It this doesn’t give you a nerd boner–or the female equivalent–then get medical help.
On the whole, I enjoyed the first two seasons of Netflix’s Hemlock Grove, but with caveats: the biggest being that it was at times hard to identity the creatures that were involved–and when your series is about monsters, human and otherwise, this is not a minor thing.
For instance, what the hell was Olivia Godfrey (Famke Janssen)? Her son was apparently a vampire, though she was something other. And now that I am speculating, what was it with Dr. Johann Price (Joel de la Fuente)? I recall he had some sort of disorder that increased his strength (or he couldn’t feel pain, something like that) but he seemed creepy-strong and way too in-tune with all the weirdness that was going on around him.
And that lizard-thing at the end of the second season? It was cool in the sense that it was totally unexpected, though I couldn’t make heads or tales why it was.
Though the werewolves? And The Company Of Wolves-style transformation? That I liked.
Despite being an avid comic reader, prior to Netflix’s Jessica Jones I barely knew anything about the character. I still don’t but I like the way–if the teasers are any indication–where it’s going.
Captain America: The Winter Soldier was a political thriller, Guardians Of The Galaxy was Marvel’s interpretation of a space opera. Daredevil (Netflix’s version) was Mean Streets or Serpico, with superheroes.
Jessica Jones? I have no idea what Marvel is going for, but I get the feeling that they’re going for a Fatal Attraction-sort of vibe, but who knows?
Thought I really want to find out.
People, typically idiots with something to prove, like to talk about how things are equal between mean and women. We all know that it’s nonsense, though what’s particularly galling is that the people from whom the suggestion emanate do as well.
What does that have to do with the latest Jessica Jones teaser trailer? Relatively little except I was reading the forums of a certain superhero website, where someone commented on the lack of vehicular traffic, which I assume was meant as some sort of problem with the trailer.
Or something equally as silly.
And sure, there’s no traffic. Then again, the trailer was never meant to realistically represent traffic patterns in Hell’s Kitchen. And you know what? I’d have less of a problem with the commenter said if it weren’t for the fact that the teasers for Marvel’s Daredevil were done in a similar fashion, though in that particular instance there happened to be two cars.
Two cars. Hardly typical of a New York street at virtually anytime, though for whatever reason the dearth of traffic in this instance went seemingly unnoticed, yet now it’s an issue worth commenting upon?
I like this trailer a lot. What I like about the Roger Moore Bond movies was their sense of scale. Sure, many of them are sort of silly, but the villains tended to be larger-than-life, as were their schemes.
Specter seems to harken back to those movies (or the trailer does, at any rate).
The Timothy Dalton and Pierce Brosnan Bond movies also tried to meld the esthetic of Moore’s movies with a somewhat more grounded approach (Dalton’s Bond, with perhaps the exception of The Living Daylights, never quite seemed to gel, while Goldeneye and The World Is Not Enough were probably the strongest from Brosnan, and Die Another Day the silliest–and the most Moore-like), an esthetic that has grown into its own with Daniel Craig’s interpretation.
Jason Zada’s The Forest revolves around Aokigahara, a 14-mile forest that sits in the shadow of Mount Fuji. It’s also known as the Suicide Forest because hundreds of people have killed themselves there over a twenty-five year period.
As if that weren’t horrifying enough, according to Japanese mythology the forest is demon-plagued.
Heck, the movie almost writes itself, which is why I was dismayed to read a review from FilmBook, which pretty much says that the movie shat the bed, replacing any sort of tension and horror with jump scares.
It amazes me–if the review is accurate–how filmmakers can take events, places and things that are actually horrific, and somehow make them less so. The review reminds me of Ouija, a not-very-good movie that somehow managed to make a terrifying object–just looking at ouija boards gives me the willies–boring (luckily the sequel is being directed by Mike Flanagan, who knows a thing or two about horror, having directed Oculus).
And that’s not that an easy thing to do.
If you’ve haven’t been living in a cave–or were in a place with more to offer than what’s coming on television–you probably noticed that The X-Files was coming back in the form of a six-episode series.
And I think that that’s a good thing. The cast looks pretty much the same–Gillian Anderson is aging really, really well–though what I am more interested in is that the series had typically been ahead of the curve in terms of its perspective on the very real growth of the surveillance state, combined with an interesting take on various paranoid-mined musings, urban myths and folk tales.
If the trailer is any indicator, it feels like they’re playing catch-up (and while I am admittedly curious, didn’t Cancer Man die via missile toward the end of the show’s television run?) this time around, though they’ve been off the air for awhile.
Part of what led to the downfall of original series–if you call a nine-year run a ‘downfall’– for me was its convoluted mythology, which after a point seemed to make scarcely any sense at all. It’s an error that I hope the limited series doesn’t make–they don’t have the time to–and decides. while the truth may be out there, some things are better left unsaid.