Monday, 22 October 2012

The Greatest Team on Earth: The Justice League


What a great accelerator $1.4bn can be to a film studio, this one being Warner Bros and the $1.4bn being roughly what The Avengers grossed this summer at the box office. That film released, obviously, by Marvel Studios and Disney. Now despite the success of the The Dark Knight Trilogy which championed and “realistic” take on the Batman character (easily one of DC and Warner Bros. biggest characters), as well as making them a fair bit of cash, nearly £2.4bn I believe. Their reboot, which so far looks intriguing, of Superman next year promises to bring them in another healthy income ever two or three years, they have decided to finally (well, again) kick start a Justice League film to be released in 2015, directly competing with the already established The Avengers sequel.

The basic idea of the Justice League, and I will keep it to a minimum as I am no expert on the team, is that is a way for DC to bring together their greatest heroes and have them confront great threats to the planet as well as, and this is part that is the most interesting to me, work with each other despite the very different rules, beliefs and morals that they all had. The biggest draw being the relationship between Superman and Batman.

The biggest arguments against the idea is that fans want to see the heroes be introduced in their own films, in much the same way as Marvel did with their Phase One plan, which worked, despite the varying degrees of quality the films had. So that we get to know them, who they are what they can do, then have them meet up. This introduction, will be even more important for people who don’t know some of the less familiar, although I’m sure still recognizable other members such as The Flash, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern and Aquaman.

As for the big two of Batman and Superman, it could be argued that they don’t need the Justice League film. Batman certainly not after the conclusion of Christopher Nolan’s trilogy, which although ended it’s run and continuity , leaves the character unquestionably a top the comic book mountain. Superman, despite some average recent films, will always draw interest from both the hardcore and the mainstream, as one of the first ever superheroes and arguable the greatest. So what will WB achieve by forcing two of what could be their biggest money makers into a risky film that could knock back their production of DC properties, not that it could get any slower really, back several years.

As it’s going to happen, lets look at how it could be done, these are only my theories and I don’t put them forward as the only way it could be done. Will Beall, of the soon to be released Gangster Squad is currently on script duties which is understandable being kept under wraps until it is finished, or is at least ready to be shown to prospective directors and actors.

With the basic story, they will have to be careful so that they don’t imitate too much of The Avengers, especially with the team coming together over the course of the film just in time for the final showdown with whichever villain they choose. They have to do something with the characters that is different, one thing that differentiates DC from Marvel, is that DC’s characters tend to be darker and more complex (in my opinion anyway). So play up to it, give the characters important decisions to make, make them difficult, ones that could very well tear the team or at least potentially force out other members out or cause themselves to be exiled as a result. This is something that The Avengers didn’t have, and while there have been hints that their third film will take from the Civil War story arc, DC and Warner has the chance to get in first and deliver and potentially very interesting comic book film with depth and intelligence, in the same vain that The Dark Knight trilogy did.  The only obstacle with this idea is that it requires the characters to be fully fleshed out, ideally in their own films, something they won’t get if they are thrown head first into this team up film.

One of the most important parts of any action film is its villain, if they’re memorable and genuinely pose a threat then the film thrives as you get behind the heroes. If they’re weak then it’s hard to feel any sense of danger or fear of the villain and his or her threat. So with that in mind it’s unlikely that we will see any of Batman’s Rogue Gallery, it’s more likely to be one of the bigger, most likely extra terrestrial threats, such as Darkseid or Brainiac, my personal favourite, as it would turn parts of the Earth into warzones, a kin to the opening of the DC Online video game.

As for casting the Justice League themselves, I’ll quickly rattle off a few suggestions for who could play the mandatory characters and even make a case for one or two secondary members. As there is no way of guessing which supporting characters, such as Alfred or Lois Lane could appear, I will avoid these roles and just focus on the “heroes”.

Superman will be in a tricky situation come 2015, either Man of Steel will have flopped and swept under the carpet by WB, or it will have been a resounding success, therefore cementing Henry Cavills position as Superman. Which will force WB into a decision about whether they want to carry over this Superman into the Justice League, thereby immediately linking him with all the other characters. Or they could cast someone else and keep this continuity separate from Man of Steel and the eventual (at least for Batman) solo films of their heroes. So to keep it simple for the wider audiences and because I like him as an actor, let’s stick with Henry Cavill.

The tough one, Batman, after Christian Bales performance, it’s going to take a very brave and talented man to step up and take on the cap and cowl. I previously touted Ryan Gosling as one of the few both capable of portraying the various sides of Bruce Wayne as well as a big enough name to attract attention. I would still at this point be very happy with Gosling taking the role.

