Category Archives: movies

Philomena promotes forgiveness in face of pain

If you were suddenly face-to-face with an individual who had caused you great pain for over 50 years, would you be able to forgive him or her? Philomena challenges viewers with that question by taking them on a touching journey for answers and closure.

The movie Philomena is based on the book The Lost Child of Philomena Lee by Martin Sixsmith, a journalist and former adviser in the British government. The film follows Martin and Philomena Lee, an elderly, devout Irish Catholic woman, on their journey to find her son, Anthony, whom she birthed at the age of 15. Unable to deal with a pregnant teen, Philomena’s father had sent her to the Sean Ross Abbey to deliver her baby and pay off her debt to the nuns for the subsequent four years.

One day, Philomena learns that Anthony has been adopted and has been taken away without her consent or knowledge. Eventually, Philomena leaves the convent, keeps her past a secret, and builds a family. Finally, after 50 years, Philomena breaks her silence and tells her daughter about Anthony and her time at the convent. Philomena’s daughter pitches the story to Martin, who is looking for a way to bounce back from the nadir of his career, at a cocktail party.

What follows is an excellent portrayal of a truly fascinating human interest story. The duo travels around the world, following leads and piecing together Anthony’s life. In the end, Philomena’s search comes full circle and she finds herself back at the Abbey for a few final questions.

While the story on its own is interesting and heartfelt, what gave the plot even more depth was the juxtaposition of the characters Martin and Philomena. For all intents and purposes, Philomena and Martin are complete opposites.

Martin, played by Steve Coogan (who also co-wrote the screenplay and produced the film), is an academic with a penchant for sarcasm who doesn’t have a simple answer for if God exists. He is generally distrusting of most people and is often angry with everyone surrounding him.

Philomena, portrayed by Dame Judi Dench, is a simple woman with amazing faith in God. While not a member of the intellectual elite, she is still wise in her own way and manner, having worked as a nurse for most of her adult life. She wants to treat everyone kindly and seems to have a knack for making friends wherever she goes. Rather than be angry and dissatisfied with the world, she chooses to be happy and make the best of any situation.

Putting these two unlikely mates in a car and on a transcontinental flight makes for some unexpectedly funny moments in light of the seriousness of their mission. The moment that made me laugh out loud was seeing Philomena describe the plot of Big Momma’s House: “It’s about a little black man pretending to be a big black lady. It looked hilarious, Martin!”

I’m not sure it needs to be mentioned, but Dench’s portrayal of Philomena was extremely heartfelt and moving. While I personally connected more to the character of Martin, Dench’s Philomena was everything a protagonist should be: relatable, friendly, compassionate, and an all-around good person. She impresses on the viewer that she finds no comfort in indignation and would rather move on with her life than wallow in the sorrows of the past. Instead of choosing to be angry, she chooses to forgive.

Near the end of the film, Philomena and Martin confront one of the surviving nuns who had contributed so much pain to the woman over half a century. In this scene, I would have certainly taken the path of Martin. When Martin presses the nun for an explanation, she states that losing her son was Philomena’s punishment to bear for her sins of the flesh. She then snaps at Martin about how Jesus is the only one who can judge her for her actions.

If I were in Philomena’s shoes, I would have then chastised the nun for her self-anointed role as God, judge, and jury. Upon reflection, Philomena’s reaction of forgiveness probably puts the nun in her place more so than any passionate lecture I would have given. Sometimes it is the simplest words and phrases that have the deepest impact. Those three little words, “I forgive you,” can take the wind out of sails of the righteous and bring peace and calm to those who desperately need it.

While Philomena was a solid choice for a Best Picture nominee, I highly doubt the Academy will be awarding it the highest honor. Even though the film had it all in terms of emotion, it lacked a certain punch that the Best Picture films have had over the past few years. I’m not sure the Catholic Church’s sins in this movie will resonate with voters as resoundingly as those of the Texas bull riders in Dallas Buyers Club or the American slave owners in 12 Years a Slave. However, missing out on this nominee would be a mistake for any fan of cinema.

Fandom on stage: The wheel is come full circle

When people think of hardcore fan*s, they often picture stereotypes like the guys of The Big Bang Theory hanging out in the comic book store, or of the legions of fan*s and cosplayers at Comic-Con. Rarely is the first thing on someone’s mind when fanning is mentioned going to be Shakespeare or theater.

However, believe it or not, some of the biggest celebrities that fan*s have fallen in love with also perform Shakespeare on stage in live theater. Fan*s can dress up as the Doctor at Comic-Con and also enjoy Shakespeare; the two aren’t mutually exclusive. And sometimes, those interests even overlap.

Recently, Tom Hiddleston, whom most fan*s recognize as Loki from the Marvel Cinematic Universe, starred in a stage production of Shakespeare’s Coriolanus produced by National Theatre Live in London. While most Americans weren’t able to travel to see the live production at the Donmar Warehouse in England, National Theatre Live records its plays and broadcasts them in certain theaters around the globe. It’s an excellent way to see brilliant British theatre productions when you’re stuck stateside, like me.

This production of Coriolanus was fantastic. Even Hiddleston fan*s have to admit he was just one of the many terrific things about this play. The production made superb use of a black box space, using just a simple square stage with no scenery or backdrop aside from the cement wall of the warehouse behind them. Coriolanus is a fairly raw play to begin with, and stripping it down to, for the most part, just the actors on the stage really focused attention on the performances, which were all brilliant.

Aside from Hiddleston, fan*s may also recognize Mark Gatiss, co-creator and star of Sherlock, as well as Alfie Enoch, better known as Dean Thomas from the Harry Potter movies.

