Prequels and Laura Croft: A combination worth seeing?

Ah the joy of prequels. Yes there is nothing quite like the ability of Hollywood to go back in time, on a movie set, and to generally screw up the history and persona of any character or storyline that can make an extra buck. As you might notice, I tend to dislike prequels. They tend to be as good as revisioned movies, and you know I hate that word.

I know that everyone, including me, loved The Dark Knight. That had a lot to do with the script, which kept the theme of the Dark Knight series of graphic novels, more than Christian Bale. Though Bale did a great job. And honestly there wasn't that much of the storyline that was changed.

Another prequel that worked out well was the restart of the James Bond series of films. Of course Bond restarts every time there is a new lead. So the public can accept every change without it being a major revision. Still there is something lost in the action first, thought nowhere, Bond that is Daniel Craig.

The Superman restart was pretty much what you would expect. Not a revisioning as much as it was an attempt to draw attention back on the movie franchise. I never was a big fan of Superman to start with - he's too much of a boyscout for me - so I'll leave that alone.

But then there are movies like Wolverine, which was horrible. Yes lot's of action, and Hugh Jackman without a shirt for the ladies. But it was disappointing. The storyline was basically missing. It was just action for the sake of action. Dare I say that the majority of the film was boring. And as for any attempt at logic, well they really stretched it even for a comic book to movie conversion film.

It gets worse when you think of films like Star Trek. Lot's of action (note the recurring theme in these prequels) and angst. Not much logic or plot. Most of the things that made Trek so enduring were thrown out. And I really disliked this new version of Spock.

So to summurize, when Hollywood wants a prequel these days they load up on action, throw out the plot, ignore all logical actions, and rewrite (or revision) everything to ensure that a youthful audience will show up for the flash of skin and lots of explosions.

Thus we are led to what got me thinking about this in the first place. Laura Croft and the Tomb Raider series. Which is set to get revisioned - excuse me, a prequel is planned. A prequel without Angelina Jolie.

To be exact, Jolie is not confirmed to be out of the film yet. But unless there is some Spock-like temporal vortex, she is too old to play herself young enough to satisfy Hollywood executives. Especially with the current emphasis on more action and more explosions vs. plot (which the Tomb Raider movies were short on to start with).

Will the prequel work for Tomb Raider? Well it's hard to imagine it being worse than Cradle of Life. That film sucked. So in regard to that, there is a huge upside potential since expectations at this point are limited to a pretty woman with big boobs (likely fake enhancements as with Jolie) in a tight shirt with explosions going off around her. Sad to say but it is honest.

Of the potential actresses being rumored to take the Croft role, Megan Fox is at the top of the list. This is likely due to her performance (if it can be called that) in Transformers. A film which the director insisted

"It seems that [Michael] Bay feels women should have curves and look like a person as opposed to the near-anorexic looks usually found in actresses these days. In fact he is making Megan Fox GAIN 10 lbs. for her next film Transformers 2."

A similar need for food, and exercise, will be needed if she is to be the new buxom adventuress.

The only 2 actresses I think fit the bill are Malin Akerman, of Silk Spectre II (Watchmen) fame. Though she is too old.



And Summer Glau, of Firerfly (Serendipity)



But we will see, once the director and screenwriter are picked, how this prequel will be geared. Don't expect much.

JB head to head: Bond vs Bourne

So the big question of the post-election cycle is just one simple thing, is James Bond better than Jason Bourne. I’ve read a couple of opinions on this question and in general the answer has been mixed.

Most tend to focus on the question of looks of Daniel Craig or Matt Damon. Some compare the revenues of the films. Others take their cue from the critics or the action in each film. But I think the real question is the thinking of the characters.

Both characters think as much as they act. So if we compare just the thinking of the latest Bond, and Bourne what do we get? Bourne wins hands down.

Bond is out of his league when it comes to number of languages. That doesn’t me he is stupid, but it does limit him in some situations and cuts down his response time. Luckily he tends to always be surrounded by only well-spoken english speaking foes and spots in the world.

Bond also loses on spontaneous thought. Neither man looks like they have a plan, if you watch them casually. But Bourne always has a plan. As Nikki says,

“They don’t do random. There’s always a target, always a plan.”

He modifies it as he goes, but the plan is always there. In every movie he has a purpose and never expends more energy or makes himself more obvious than he needs.