But as an alternative how about Jake Gyllenhall, he was considered back for Batman Begins, so this isn’t completely original, but of late he has begun to take a number of interesting roles that have challenged him and undoubtedly brought out the best in him. Although his best I still feel is Brokeback Mountain. It wouldn’t be a surprise if he were to get the role, he has the right looks, the acting capability and is certainly a name actor.

Wonder Woman is arguably one of the hardest characters to get right on screen, bar the seventies television show there has been a number of false starts and stalled projects. But as she is one of DC’s top characters and an important member of the team, she will have to turn up here, cast well, written well and given the time to develop. Firstly she has to be an equal, essentially to Superman and Batman physically (I don’t mean size, as that would look odd) so that she can hold her place as part of that trinity.

My personal suggestion would be Eva Green, she has the height and the looks to pull off the characters look and can also portray very different versions and parts of the character, she can be strong and commanding whilst also vulnerable (not that the character is permanently weak or vulnerable) during the character scenes throughout the film. Which will be crucial, none more so to Wonder Woman, during the film.

The Flash, like Wonder Woman has been touted to get a film of his own for the last six or seven years, but has unfortunately never come to fruition. One of the problems being that there have been a few people to hold the title of The Flash during the characters run. The most popular version seems to be Barry Allen and is the one that is probably most likely to appear in the film.

The Flash is the character that in all likelihood would handle most of the comic moments, a character trait that I believe is apart, in certain ways of all characters. Also when compared with who else is on the team, is largely to be expected. As for the casting well, prior to The Dark Knight Rises, I would have said Joseph Gordon Levitt, but now I’d be more inclined to go for I’ll throw out three of four names, all of which would be interesting choices more than qualified to bring a different portrayal of the character, starting with Logan Marshall-Green (Prometheus), John Krasinski (The US Office), Ben Barnes (Prince Caspian) or, ah what the hell Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

The Green Lantern had a pretty rough start when it comes to feature films, it didn’t hit the heights that anybody wanted, but neither was it as bad as some people make out it to be, it was about half an hour too short and left one big plotline unresolved, too busy hoping for a sequel, before they had finished the first one. But still, I would hold strong with Ryan Reynolds, he gave us a likeable and layered character to follow, undoubtedly doing the best with a muddied and sequel bait heavy script.

Another advantage of this, is that it saves WB from having to introduce this character again, his origin is out there for the people who want to find it and may even help to shift some of those DVD’S and Blu Rays they have stashed away as well as reintroduce one of their greatest characters to the mainstream.

The Justice League does feature more than this, but for me, these five would probably be a good place for the first film to start, have these as your core characters, in much the same way that The Avengers did (with Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Captain America, then Hawkeye and Black Widow as two equally placed second tier characters).  But there is always the chance of more, the first person would to come off the bench would have to be Aquaman, a character whose story takes place largely under the sea, arguably a character who very much needs a film of his own to get this unique world and setting across, much like Thor did. I only know the very basics of his mythology, so I can only talk in broad strokes. He would be a hard character to make work, specifically as his powers are somewhat limited to the ocean, with varying degrees of telepathy and mind control, but this varies on interpretation.

As for casting, you wouldn’t far wrong with Armie Hammer (although I’m sure he would rather hold for the Batman role that is always talked about). Failing like a prominent TV actor such as Nicolas Coster-Waldau (Game of Thrones) would give the character screen time, but without the pressure of having to make him a top tier player in the film.

The final founding member, is the Martian Manhunter, a character who has currently fallen out of the core seven since the reboot last year. As his form is not that of a human, although his basic form is humanoid, the role would largely be prosthetic based in appearance, although with the ability to shape shift quite a few different, yet consistently maintained performances would be required. When it comes to this kind of performance, Doug Jones (Hellboy, Pan’s Labyrinth) is the one that most people cite as his career has the most example of it.

The last character, who is a personal favourite, is Green Arrow, aka Oliver Queen, the character is getting his own television show, which will have just started. So if all goes well, WB could have a character with roughly three seasons of history, development and a pretty healthy following to bring to this, as with Green Lantern, it would allow the character to into the film with his history already established, ready to go. It would be a risk to the show more than the film if it develops the following I am sure they hope it will.

Some of these characters may, in the grander scheme of things not warrant roles in the film, some of which is understandable, but there are others, who are crucial to it’s marketability and it’s loyalty to the material. The success of not just this film, but the spin off films will depend on their portrayal and casting. The pressure is certainly on.