Another production that National Theatre Live broadcasts in the States almost every year is a fascinating staging of Frankenstein directed by Danny Boyle, known for Slumdog Millionaire and more. This production stars two Sherlocks, each taking turns with the two lead roles. One night, Benedict Cumberbatch will play Dr. Frankenstein while Jonny Lee Miller plays the Creature, and the next night they switch roles. I’ve seen the version with Cumberbatch playing the Creature and it was incredible. If, for any reason, anyone still doubts Cumberbatch’s acting abilities, they need only watch this production to have that doubt erased.

If you’re a fan* as well as a Broadway lover, there have been many opportunities for your interests to overlap recently. Doctor Who fan favorite Arthur Darvill was starring in Once for several months, which I’m sure was enjoyable if you had a chance to see it. Also, at the beginning of January, Chuck’s Zachary Levi finished up a run with the musical First Date, which was wonderful, according to reviews. Emmy-winner Jim Parsons also made his Broadway debut in the 2011 production of The Normal Heart, which is being adapted as a television movie this year.

I can’t mention Broadway productions without bringing up one of the best friendships in the business: Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan, who are starring in repertory productions of No Man’s Land and Waiting for Godot that have gotten rave reviews. And if you follow either of these gentlemen on Twitter, you know just how awesome they really are. As an added bonus, these productions also star Billy Crudup, who may be more recognizable to some fans as Watchmen’s Dr. Manhattan.

McKellan and Stewart are also both accomplished Shakespearean actors. Recently, Stewart played a small role in the BBC’s The Hollow Crown, a miniseries adapting the second of the Bard’s historical tetralogies: Richard II; Henry IV, Part 1; Henry IV, Part 2, and Henry V. Stewart played John of Gaunt in Richard II. He has also played Claudius on stage and on film in the Royal Shakespeare Company’s Hamlet, which starred another fan* favorite, David Tennant.

Tennant is probably most famous for his role as the 10th Doctor on the long-running British sci-fi series Doctor Who. He also played Barty Crouch Jr. in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Recently, he has taken on a variety of roles, including starring in several stage productions of Shakespeare’s works. In just the last few years, he has appeared as Hamlet, Benedek in Much Ado About Nothing (alongside former Doctor Who companion Catherine Tate), and Richard II in the Royal Shakespeare Company production.

Speaking of Shakespeare, I’d be remiss if I didn’t include possibly the ultimate crossover between fandom and Shakespeare: Joss Whedon’s Much Ado About Nothing. The movie was filmed during a break in filming The Avengers and stars many of the actors fan*s have come to know and love from Whedon’s other beloved series. The entire film was shot at Whedon’s own home in black and white and is one of my favorite film adaptations of Shakespeare ever.

The best parts of the film are all the subtle (and sometimes not-so-subtle) actions and expressions of the characters in the background. The film flows with a relaxed pace and it’s easy to feel the chemistry and friendship between the actors. This was a project most of them did for fun because they enjoyed working together, and I think some of that comes through in the finished product. If you’re a fan* as well as a Shakespeare lover, I cannot recommend this film highly enough.

And finally, we’ve come full circle. Aside from Hiddleston’s recent stage performance of Coriolanus, he also starred as Prince Hal, the man who becomes Henry V, in the The Hollow Crown. The series aired in the United Kingdom shortly before the Summer Olympics in 2012, and in the United States back in September. It can now be purchased on DVD, and each play is a fairly faithful adaptation of Shakespeare’s work. They are beautifully filmed and the cast is magnificent: aside from Hiddleston and Stewart, you also have Jeremy Irons, Ben Whishaw, Michelle Dockery, Joe Armstrong, Simon Russell Beale, and many others, all of whom are amazing.

This is just an overview of a few of the theatre works some of our favorite celebrities have done in the last few years. If you know of something I missed, feel free to share it in the comments so we can all experience it! One of my favorite parts of being a fan* is introducing people to new things; you wouldn’t believe how many Supernatural and Doctor Who converts I’ve made over the years.

Like I said last week, we now live in a time where it’s cooler to be a fan* than it used to be, so let’s take advantage of that and show everyone just how cool we can be. We can fan out over the new Guardians of the Galaxy trailer or Benedict Cumberbatch on Sesame Street and still enjoy things like Shakespeare and wine.

To be or not to be isn’t the question any more, because now we can have both.

The true, important story of Dallas Buyers Club

The film Dallas Buyers Club tells the true story of Ron Woodroof, a Texas rodeo enthusiast, electrician, and occasional con man adapting to a shocking HIV diagnosis in 1980s Texas, where the disease and its sufferers were shrouded in confusion, homophobia, and hopelessness.

The Best Picture nominee has been a film over 20 years in the making. Screenwriter Craig Borten spent hours interviewing Woodroof prior to the AIDS victim’s death in 1992. The film had several false starts, as the bleak, difficult subject matter put off financiers. Borten found the constant rejection pushing him into self-destructive behaviors. Even after the project was finally green-lit, it nearly came to a screeching halt when financing fell through just seven weeks before filming began.

In the end, enough money came through to create a stirring film, driven by stellar acting and a surprising, touching friendship between two people seemingly as different as night and day.

Woodroof, played by Matthew McConaughey, struggles not only with the physical ravages of HIV and AIDS, but also with the paranoia and prejudice exhibited toward AIDS sufferers. There are the fears and misunderstandings of how HIV is contracted: even Woodroof’s so-called friends didn’t want to get too close to him, for fear they may contract the disease as well. Plus, there is the misconception that to have acquired HIV, Woodroof must be gay — an unacceptable condition in Woodroof’s “macho” circle. His friends all turn their backs on him when he needs them most.

Much of the buzz around Dallas Buys Club concerns McConaughey’s performance as Woodroof. With this role, McConaughey attempts to step out of the shadow of the stereotypical goofy, stoner characters he has been typecast into and take on a much more serious and dramatic role.

