with a good deal of film history, from 1961, when Morricone did his first work for film, until 2 to 3 years ago. 

Giuseppe Tornatore, who has worked with Ennio Morricone on films like CINEMA PARADISO, STANNO TUTTI BENE, THE LEGEND OF 1900, MALENA and THE BEST OFFER, takes us on a musical history lesson here by talking to Ennio himself about his earlier work. He also talks to other people who have been meaningful in the life of the Maestro: one of his teachers, Goffredo Petrassi is seen talking how proud he was to see his star pupil become so succesful in his lifetime. 

I have had the good fortune of seeing Maestro Morricone conduct his music in several concerts. Every time, it was a great treat of hearing his music performed live by a renowned orchestra. Quite something else than just playing your cd's. And even if Morricone may not come across as a very sympathetic character, he does tell of his work with great passion in this documentary. And why not? His music was his passion !!!!

In speaking with directors like Sergio Leone, Giuliano Montaldo and Quentin Tarantino, this documentary also delves a bit into the side of the making of a film and shows then how Morricone's music helps the film make a big statement. After all, how often do you not find out that the music is the last step in the film's production? 

Normally, the music also is not allotted a proper budget but with Ennio Morricone as the composer one would have a big name there. And in many cases, Morricone also composed the music on the basis of the screenplay and the music would be recorded and then played for the actors while performing. This would often influence the acting itself as well.

A good number of films that are mentioned I was fortunate enough to have seen. (Not a lot of Italian films end up in this part of European cinemas.) A good number of albums and cd's I have myself as well. This means that many points of recognition can be found in this documentary and Morricone's career is highlighted on every side. (Also his experimental music in the Nuovo Consonanza group, that I don't much care for, is talked about.) Also Morricone's fondness for chess is a nice moment, as we see him play with similar passion as he works on his music. 

The Mission, a historical drama by Roland Joffe, is definitely one of Morricone's best scores and when this film was nominated for Best Original Score, it was heartbreaking to see Herbie Hancock win that year for AROUND MIDNIGHT, a film about jazz music. 

Not that AROUND MIDNIGHT was not good in terms of music, but it was jazz music, not an Original Score and it should not have gotten the Oscar in the Best Original Score category. We (including Ennio, who left the ceremony early) were heartbroken to see this Morricone gem overlooked. 

The Academy later saw fit to give Ennio an Oscar for his whole body of work and in 2018, they awarded him the Best Score Oscar for Quentin Tarantino's film THE HATEFUL EIGHT. 

It was a great shock, 2 years ago, when we heard that Ennio Morricone had passed away. But in his long and wonderful life, he has left us so much wonderful music that I can only say: GRAZIE, MAESTRO, GRAZIE !!!

ENNIO is now in cinemas and can be seen on streaming services. Look for it, it is definitely worth it.

STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE: The Directors Edition Now Upgraded to 4K (HD) for the Blu Ray Markets !!

 

The original television series STAR TREK ran from 1966 to 1969 but was repeated all the time after that. But in 1978 this teaser poster was released, promising a new film in December 1979. Of course, this meant that director Robert Wise did not have enough time to fine tune his film. 

From left to right, Leonard Nimoy (Spock), director Robert Wise, producer and creator Gene Roddenberry, DeForest Kelley (Dr. McCoy) and William Shatner (Kirk) posing for a publicity shot.

Robert Wise did not want to release Star Trek The Motion Picture the way it was done in December 1979 because he had had no time to finetune the editing and there was still a lot of work to be done on it. Paramount had however presold the film for the Cinemas in this time slot so there was nothing that could be done. Let's just say that Star Trek The Motion Picture was interesting to watch but maybe it was a little bit too much for just the fans of the original show.

In 2000 Robert Wise was given permission by Paramount to "finish" the film as he had wanted to for a special DVD release. This was released as STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE: The Director's Edition.