Bond is always very visible. He tends to draw attention to himself. And his reaction time to events unfolding around him is slower than Bourne. Bond looks to figure out the big plan and then work down to the details, skipping a few points on the way.

Bourne is focused on the details, working his way up. He follows every detail and works from the shadows if at all possible. Bourne looks to misdirect and confuse to Bonds frontal attack.

Another problem for Bond, he needs gadgets. Mind you we all love the stuff he gets from Q. It’s cool stuff, perfect for the mission at hand. Sadly almost none of it survives a mission.

Bourne has never used anything more complicated than a tracking device. He is so low tech as to almost be stone age compared to Bond. Of course Bond never gets to beat down anyone with a pen, magazine, or a towel. I’m not sure Bond could if he needed to.

If they had to go up against each other Bourne wins in my opinion. Bond would likely never see Bourne coming after him, and I doubt he could keep up with him in a fight. Bond could never track Bourne down. And Bond sticks out in a crowd everywhere.

And the last thing that puts Bourne over Bond is the fact that Bond is not committed enough. Bond would die for Queen and country, but Bourne refuses to acknowledge pain or the thought of death. Once he has to act it is without regard to pain or physical consequence with everything in his surroundings adding to his arsenal of weapons. (I don't recall exactly but did Bourne ever shoot anyone besides the one guy in the field in the first movie?) Bond really hasn’t been in such a situation (yet) but he does not inspire the thought of absolute commitment that Bourne does.

In a different way of stating it, Bourne is a samurai to Bond’s cowboy. Both can be quite deadly, but your chances of surviving the cowboy is much higher.

Do you agree? Do you think Quantum of Solace will prove this wrong? Let me know if you see the movie this weekend.

Movie trailers for fall 2008

Ok time for a couple of quick movie previews. The following movies will be coming out later this year, and a couple of them I will preview and/or review later. But this will give you a taste of what is to be expected.

First on the list is Max Payne. This is supposed to be the movie version of a successful video game. Yes, yet another videogame converted to a movie. Now will that mean it will be good? That’s a question as while Mark Wahlberg is in the film (and he does a decent action film – see The Big Hit) they have departed from the games storyline to give it a Constantine style theme. It seems the writers never bothered to play Max Payne, or they thought the gritty New York cop on a vendetta (and more than a few painkillers) was not intriguing enough. As long as it’s better than last years Hitman video game-to-movie flop it will be successful.



Then there is the 3rd remake of the Punisher comic book. Yes another comic book to movie attempt. This one is Punisher: War Zone. Now Marvel has been trying to get this right time and again. The prior 2 tries were so bad that they can’t even be called laughable. This one looks to be a bit grittier and darker, which sounds more like the character in the comics. Will Ray Stevenson be the man to finally bring this to life or will it be another straight to DVD bargain bin write-off for Marvel? The trailer says it will work, the history says failure. More soon.



A film that will be out shortly is Bangkok Dangerous. This is the chance for Nicholas Cage to resurrect himself from the horrible films he had out earlier this year (NEXT and Ghost Rider). It looks like this time he actually did some acting, though the character and action scenes remind me of his role in the film ConAir. A hitman looking to get revenge, and paid, can be a great idea and the setting in Bangkok won’t hurt.





Of course there is one thing that serious movie fans might want to know. This is a remake, an Americanized version of a film from 2000



Moving on to something that should keep us guessing is Eagle Eye. The premise seems fresh, so I have no idea where Hollywood came up with it. Considering the low-brow, unimaginative, boring, illogical nature of most movies these days this is a big surprise. Random people are used to act on behalf of an unknown group for an unknown reason, and the Government has a hard-on to get these average joes fast. (I wonder if the writers from USA Network’s Burn Notice were involved with this?)



Now a probable winner of a film should be the next 007 movie Quantum of Solace. The new blonde and more hands on physical James Bond (Daniel Craig) did a great job in Casino Royale. This next film looks to follow on that story directly. Bond is bitter and twisted in this film, and it’s bollocks for M or anyone else in his way. A more emotional and violent Bond film, this should keep the franchise alive and well.



Well this is a film that will certainly make money. Saw V. There really isn’t much more to say. The only trailer is very unclear, beyond the fact that someone is having a very bad day.



More reviews and trailers coming soon.