McConaughey dove in with such dedication that he lost more than 40 pounds for the movie. His appearance is so skeletal, he’s nearly unrecognizable; only his voice is distinctly his. The way his skin clings to his body makes him look almost mummified. The physical transformation makes it easy to set aside any preconceived notions you may have about McConaughey himself and just see the character.

What many people have forgotten over the last few years, as McConaughey has taken on more and more chick-flick roles and become the brunt of many jokes in Hollywood, is that the man actually has talent. The problem is that talent is all too often squandered on films like Failure to Launch and Magic Mike (in which he coincidentally plays a character named Dallas). But every so often, McConaughey puts on a performance like this one that reminds everyone how good he can be.

As Woodruff defiantly resists treatment for his illness, he finds himself rushed to the hospital, where he shares a room with Rayon, a transgendered AIDS patient. Rayon is a composite character, distilled from a number of individuals the real-life Woodruff came to know. Rayon is played by Jared Leto, the Thirty Seconds to Mars front man, who is brilliant in his first film role in four years.

Rayon, who identifies as a woman, helps balance out and smooth over some of Woodroof’s rough edges. She is a perfect foil for Woodroof, and it’s through Rayon that Woodroof begins to let go of the bigotry he harbored before being diagnosed with HIV. One of the best aspects of this film is watching the friendship that develops between Woodroof and Rayon. Woodroof starts out as a homophobic cowboy with all the same prejudices as his friends, but ultimately Rayon becomes the only true friend he has.

As the HIV/AIDS pandemic exploded in the 1980s, unauthorized “buyers clubs” opened across the United States to provide experimental and alternative treatments for the symptoms of a disease that was poorly understood and often willfully ignored because of its association with so-called immoral behaviors. Before long, Woodruff and Rayon form a partnership to open a buyers club of their own to sell medications to other AIDS patients.

In doing so, Woodroof raises the ire of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. A drug called azidothymidine (AZT) was fast-tracked through the testing process and given FDA approval. AZT was then administered in high doses, which damaged patients as frequently as it helped them. Eve, another composite character, is a crusading doctor at the hospital where Woodruff and Rayon are treated. Eve’s loyalties lie with treating her patients, occasionally bringing her into conflict with hospital administrators and Big Pharma.

Despite the potential for the character, Jennifer Garner is underwhelming in the role of Eve. Compared to the other Oscar-worthy performances in this film, Garner’s effort felt stiff and somewhat awkward. Despite having worked with McConaughey previously, there didn’t seem to be as much chemistry there as one would have expected. Garner is a decent actress; however, she doesn’t seem to have the range of her contemporaries. Quite often, her characters blend together and it feel like she’s always playing the same role.

Leto and McConaughey’s fantastic performances, though, made up for any shortfalls with the rest of the cast. Yet there still seemed to be something lacking in the telling of this story. The filmmakers’ financial struggles forced them to sacrifice some shooting locations and lighting to save money. Director Jean-Marc VallÃ‡e said this may have worked out better, as it ended up being more in the spirit of the characters. Nonetheless, the film felt rough or uneven at times; it was hard to tell how much of this was an intentional choice and how much was a result of the sacrifices that had to be made.

In the end, though, the cinematic inconsistencies within the film do not detract from the overall plot and the performances of its lead actors. Dallas Buyers Club is the fascinating story of one man’s refusal to die quietly and of his determination to fight for the right to use whatever drugs he saw fit to keep himself alive.

RoboCop reboot? I’d buy that for a dollar!

Sequels, prequels, adaptations, reboots, and spinoffs. That seems to be all Hollywood knows how to make. But is that necessarily bad?

Movie studios saw a seven-year fall in home video sales alongside the rise of Internet streaming and illegal downloading. In order to combat that loss of revenue, studios have invested most of their resources into franchises they can bet on.

And we hand over our money, so it can’t possibly be all that bad. These cinematic retreads are part of our culture now, and even if they aren’t the same as the original, they are often quite good. Maybe we should give these movies a fair shake.

Outside of Footloose and The Amazing Spider-Man, no reboot has received as much criticism before its release as RoboCop, which opened in American theaters this week. José Padilha’s attempt at telling the tale of the first robotic police officer was hardly even announced when fans of the 1987 original began denouncing the film. The original is a classic, they argue. And perhaps they are right. However, the original is older than I am, and it should be acceptable for a story to be retold for every generation.

Even if you disagree with repeating old stories, fear not: the new RoboCop flick is a completely different movie, with the only similarities to the original being tons of satire and lots of shooting.

The 2014 edition begins with a look into a near future that seems far too real. The United States has grown excessively belligerent in its foreign policy and has morphed its unmanned drone program into one of full humanoid robots. These machines operate brilliantly, being able to assess threats in seconds before taking action. The robots are shown “keeping the peace” in Tehran, where it is evident the United States has finally decided to invade.

From the beginning, it becomes clear the filmmakers are not glorifying the advanced drone program. The robot warriors, manufactured by OmniCorps, are promoted heavily by an obnoxious, biased political pundit, played by Samuel L. Jackson, despite the drones causing more problems than they are solving.

The robots are initially shown to be efficient and infallible, but events quickly go awry. Iranian freedom fighters try to fight off the invading mechanical army and, in a heartbreaking scene, one of the robots sees a child wielding a knife, determines he is a threat, and fires on the young boy. The message is clear: without a human element, drones cannot be trusted to implement fair and merciful policy.