And although the film now looked a whole lot better than before, it was not yet HD. HD TV arrived only a few years after and the first series to have the benefit of that was Star Trek: Enterprise, which was also released directly on Blu Ray. But Star Trek The Motion Picture the Director's Edition had been a major investment by Paramount that was not an easy fit for HD formatting. The new masters that had been made of the film were unsuitable for a Blu Ray upgrade so the first Star Trek The Motion Picture blu ray release was still the theatrically released film. 

Now 20 years later, Star Trek The Motion Picture The Director's Edition has been upgraded to 4K, which immediately makes it suitable for a blu ray release. 

As a belated 40th anniversary, the 4K edition can now be seen on Paramount Plus or whatever you stream from. Mind you, this does not make the film inherently better. It just improves the way in which the story is told, so you can understand better what is going on. 

The immense quality of this 4K upgrade can easily be seen in the outer space shots, the special effects shots and the V'Ger Interior FX shots, which are considerably clearer than before. The story is improved upon in this way because now, you can understand it better. Unfortunately, it still is a film that takes it's time and does not allow all the cast members to have their best moments. Sulu and Uhura really don't have much to do.

But still, seeing the old cast back again as they were in 1979 is a joy I cannot possibly describe in words. STAR TREK THE MOTION PICTURE was not perfect, even as the Director's Edition, but it did show us Star Trek still had a future we could look forward to. 

SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME - Some Critical Notes from My Perspective ! SPOILERS !!! BE WARNED!!!

My friends know me to be a Spider-Man fan from way back. I have collected lots of Spider-Man comics in the past and have read an awful lot of comics about him, good and bad. For that reason I have always been interested in seeing him well represented on film.

Tom Holland made an incredible first impression in CAPTAIN AMERICA : CIVIL WAR but where  Holland is a very good  (but very young) Peter Parker, his own movies have never been able to really to fascinate me. That is not Tom's fault: he is wonderful in his acting but for me the films never really captured Spider-Man at his best.

I understand as a screenwriter you try to create new stories while learning from the past. Then you can improve on older stories while creating something worthwhile, something of interest that is fresh and new. Yet, with SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME, I saw a film that was hardly at its best.  

Example: everybody knows J. Jonah Jameson is a wonderful character. His hatred of Spider-Man is wellknown and yet you can believe him because there have been moments where we were allowed to see inside his character. When Jameson was being reintroduced into these Jon Watts films at the end of SPIDER-MAN: FAR FROM HOME, there seemed to be no reason to bring him back other than to plague Spider-Man. To reveal the Peter Parker identity of Spider-Man at that same moment, that makes no sense. 

The point to Jameson is that Peter Parker would be able to fight crime and make pictures of that and sell these to him. Parker needs the money, Jameson needs the pictures. The irony there being a love hate relationship between the two that would allow humor and pathos to work both ways. In the Jon Watts films however, Peter Parker had never heard of Jameson before his surprise announcement. So that makes no sense. It just comes too soon. That would have worked if Peter Parker had already been familiar with Jameson, like in selling him pictures. Then for Jameson the impact of knowing that Parker is Spider-Man would also be double as big. A missed opportunity here.

A moment in Comic Book History, not in the films.

(I must point out that with THOR: RAGNAROK Marvel has also missed out on a major opportunity there. This would have served very well to have Mark Ruffalo be able to do a mini-series of PLANET HULK. But no, I suppose in the long run of Kevin Feige's plans, that was not something meant to be included.)

I would like to say here that if these films had been more evenly spread out, it might have been possible to spend more attention to the stories themselves because now SPIDER-MAN:NO WAY HOME is so full of story content that it is bursting at the seems. This also means other parts that could have been  better have to be rushed. The DOCTOR STRANGE part, I really like but there, too, you see that they are trying to do too much at the same time. Parker and Strange know each other.

