Ranking the Marvel movies

Leave a reply

Avengers assemble

Here’s a pointless exercise but maybe a fun one.

I decided to rank, in order of how much I enjoyed them/how good I thought they were, the big-screen Marvel movies.

It’s not too hard to tell that I prefer the official Marvel Cinematic Universe movies over the random Fox and Sony movies, I know.

A few provisos:

I’m not dipping back into pre-history far enough to drag “Howard the Duck” into this. And I haven’t seen it in a couple decades.

And I’m not including the 1994 “Fantastic Four” movie because it wasn’t released – I’ve only seen it on a bootleg DVD bought at a convention – and it doesn’t belong on this list any more than the awful “Captain America” TV movies do. Same for the “Blade” movies, which had their moments but seem as remote as the 1944 “Captain America” serial now.

Be aware, I’ve only glimpsed moments of the “Ghost Rider” movies on TV. And I’ve never seen the “Punisher” movies at all.

Two lists: First, just the “official” Marvel movies, then the list with the non-Marvel-overseen movies mixed in.

The Avengers

Captain America: The First Avenger

Iron Man

Thor

Thor: The Dark World

The Incredible Hulk

Iron Man 3

Iron Man 2

If you add the other post-2000 Marvel movies that aren’t part  of the official Marvel Cinematic Universe into the mix, it’s still weighted pretty heavy toward the official Marvel canon.

The Avengers

Captain America: The First Avenger

Iron Man

Thor

Thor: The Dark World

X-Men 2

Spider-Man 2

X-Men

X-Men: First Class

The Incredible Hulk

Spider-Man

Iron Man 3

The Wolverine

The Amazing Spider-Man

Daredevil

Iron Man 2

X-Men 3

Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer

Spider-Man 3

X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Hulk

Elektra

Looking at that list, it seems like “Iron Man 3” is way too far down. But maybe not. I need to see it again.

Something tells me my list will see a big shake-up next month, when “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” opens.

Oscars: I’ll catch up tomorrow

Leave a reply

oscars statue

I doubt I’ll be watching much, if any, of the Oscars tonight.

It’s not a protest of anything, or a statement about anything, including Ellen, the host.

I just feel more disconnect with the Academy Awards than I ever have.

For one thing, I haven’t seen a single one of the nine Best Picture nominees. I want to see at least three or four of them, but my schedule doesn’t encourage a lot of movie-going. And when it does, frankly, I really like escapist fare. Not that I didn’t see, and enjoy, movies like last year’s “Silver Linings Playbook.” But – and if you’re a reader of this blog, I don’t have to tell you this – I’m more likely to see the latest big-screen comic book adventure or action movie or comedy.

So other than tuning in to see what could be some funny stuff from Ellen at the opening, I’ll probably do other things until “The Walking Dead” comes on and then I’ll be watching it.

One reason I’m startled by my disconnect with the Oscars and movies in general is that I was a movie reviewer from 1978 to 1990. I saw two or three movies every week – during a period that was pretty good for movies of a certain type – and wrote about them. I loved Oscar night. I did my own predictions and sometimes the winners even coincided with my picks.

But tonight I’ll check out Ellen and undoubtedly enjoy Twitter comments by people who are watching. I’ll be amused, as always, by people who complain that the Oscar telecast runs long, like it doesn’t every year.

And if the show seems too long to you, why are you watching? There’s room alongside me on the couch for someone with an actual excuse as to why they’re not watching.

But I’ll catch up tomorrow.

The new ‘Flash’ sneak peek

Leave a reply

the flash_cw_costume

Yeah, that looks pretty good.

The CW has released a picture of Grant Gustin in the headpiece he’ll wear in the upcoming CW series “The Flash,” a spin0ff of “Arrow.”

It’s dark-ish, but so was the costume for the 1990 “Flash” series starring John Wesley Shipp as Barry Allen.

flash john wesley shipp

Shipp, by the way, has been cast in a recurring role on the new series. Here’s hoping for Jay Garrick.

Some other notable looks for the Flash:

the flash through the years

The evolution of the character and costume in the DC comics.

the flash justice league unlimited

The best presentation of the Flash, in the person of Wally West, from “Justice League” and “Justice League Unlimited” animated series.

justice league failed pilot

And, just for fun, the failed “Justice League” TV pilot.