Public sentiment against the robots causes OmniCorp’s CEO, Raymond Sellars, to issue a new directive: put a human in the machine. Alex Murphy, a Detroit police officer looking to root out corruption in his department, is chosen for the procedure. Murphy, played by Joel Kinnaman, is left with only his original brain, lungs, and right hand as he becomes the RoboCop. Again the message is obvious: regardless of how much of the RoboCop is machine, a human hand is still pulling the trigger.

The rest of the movie raises questions about the morality of drones and the distance being placed between the American public and American wars. The film also warns of a future when drones could be used on American soil — a future for which Jackon’s character lobbies hard.

Setting aside the scathing satire, the movie’s MVPs are two Batman veterans: Sellars is played by Michael Keaton, the man who originally brought the crime fighter in black to the silver screen; and Gotham’s Commissioner Gordon, Gary Oldman, portrays Dr. Dennett Norton. Both men play their roles to perfection.

Keaton is the prototypical evil CEO character, determined to make money no matter the cost in human lives and suffering. While Sellars is a bit of a shallow character, Keaton still shines when using his fake sincerity to manipulate everyone around him. Still, I found myself wondering if OmniCorps’s CEO was actually guilty of committing any crimes. The most chilling aspects of this movie were how possible all of it is, and how legal culpability does not always line up with moral responsibility.

Giving another tremendous performance, Oldman continues to prove his worth. (Hopefully, Lucasfilm is taking notes and the rumors will prove true about Oldman being cast in Star Wars 7.) Oldman’s Dr. Norton character is easily the best-written of the movie. A man who obviously began work in robotics to give second chances to the suffering, Norton is the embodiment of the slippery slope argument. At first, Norton is concerned about the morality of OmniCorp’s actions. Then, Norton gradually consents to worse and worse actions, slowly removing more and more of Murphy’s humanity until the officer of the law becomes more machine than man.

The 2014 RoboCop is a movie that would benefit from having a unique identity to avoid drawing comparisons to the original. However, Hollywood needs familiar names tagged onto big releases to feel safe in taking the financial risk. That doesn’t mean there is a lack of artistic risk in new movies; it just means we are more likely to see that fresh perspective pasted on a rehashed character.

The original RoboCop, released 27 years ago, was an entirely different work from the current version. The film, starring Peter Weller, was a thematic portrayal of Reagan-era America and all of its associated problems. Showcasing the fears of liberals and conservatives alike, this dystopian Detroit is riddled with white-collar and blue-collar crime that are both terribly out of hand, requiring a new type of hero to rein in the trouble.

Paul Verhoeven’s RoboCop antagonists were almost cartoonishly evil people, leaving no room for audience sympathy. When Murphy’s robotic hands pulls the trigger, you are never left wondering if the criminal’s gruesome demise was justified.

The original and the reboot both tackle the problems inherent in defense contracting and privatization of public services. The original goes much further in showing the profit-over-morality mentality of Omni Consumer Products, with a board member blatantly stating the company’s goal to profit off “markets traditionally regarded as non-profit: hospitals, prisons, space exploration.”

Both movies have fun taking shots at the media. In the 1987 movie, news anchors casually discuss terrible tragedies with no regard for the human suffering. Today, Jackson’s Pat Novak character is a perfect stand-in for Bill O’Reilly or Sean Hannity as the modern news pundit demanding that the world change to adhere to his beliefs. Jackson, of course, kills it, with his over-the-top anger that would look perfectly at home on the Fox News Channel.

Fans of the original movie will immediately notice a distinct lack of blood in the reboot. Many would argue that’s a good thing, but aren’t we all a little nostalgic for a simpler time, when movies were filled with eviscerations and exploding body parts?

Padilha did a good job creating a compelling satire of the military-industrial complex and U.S. drone policy that is more relevant to 2014 audiences than the 1987 baddies are. At times, the satire is a bit heavy-handed, but that is the case in the original as well. Ultimately, RoboCop is a reflection of the times, which is necessary for any successful story, especially when it’s being retold in a fresh perspective.

In that respect, 2014’s RoboCop movie is a success. Still, don’t feel the need to rush to your nearest theater. A nice DVD rental should suffice.

Her puts twist, new lens on love

Valentine’s Day has relationships on everyone’s mind, and it leaves some asking themselves, “Just what is love?” The film Her attempts to answer that fundamental question from a unique perspective by asking a question of its own: Can a man and a machine be in love?

Her, written and directed by Spike Jonze in his first feature film since 2009, tells a complex and unusual love story that’s surprisingly poignant and relevant. Jonze has created a world where computer operating systems are self-aware artificial intelligences. In this setting, a reclusive man named Theodore develops a relationship with the “woman” in his computer, Samantha.

Joaquin Phoenix brings sincerity and heart to a character that could easily have been seen as pathetic or creepy. Instead, the audience can’t help but feel for the lonely, anti-social Theodore Twombly. As his relationship with Samantha, voiced by Scarlett Johansson, progresses, it’s evident he has genuine feelings for her, despite the fact she isn’t human.

Early in the film, it becomes clear Theodore spends much of his time alone. However, as his relationship with Samantha grows, so does his confidence. He begins interacting with the world again, spending more time with friends and even going on a double date with his coworker.

Theodore’s evolution over the course of the film makes a case for the authenticity of his love. If one of the signs of a healthy relationship is that it helps one grow and become a better person, then Theodore’s relationship with Samantha, however bizarre it may seem, is more productive than the toxic ones many humans endure. For Theodore and Samantha, this relationship is completely real.

Her is the only film nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards that takes place in an imagined future, incorporating some elements of science fiction and fantasy. As many of the best science fiction stories do, Her shines a light on certain aspects of our current society. By changing elements of the reality we are familiar with, Her frees us from so many of the constraints we have when evaluating the nature of love.