Picking a director for WB is going to be hard, as it will almost instantly signal their intent for the film, tonally and thematically as we study their back catalogue. It will also be a big step in either winning over the fans, or losing them. Some of the names rumoured so far have been interesting, Ben Affleck (although I think he would be better suited to the next Batman), The Wachowski’s or even Zack Snyder, continuing on from Man of Steel. All of them are a step in the right direction for the film, but still apart from Snyder, none of them really seem to fit the role.

If Warner Bros really mean to have this done for summer 2015, these and many other roles will be cast and questions answered within the next year. But till then we will still have time to get angry and speculate.

Wednesday, 3 October 2012

Looper


Time travel films are a divisive sub genre of science fiction, for people who refuse to accept that it is impossible (I am not arguing that fact here), they come in sceptical and quick to point out it’s flaws and gaps in the logic. The other group will wait till see what the filmmakers are doing with the time travel device before they make a judgment and their interest and enthusiasm goes one of two ways. Time travel and the basic idea of it, in my opinion is best used when the characters are forced to make difficult moral decisions when faced with a freedom to change something, which luckily Looper has, as an integral part of it’s plot.

The basic plot of the film is that Joe (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is a Looper a killer who works for a mob that exists 30 years in a future, so that when they want someone killed, they send him back in time for Joe to kill. But when Old Joe (Bruce Willis) is sent back from the future, Joe hesitates, allowing his older self to escape and cause havoc with his future.

Two of the biggest strengths of the film are the two lead performances, especially from the two main characters, Joe and Old Joe, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis. Gordon-Levitt throughout the film wears, what I assume is some kind of facial prosthetic, so that he looks more like Willis, his jaw and nose are altered the most and it does create a buyable if somewhat jarring, at least initially, visual effect.
As they both play the same character, but at different points in their lives and with different personalities, it is important that they appear as the same character and it’s a tribute to the way that both actors imitate the others facial ticks and mannerisms. In young Joe we get an arrogance that the life he leads now won’t end and that all he wants to do is look after himself. But in old Joe, we get a man who has been changed, by what I won’t say, and is now more in tune with the world, has learned some humility and is willing to sacrifice himself for something he cares deeply enough about.
We see more of young Joe throughout the film, as old Joe only cuts through the film at certain points as he does what he came to do. This was a good decision by writer/director Rian Johnson, as it is young Joe who has the films main arc to carry, which begins with him being one of the best Loopers, to him ending up (a vast amount of the second half takes place here) on a farm with single mum Sara (Emily Blunt) and her son Cid. I won’t go into details about the second half, as it really is best to go and watch it and experience it for yourself.

As with all time travel stories there may be a paradox in their somewhere, which could ruin the story for you if you actively look it out and want to, but in Looper the rules which the world sets itself, for my at least, actively discourage you from looking for a hole, or even thinking that there is hole in the logic. There may be one or two in there, but they won’t affect your viewing of the film.

The look of Looper is one of it’s biggest strengths, the future (young Joe’s world) is not the clean and crisp version of the world that is sometimes portrayed, nor is it the all out dystopia that seems to be the other option. In this future, we haven’t that far on from where we are now, the only difference in the city is that people are still driving cars we drive now and living in the same kind of run down homes that populate most cities. Basically, if you don’t have money you are being left behind. Outside of the city, on Sara’s farm, you would be unable to tell the difference from then to today, bar the odd piece of machinery that is surely only a few years away from us today. This is certainly a world that is believable especially given that it is only 30 years away at this point, it’s not as depressing as Blade Runners Los Angeles, but it is on it’s way.

Looper is beautifully shot, the city’s look crowded and overbearing, whereas the outskirts and farm look warm and comforting, and obvious escape from what the characters know goes on there. The camera is kept secure and the shot expertly composed, we see everything we should and never in jumpy disorientating shakiness that some recent films have used. Cinematographer Steve Yedlin, who has worked with Johnson on all three films, deserves much of the praise for making the films camera work engaging yet never drawing attention to the flashier moments, instead bringing them together with a style that feels fluid once editor Bob Duscay has gotten his hands on it.

Rian Johnson guides us through a story that could have been very confusing with a calm and understandable style, much like Christopher Nolan did with Inception or Duncan Jones (and writer Ben Ripley) with Source Code, giving us a complex idea, but trusting enough that audience will be able to follow the plot and be interested enough to engage and invest in the characters. Johnson certainly has a big future ahead of him if he keeps producing the quality of films that he has so far.

Looper is the kind of sci-fi we don’t get a lot of now, intelligent and full of ideas, so go and see it regardless of how you feel about time travel. Films like this need to be supported, as they don’t come around to often. It is definitely worthy of your time.