Okay, now I don't feel guilty about not wanting to go see The Spirit

[jducoeur]

I commend to you Peter David's review of The Spirit, which desperately tries to be positive and fails. Indeed, he doesn't even lambaste it for the reason I'm so annoyed by it (the fact that Frank Miller took one of the classics of the comics field and rewrote it to look just like everything else he writes) -- rather, he treats it as simply a Frank Miller movie on its own terms, and it *still* fails.

I mean, really, when the list of positive things you can say about the movie includes, "Everyone's diction was really clear, and no one bumped into any furniture.", you are truly damning with the faintest praise possible...

Comments

I'm confused

[etherial.livejournal.com]

so, uh, what should it have been like?

Re: I'm confused

[jducoeur]

The Spirit, while not exactly sunshine and roses, isn't even remotely that dark a story: there is always a fair amount of humor leavened in. Our hero is explicitly very much human -- he gets beat up a fair bit, but there's none of these ridiculous Batman-level stunts. (Indeed, he's got something of a glass jaw, and gets knocked out frequently.) In general, the focus is on the characters, not the guns.

(And what's this nonsense about the Octopus having "eight of everything"? Total invention. The Octopus *is* the Spirit's arch-enemy, but his gimmick is simply that he's a behind-the-scenes genius. Indeed, in all the many years of the series, he never, ever appears on-screen. Would have made a far better gimmick, in the hands of a better director.)

I have no problem with movies taking some liberties with a comic book in the name of adaptation -- indeed, most have needed it. But I do insist that the movie *understand* the comic: that it get what makes the character tick. The recent successes, from Spider-Man to Iron Man, have managed that: while they've screwed with lots of details, they've gotten the essence right. The Spirit, by contrast, appears to gut the heart of the character, and replace it with Sin City...

Re: I'm confused

[alexx-kay.livejournal.com]

A few (minor) corrections to J's reply above:

"isn't even remotely that dark a story: there is always a fair amount of humor leavened in."

There are a few stories in the 1940s that are as dark as even Frank Miller would want, with no humorous elements. I'm thinking in particular of one about a prison break that has a body count in the dozens. That said, The Spirit only rarely reached that level of grimness, and never for an extended period. Part of the series' charm was the way that it would shift tone from week to week.

"Our hero is explicitly very much human -- he gets beat up a fair bit, but there's none of these ridiculous Batman-level stunts. (Indeed, he's got something of a glass jaw, and gets knocked out frequently.)"

He does *sometimes* exhibit near superhuman levels of endurance to punishment, or recovery from wounds. It becomes much more visible when looking over the course of the whole series rather than any one individual episode. In fact, it was a running joke among old-time fans that Denny Colt had to have near-Wolverine* level healing abilities, given how often in his career he was badly beaten or shot, only to make a full recovery. (They did at least occasionally let him get hurt badly enough that he would spend several weeks recovering; something few other comic book heroes have ever done.)

Speaking of Batman, I am reminded of the Alex Ross painting that appeared in one of the Batman Black & White books: Batman without a shirt, putting on a bandage, and revealing the most astounding collection of scars on his torso. (This is perhaps why he eventually stopped actually sleeping with all the beautiful women he dated to keep up his playboy image...)

"in all the many years of the series, he never, ever appears on-screen."

Not so. The Octopus frequently appears on screen, taking a personal hand in his crimes. But his *true face* is never seen. Either he is shrouded in shadows, or when you *think* you've seen his face, it turns out to have been a mask.

*This was from a period when Wolverine's own healing abilities were not portrayed at the extremely ludicrous level that they have since become.

Re: I'm confused

[jducoeur]

But his *true face* is never seen. Either he is shrouded in shadows, or when you *think* you've seen his face, it turns out to have been a mask.

'Tis what I meant. The Octopus' *hands* appear on-screen all the time, to the point where you always know who it is when you see those gloves. But I find the gimmick of never showing his face to be extremely effective, and I think it would be *great* in a movie if handled with care.

Really, the tragedy of the whole thing is that the studios will inevitably decide, "Well, a Spirit movie was a bad idea", rather than "This wasn't actually a movie about the Spirit". I still suspect that a properly-made Spirit movie could be quite effective, but the idea's probably now dead for at least a decade...

[calygrey.livejournal.com]

I liked the visuals. But, my sixteen year old sat through the entire thing muttering "what a horrible movie". It was a waste of time. This is a movie for watching while really drunk, or something, with the sound off so you and your friends can make up the lines.

It was that bad. I am still waiting for the plot.

[lauradi7.livejournal.com]

I think I'd like more reviews to mention the diction.

[serakit.livejournal.com]

You make it sound so ominous.

[jducoeur]

The movie, or the review? Either way, it's probably accurate: it's a pretty scathing review of a movie that looks much darker than its source material...

[serakit.livejournal.com]

The movie. I never pay attention to reviews; they almost never share my opinions.

[jducoeur]

Those who have seen it can give a more informed opinion, but the trailers certainly make it look pretty much just like Sin City: grim, dark and violent almost to the point of pornographic. Which annoys me because the original really isn't like that -- it has a violent element, sure (it's about a crime-fighter, after all), but the violence was never the *point*, the character development and interplay was...

[peregrinning.livejournal.com]

I very much like the image of Bruce Campbell as The Spirit. It fits my reading of some of Will Eisner's comics rather well.

[jducoeur]

I can see it. I'm a little concerned about whether he could take it quite seriously enough -- I want to see Bruce Campbell playing the Spirit, not Bruce Campbell playing Bruce Campbell playing the Spirit, if you see the distinction -- but if he hit the right notes, he could do quite well at it...

[peregrinning.livejournal.com]

That is a very important distinction. I, too, want him to disappear into the character, more like Bubba Ho-Tep than most of his other work that I've seen.

[alexx-kay.livejournal.com]

Seconded.

[baron-steffan.livejournal.com]

Just as a data point, the Providence Phoenix (which I must note in fairness, hardly ever bestows more than a mediocre review on anything and would probably give Casablanca 2 1/2 stars), gave The Spirit a negative 1. I'm passing.