Many people today turn to the Internet to find friends and significant others. Granted, there is another person, made of flesh and blood, sitting at the computer on the other side of those relationships. But by altering the present just slightly, Jonze introduces a near future that isn’t so far-fetched and that has relevance to relationships of any era.

In fact, the film draws attention to the lack of authenticity that plagues many traditional human relationships. Theodore works for a company that produces handwritten letters for clients who want to send a “genuine” message to relatives, lovers, or anyone else. Theodore mentions one couple he has worked with for eight years; he likely knows them better than they know each other — or even better than they know themselves. This scenario calls to mind the current state of our society, where people often spend more time texting and staring at their smartphones than having face-to-face conversations with those right in front of them.

The sci-fi elements of the movie blend seamlessly into the film in a subtle and understated way. In this world, computers are completely integrated with cell phones and obey voice commands spoken into a Bluetooth-like device. There’s just enough advancement in technology to tell that this film takes place at some point in the future, but the audience is not being hit over the head with shiny distractions. This environment creates a rich backdrop for an intriguing film.

Amy Adams is delightful as Theodore’s neighbor and friend. She adds a much needed lightness and humor to the film. Plus, her rapport with Theodore demonstrates one of the few positive human relationships he maintains. Their interactions provide some added insight into Theodore’s character; he’s not incapable of maintaining a human connection, he just needs someone who understands him.

Her is sweet and sincere, but sometimes feels a little too saccharine. Its soft focus and pastel color palette create a jarring contrast during the heavier moments of the film. Compared to much larger-scale films like The Wolf of Wall Street or Captain Phillips, one wonders how it made it into the Best Picture category. This is a much more subtle and nuanced film than any of the others in the category with the possible exception of Nebraska.

This isn’t the type of film that appeals to a wide audience. The viewer has to be willing to think about the story beyond what’s on the surface; otherwise, it may just seem depressing or awkward. Unlike the aforementioned films, Her didn’t provoke an immediate reaction as I walked out of the theater, but I soon found it had gotten in my head and stayed with me for days after viewing.

Fans of Jonze’s previous works will likely know what to expect and will enjoy the film more than those who are just looking for a simple love story. But if you let yourself reflect on the film, you just might find yourself reevaluating your real-life and online interactions, and perhaps the definition of love itself.

Batman has endured, evolved for 75 years

When it comes to iconic American characters, there can be no doubt that Batman is among the best. Created in 1939, “the Batman” has endured across seven and a half decades of vast social change, surviving innumerable reboots and interpretations to become a fascinating, well-crafted character who is both relatable and legendary.

Fans of Batman have always appreciated the character for being remarkably unique. The Dark Knight, however, began as a ripoff of every character his creator had ever heard of.

Origins of the Bat-Man

The idea for a the vigilante hero came about as a money-making scheme. Bob Kane, a comic book artist at the time, was looking to make the same kind of money as Superman creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. Kane promised to bring National Periodicals, today’s DC Comics, a new superhero to publish alongside the Man of Tomorrow.

Kane began sketching his ideas for a Bat-Man, drawing a character similar to Superman, in a bright red suit, but with wings like a bat. Kane took his proposal to his writer friend, Bill Finger, who offered ideas to modify the outfit for the bat-themed hero. Finger proposed getting rid of the domino mask and replacing it with Batman’s signature cowl to give the hero the appearance of his namesake mammal. Instead of large wings, Batman would wear a cape that could be made to simulate the appearance of wings. Finger also suggested that Kane replace the red suit that was too similar to Superman’s bright colors with darker shades befitting a nighttime vigilante.

Despite his contributions, Finger never received much recognition in his lifetime, and is largely viewed as the uncredited co-creator of Batman.

Under Kane and Finger’s direction, Batman began to take on traits of several popular characters. Kane often cited being inspired by The Scarlet Pimpernel, the swashbuckling Zorro, and Leonardo da Vinci’s flying machine. Kane and Finger have also acknowledged the heavy influences of The Phantom, Doc Savage, The Shadow, and Sherlock Holmes. The Bat-Man made his debut in Detective Comics #27 in “The Case of the Chemical Syndicate.”

Developing the Story

To explain why a millionaire like Bruce Wayne would dress in a bat costume to fight crime in dark alleys, the writers concocted a tragic story that would traumatize any young boy. The story has remained almost exactly the same across numerous genres and retellings.

As presented in Detective Comics #33, young Bruce Wayne witnessed the cold-blooded murder of both his mother and father after a trip to the theater. The shock of this senseless crime caused the boy to make a vow. He would not only swear vengeance against the criminal who killed his parents, but against crime itself. It is this vow, even more than the death of his parents, that is the central tragedy of the Batman mythology.

Robin joins the team in Detective Comics #38

Almost immediately, the Caped Crusader’s supporting cast filled out. Commissioner Gordon, Batman’s liaison in the Gotham City Police Department, was introduced in the same issue as the Dark Knight himself. The character has endured across the ages as another Gotham hero, including his most recent portrayal on film by Gary Oldman.

Only a year into his run as a hero, Batman took on a sidekick, sparking a new trend in comics of underage boys fighting monsters and dangerous criminals. Robin was introduced as a writing device, decreasing the number of thought balloons on a given page by giving Bruce a friend with whom to discuss his plans.

The Boy Wonder became an adopted son to the chronically lonely Bruce Wayne, adding a new layer to Batman’s character. Dick Grayson, the original Robin, evolved over the years into a hero in his own right, called Nightwing, creating a second iconic character out of the Bat mythos.

The Dark Side of the Dark Knight

In the early years, Batman was not opposed to killing or simply letting his opponents die. Longtime fans of the Bat would be aghast to see their hero breaking necks of bad guys and firing a gun when necessary.