Friendship in the comics

I see Dr. Strange as being the more reasonable person because he had been arrogant in the past. That arrogance cost him his earlier career and possibly a marriage. Unfortunately, in the film he only keeps the arrogance intact. At least this story will be continued for him into his own next film, which I look forward to. But had he been given more time, it would have worked better for him as well. For me, SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME is a film that is overburdened with story ideas that are barely given enough time to be worked out properly. ( You see this as well when the 3 Spider-Men are working to solve the medical issues of the villains. In less than 5 minutes those problems are solved. That's maybe a little too convenient?!!)

Mind you, there is a lot too that is absolutely wonderful. The appearance of TOBEY MAGUIRE and ANDREW GARFIELD as the former SPIDER-MEN, together with Tom Holland here, that is TRUE MOVIE MAGIC!!! Had these men together been granted just a little more time together, I am positive it would have worked out even better, too. It's a shame that at that point in the movie, everything seems to be rushed. But for Andrew, the moment that he saves MJ by diving after her, catching her and landing with her intact and then realizing that that was how he could have saved his GWEN STACY, that is PURE SPIDER-MAN GOLD !!! Andrew was a far better Spider-Man than he was being given credit for. And Tobey, Tobey has always been magnificent. Except in Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN 3.

One major objection for me: I do understand that for the Peter Parker character development there are some hard lessons that have to be taken to heart but killing off MAY PARKER (the wonderful Marissa Tomei), that is a mistake. Aunt May is an anchor for Peter Parker and in the comics they have tried to kill her off as well. And subsequently they retconned it. (Corrected it with a terrible excuse.) 

Amazing Spider-Man 400

I think Peter Parker should have that anchor to fall back on if he is down on his luck. What's going to happen now? Is Parker going to grow bat ears and skulk around in caves? That's the other guy who has the money to engage in funny hobbies with lots of toys. Peter Parker lost his parents earlier already and needed his aunt for that reason. Taking her away now, while I understand the purpose of the action, seems unwarranted to me. But mind you, Parker going his own ways now, also with a new selfmade SPIDER-MAN suit, that was very cool to see. I just wish she would have been there still for the odd moments now and then. And that is out of the picture now.

This could be better than using the subway to school. (If only she would stop screaming.)

Now, you ask me, was there nothing good about SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME? Please forgive me: the film has a lot of really good stuff, too. The 3 Spider-Men working together,  that was awesome. And I think I only now really got to appreciate Zendaya for playing this version of MJ, while I have earlier stated that this was not Mary Jane Watson as I know her. (And Zendaya is not playing Mary Jane Watson, indeed.) She was good, as was Jakob Batalan as Ned. And Benedict Cumberbatch was wonderful too as Dr. Strange (but what is it that he has in his hair? It looks like too much gel.) and I cannot say enough of the villains. WILLEM DAFOE ! Wonderful!!! How I despise you now for killing Aunt May, he he he !! ALFRED MOLINA: the one and only Dr. Otto Octavius, you are AMAZING !!! Thomas Haden Church, Jamie Fox and Rhys Ifans were good, too, but in their own respective spots could have used some more time to work out some issues.

As a film music lover, I can clearly say I did not think there was a good score here (and I hated the end title animation). But that does not mean Michael Giacchino should be worried. The film was also not aimed at me, a 55 year old Spider-Man fan who still tries go get some kicks from the comics and then finds the new stuff doesn't cut it.

There is still a lot to like on SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME but I do realize that now with the trilogy HOMECOMING - FAR FROM HOME and now NO WAY HOME, it was the intention to have Peter Parker become a man the hard way. Not that I oppose this but I would have dealt with it in different ways. For one thing, it is understandable that he wishes to spare MJ and Ned the grief of being endangered every time because they know he is Spider-Man but is he going to go thru college now in a complete isolation or will he be allowed to have friends? Good friends are hard to come by and they can support you in many ways even if they can not be with you. 

If Mr. Watts is going to continue making Spider-Man films with Tom Holland, I wish him good luck. (I hear you will be doing FANTASTIC FOUR first now? About time.) I will be watching them, no matter if I am critical now and then. (And I will be.) SPECIAL THANKS TO CHARLIE COX !!!!!

BRING BACK DAREDEVIL !!!!!