In Batman #1, which saw the introduction of perennial villains The Joker and Catwoman, Wayne used guns to slay monstrous giants. The violent imagery led the editor to decree the end of guns and killing in the Bat comics. Bruce Wayne’s aversion to firearms and killing was retconned, explained as stemming from the loss of his parents. Batman’s refusal to kill has become one of his most defining traits.

The Comics Code Authority stemmed from a political backlash against violence marketed to children.

The desire to make money and gain notoriety almost killed Batman in the same way that led to his creation. In 1954, Seduction of the Innocent by Fredric Wertham linked teenage delinquency to comic books, usually citing the violent and gruesome nature and imagery of horror comics.

As expected, the sensational book, which offered little in the way of verifiable science, sparked an outcry exaggerated by a politician looking for an issue to get his name in the news. Estes Kefauver was a Democrat with his eye on the Presidential nomination. Seduction of the Innocent would give him his issue and his media attention.

While Kefauver never became President of the United States, he did force the comic book industry to create a self-censoring body known as the Comics Code Authority. The CCA established numerous rules which led to the death of innumerable superhero properties and forced change upon those that survived.

Batman became a deputy of the Gotham Police Force who fought crime in the daytime. His stories took on elements of the fanciful and the science fiction genre. DC introduced new characters into the Bat mythos, Batwoman and an early version of Batgirl, likely to curb Wertham’s charges of homosexuality in the Bat world.

Entering a new medium

Adam West as Batman in the 1960s television series

By 1966, Batman comics were close to cancelation. Swooping in at the last second to save the day, the ABC television network picked up the Batman character for a new TV series. Batman, starring Adam West and Burt Ward, became a national sensation, offering a campy take on the character that was actually quite faithful to the comics of the time. The show employed a brilliant tactic: appeal to audiences of all ages. For the kids, Batman was a serious adventure story about the Caped Crusader. To adults, it was a humorous take on the absurdist nature of the superhero genre.

Unfortunately for Bat-fans, the show only lasted three years before being canceled due to declining ratings. Still, the show has had an enduring impact, being referenced to this day: Adam West regularly makes appearances to parody his most famous role in shows such as Family Guy and The Fairly Oddparents.

Batman on TV created a new generation of fans, but for some dedicated to the franchise, the hero portrayed on ABC was no Dark Knight. Comic book writers and artists did not want to see another generation of fans grow up believing that Batman was the goofy master of onomatopoeia.

Ra's al Ghul comes on the scene in Batman #233

Artist Neal Adams and writer Denny O’Neil led the charge, taking over the Batman comics in 1969. Looking to add real-world issues into the formerly extravagant comic, Adams and O’Neil introduced the terrorist character Ra’s al Ghul. Ra’s represented a change in Batman stories from exclusively flamboyant supervillains with increasingly convoluted evil plots, to more realistic stories and more relatable villains. Unlike the numerous Bat-villains that preceded him, Ra’s aimed for a seemingly noble goal. He wished to save the world’s environment. The only problem: it would require the death of humanity.

Despite these changes, Batman comics continued to decrease in sales until 1986, when a bold new writer, known for his dark work on Marvel’s Daredevil, was given the opportunity to write the definitive Batman story.

The Bleak Reality

The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller tells the story of a 55-year-old Batman, 10 years after retiring, returning to his crusade against crime in a Reagan-Era Gotham City. Miller’s Batman is, in several ways, a departure from the Batman of mercy, born of his parents’ tragic murder. Instead, Batman is a terrifying brute, certain of what is right and willing to permanently injure those in the wrong.

“I want you to remember Clark, in all the years to come, in your most private moments, I want you to remember my hand at your throat, I want you to remember the one man who beat you.”
Batman, in The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller

This Dark Knight appears to have a death wish, constantly challenging himself to greater fights, until finally the Batman takes on a stand-in for God himself: Superman. In Miller’s bleak reality, Ronald Reagan nearly sparks nuclear war. With Superman by his side, the president believes the United States to be invincible, and he is willing to use its power belligerently, knowing that the Man of Steel is fast enough to stop a nuclear strike from the Soviet Union. As Reagan’s stooge, Superman is brought in to take down Batman. The Dark Knight, always prepared, welcomes Clark Kent’s arrival and enacts a plan to bring the Man of Tomorrow down.

Alan Moore's lasting contribution to the Batman canon

Miller’s Batman defined the hero for a generation as a brutal, unforgiving, genius man, capable of striking fear into the gods themselves.

Following the success of Dark Knight Returns, Miller was asked to rewrite the origin story of the Caped Crusader. Setting his story in a Gotham City controlled by organized crime, Batman: Year One follows the early years of Gordon in the GCPD and Wayne’s attempts to become greater than just a man. Year One asks a question later addressed in the Christopher Nolan film trilogy: Is Batman to blame for the rise in theatrical supervillains?

Adding a new dimension to the Batman character was Alan Moore and his classic work The Killing Joke. That installment follows the Joker’s attempts to corrupt Batman and Gordon. Joker is meant to act as the mirror image of the Dark Knight, a man who was changed by only “one bad day.” In an attempt to prove that one bad day is the only difference between men like Gordon and himself, the Joker sets out to ruin the Commissioner’s life by shooting and torturing his daughter, Barbara Gordon.

Jason Todd meets his demise in 'Batman: A Death in the Family.'

The Killing Joke is one of the most philosophically challenging Batman stories ever written. Is Batman, by not killing the Joker, responsible for the deaths the Joker causes? Since the editorial decision following Batman #1, the Gotham City hero has been known for his deontological stance on killing. Moore had the Joker challenge Bruce Wayne’s convictions, and some fans believe the Joker was actually successful in breaking Batman’s will.

Batman stories continued through the realm of darkness, culminating in a showcase of the danger of kids fighting crime. In A Death in the Family, the second man to don the Robin costume, Jason Todd, is beaten to the point of death by the Joker. The decision about Todd’s fate was left up to fans of the Batman comics, and they chose to allow Todd to die.

On to the Silver Screen

Jack Nicholson (The Joker) and Michael Keaton (Batman) brought the Caped Crusader to Hollywood

In 1989, the Bat achieved new levels of popularity with the release of Tim Burton’s Batman movie. Inspired by The Killing Joke, Burton’s Batman is a single-minded crusader who is often aloof when not seeking out Gotham’s criminals. Burton and actor Michael Keaton returned to Gotham City with Batman Returns. This second installment in the series saw a much more absurdist city, perhaps changed by the appearance of the Batman and the Joker. After Burton left the series, Warner Brothers continued the franchise by handing over the reins to Joel Schumacher. These movies are so universally panned that it’s better just to say nothing.

In 2005, Batman returned to the big screen under the direction of Christopher Nolan. Batman Begins drew its inspiration from Year One, retelling the famous origin story of the Caped Crusader while adding chapters about his time spent traveling the globe to acquire the skills necessary for an urban war.

Following the success of Batman Begins, Warner Brothers released The Dark Knight, starring a returning Christian Bale as the title character, with Heath Ledger redefining the Joker. Ledger’s portrayal of the maniacal clown earned universal praise and a posthumous Academy Award. The Dark Knight and its sequel are currently among the highest grossing films of all time.

“Oh, you. You just couldn’t let me go, could you? This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object. You truly are incorruptible, aren’t you? Huh? You won’t kill me out of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness. And I won’t kill you because you’re just too much fun. I think you and I are destined to do this forever.”
The Joker, in The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller

Batman can be found in dozens of ongoing DC comics and is returning to theaters in 2016’s tentatively titled Batman vs. Superman.

An Enduring Legacy

Batman has become a cornerstone of American culture. With successful movies and comics, an upcoming television show based on Gotham City, and 75 years of mythology to draw from and build on, the Dark Knight will likely be with us for a long time.

Bruce Wayne, as a man among gods, inspires us to achieve greatness. Despite being only human, Batman has faced down the likes of alien demigods Superman and Darkseid and has always come out on top. Batman reminds us of the strength of one person to do tremendous good.

And if you ever doubt the inspiring nature of Gotham’s greatest hero, just remember the Batkid.

All Batman comics are the property of DC Comics. Thank you to comicvine.com for archiving these images.

The author recommends the following resources for more information on Batman:

Batman and Psychology
Batman and Philosophy
Batman: Year One
The Long Halloween
Death in the Family
The Killing Joke
Hush
The Dark Knight Returns

Captain Phillips illustrates humanity on all sides

If you asked three people to tell the same story, chances are you would hear three different versions of the same event. Each would be tinted a different shade by the assumptions and preconceptions of the narrator.

The director of a movie based on real-life events is handicapped by those same storytelling challenges. By being on a worldwide stage, though, the director has a responsibility to expand the camera’s perspective beyond individual biases, to tell as complete a story as possible.

Captain Phillips is director Paul Greengrass’s recounting of the MV Maersk Alabama hijacking. Greengrass, with the help of extraordinary acting, deftly weaves a narrative from the viewpoint of the American crew of the freighter, while honoring the story of the Somali pirates who took over the ship, and he does it in a way that reminds us even the “bad guys” are the heroes of their own stories.

In April 2009, the Maersk Alabama was supposed to be on a simple business trip passing around the Horn of Africa. The vessel, which contained tons of valuable cargo, was targeted by a group of young Somali pirates. The story of what transpired was told from Captain Richard Phillips’s perspective in his 2010 book A Captain’s Duty, and was adapted for the silver screen by Billy Ray.

In the film, which is nominated for Best Picture at the 86th Academy Awards, Phillips is portrayed by Tom Hanks and is shown as a man prepared for this harrowing situation. Using experience acquired over 30 years, the captain does whatever is necessary to keep his crew safe from harm.

The inclination for American audiences is, of course, to root for the safe passage of the American crew. A lesser movie would demonize the pirates, stripping them of all humanity and denying the viewer any reason to empathize with their plight. Instead, the backstory and motives of the Somalis are brought to life by some excellent actors, new to Hollywood, and with incredible stories of their own.

Acting across from Hanks is Barkhad Abdi, playing the role of Muse. Muse is a young man who aspires for more than Somalia can offer. With the Maersk Alabama in the pirates’ possession, Muse stood to gain much. He believed he would be able to ransom the ship for enough money to allow him to move away to America and begin a new life.

Abdi brings much to the character of Muse. A Somali himself, Abdi left his native country at seven years old, eventually reaching the United States. His is an all-too-rare success story from that troubled nation, having now been nominated for an Academy Award in his first major film role.

Abdi rises to the unenviable task of holding his own on-screen with Hanks. Their characters engage in an intriguing game of chess. The captain offers Muse and his crew thousands of dollars in cash to leave the ship alone. Muse sees through the play, knowing that the a ship the size of the Maersk Alabama can yield a much higher payout, and counters by refusing the deal. Phillips sets a plan in motion that puts his side in control, but the Somalis soon trick the crew and take the captain hostage on a lifeboat.

As the U.S. Navy mobilizes to free Phillips, the captain continues to negotiate with his captors on the lifeboat. He learns much about his captors and even seems hopeful he can change their minds before any blood is shed. This is where the director and actors truly excel at giving voice to the pirates’ story.

No one is going to argue the virtues of piracy, even if Johnny Depp makes it look so drunkenly hilarious. But what Captain Phillips does so well is portray the pirates as men on a mission — and for them, it is a righteous mission. The movie shows that the pirates themselves were victims of the horrid situation in Somalia. One pirate in particular has been swept up in the tide of a hopeless life that has led him here, where his innocence and kindness lead him to the verge of forging a friendship with the American captain.

The problem with the cinematic successes of the movie up to this point is that it makes the viewer wish for a peaceful resolution. A part of me hoped to see the pirates make it home with their ransom, raising the standard of living of their native land and saving Somalia from the pits of post-colonial hell. Of course, that didn’t happen, and Somalia is still considered among the most failed states in the world.

That reality made the conclusion of the film difficult to watch. The United States was right, of course, to pursue the safe return of its citizens. But the juxtaposition of the overwhelming firepower of the U.S. Navy with the desperation of four men armed with guns brings into relief the imbalance of power and wealth across the globe. The outcome of the conflict also raises important questions about what constitutes a proportional response in such a situation.

Captain Phillips is a beautiful tale from the perspective of Phillips himself. Hanks’s acting ability alone elevates the movie into Best Picture territory. He portrays Phillips as a crafty sea veteran who was prepared to handle an impossible situation. At the end of the movie, Hanks gives another career-defining performance in a scene wrought with pain. Hanks, even without an Oscar nomination this time, again establishes why he is one of the great actors of all-time.

Phillips’s thoughts are also never far from his family, which is a poignant reminder of the flip side of the story. The movie is a tragedy for the four pirates involved. If you are like me, you may find yourself questioning the decisions of the U.S. Navy and lamenting the way the real-life events played out for the Somali men.

Ultimately, this is a film with a rich depth of perspective, challenging the viewer to consider his or her own unconscious biases. Captain Phillips artfully demonstrates the principle that both sides can simultaneously be fighting the good fight, even while employing tactics that may betray those principles.

Osage County defines dysfunctional family

“Life is very long.” These words from T.S. Eliot open August: Osage County, a film that looks at the impact one person’s decisions can have, like ripples in a pond, on several generations of a family in different stages of those long lives.

August: Osage County is the story the Weston family — a family that is the very definition of dysfunctional. The patriarch, Beverly, is an alcoholic and former award-winning poet; his wife, Violet, is dealing with cancer and has become addicted to pills that severely affect her mind; and their three daughters, Barbara, Ivy, and Karen, each lead complicated lives of their own. When tragedy strikes, the girls return home to face their mother’s addiction and madness.

The movie is based on the Tony Award-winning play of the same name by Tracy Letts, who also wrote the screenplay for the film. Editing and adapting a play of that caliber must be a challenge, but Letts (whom you may recognize) did an excellent job trimming his three-hour script into a two-hour film while maintaining all the integrity and dark humor of the original text. Director John Wells closely follows Letts’ dialogue and even some of the original staging, though unlike the play, the entire film does not take place in the Weston home.

The success of both the play and the film depends entirely on the performances of the actresses playing the roles of Violet and Barbara Weston. In this case, the producers found two of Hollywood’s best, who are always up for any challenge.

Violet’s mood swings are unpredictable, an endless emotional roller coaster. Meryl Streep masterfully portrays the many highs and lows of the venomous Weston matriarch in a performance deserving of her latest Oscar nomination. Suffering from cancer in her mouth, Violet is dependent upon multiple pill prescriptions that have clearly addled her mind. In her drugged state, Violet often lashes out against her family in bitterness for the long and hard life she has endured.

Julia Roberts, nominated for an Oscar in the supporting actress category, proves she is more than able to hold her own opposite Streep with an equally emotional performance as Barbara. The oldest Weston daughter is dealing not just with her father’s disappearance and her mother’s addiction, but with a dissolving marriage and a rebellious daughter of her own. Barbara also has to come to terms with her fear that she will travel the same road to bitterness and addiction as her mother. That struggle is quiet and unspoken for much of the movie, but it bubbles to the surface and is illustrated well near the end of the film.

The rest of the cast is rounded out with many recognizable faces and names, and each actor plays his or her role extremely well. Margo Martindale and Chris Cooper are terrific as Violet’s sister and brother-in-law. Martindale had been underappreciated for years, until her fantastic performance in FX’s Justified, and Chris Cooper almost always quietly steals any scene in which he appears.

Ewan McGregor does a fine job as Barbara’s husband who, despite their separation, remains supportive. However, McGregor’s performance is often overshadowed by the strong performances of the females around him. The same is true for Dermot Mulroney: his character is textbook sleaze, but the performance itself is almost negligible in a film filled with so many heavy-hitters. Americans are most familiar with Benedict Cumberbatch as the overly confident Sherlock, or the manipulative Commander John Harrison / Khan, but he performs well here as the meek and downtrodden Little Charles, Violet’s nephew.

August: Osage County is almost entirely character-driven. However, those characters are so compelling, and the acting so strong, that it is easy to overlook how little action the film contains. The plot does have several twists and surprises along the way to move the story to its conclusion. The original play is clearly Violet’s story, but changes to the ending of the film version shift the focus onto Barbara and give the narrative a new light. While that ending may not provide as much closure as some would like, it is more hopeful than the original play.

August: Osage County is a well-acted, strongly written movie that certainly lived up to my expectations. If you’re a fan of Letts or of intense, sometimes grim, family dramas, this is definitely a must-see. Letts’ writing does a great job of balancing the serious moments with dark humor and levity. But keep in mind that, despite being billed as a comedy by some media outlets, August: Osage County turns the lens on the reality that “life is very long” indeed.

And, if nothing else, the film will leave you feeling a little better about your own family.

Mitt shows insulation as Romney’s fatal flaw

12 Years a Slave stresses Gettysburg’s significance

curiata

provoke your curiosity