Retro superhero: ‘The Phantom’

Leave a reply

the phantom billy zane

Richard Donner’s “Superman” movies and Tim Burton’s “Batman” movies – and their sometimes regrettable sequels – came before, of course, but Bryan Singer’s “X-Men” really kicked off the big-screen superhero genre in 2000, and the trend was solidified a couple of years later by Sam Raimi’s “Spider-Man.”

But during the “lost in the wilderness” years of the the 1990s, the studios tried not once, not twice, but three times to capture the spirit of the superhero genre as typified by the great pulp magazine-style heroes, the forefathers to comics.

“The Rocketeer” came first in 1991 and was probably the most successful. “The Shadow” came in 1994 and did a pretty good job of hitting all the key elements of the most popular radio and pulp hero of them all.

Then there was “The Phantom.”

The 1996 Simon Wincer movie, starring Kristy Swanson, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Treat Williams and Billy Zane as the Ghost Who Walks, was certainly faithful to Lee Falk’s original comic-strip hero.

Maybe too faithful.

the phantom by lee falk

If you’re not familiar with the Phantom himself, the character was born in newspaper comic strips in 1936 and continues to this day. The Phantom is Kit Walker, the 21st in a series of fathers and sons who – following the 14th-century murder of a father, prompting a son to vow vengeance and the upholding of law and order – has kept the peace around the world and battled evil accompanied by his wolf companion, Devil, and his horse, Hero.

The Phantom is notable for some cool characteristics, including his twin handguns, the skull ring – whose imprint is left on bad guys’ jaws – and the legend that has been cultivated around him: He’s known as the Ghost Who Walks because criminals – a superstitious and cowardly lot, as Batman could tell you – believe he’s immortal rather than just the latest in a long family of crimefighters.

Falk created “The Phantom” after his newspaper syndicate asked for a follow-up to his “Mandrake the Magician.” In creating the Phantom, Falk invented a couple of superhero conventions, including the skin-tight costume and pupil-less eyes behind the hero’s mask.

“The Phantom” movie had the courage of its convictions, certainly. Its tale – the Phantom tries to protect a set of magical skull carvings and keep them out of the hands of a wealthy villain (Williams) – goes through the correct motions. Switching back and forth from the remote island home of the Phantom to New York City, the hero is aided by a spunky newspaper reporter (Swanson) and everything is complicated by the femme fatale played by Zeta-Jones. And what a revelation she was here. I really wanted her to play Wonder Woman after seeing her here and in another, better superhero 1990s movie, “The Mask of Zorro.”

There are pirates and submarines and seaplanes and immense sets and some action set-pieces, some better than others.

Zane leaves a lot of people cold – including me – but he’s really pretty good here as the Phantom. He nicely underplays the role, tossing off jokes and filling out the purple outfit about as well as anyone can. I was as frustrated as anyone by the black leather “X-Men” outfits, but maybe the world just wasn’t ready for purple spandex. And striped shorts.

As much as Zane underplays his part, Williams seems to have been told to overplay every line. I guess he’s being a good sport and the “Power Rangers” villain delivery would at least come across as non–threatening to kids in the audience. While the character is amusing, a villain who’s never truly threatening is not a great villain.

I’m not sure there’s ever been a big-screen movie that so desperately wanted to be “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” (I’m not counting the low-budget knock-offs here.) From the 1930s setting to the rickety bridge crossing that ends with the heroes swinging to safety to the ancient relics that magically illuminate a spot on a map to the villains that go “boom” at the end, “The Phantom” tries to strike so many “Raiders” grace notes it’s almost bizarre. Maybe that’s not a a surprise: Screenwriter Jeffrey Boam wrote “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade,” a far better film.

“The Phantom” is worth seeing if you never have or if, like me, you haven’t in 18 years. It’ll seem like something of an awkward artifact because of the string of superheroes that followed it into theaters beginning just four years later, though.

Purple tights or no.

‘Dallas’ – Five things we want to see

Leave a reply

dallas season 3

The third-season premiere of TNT’s continuation of “Dallas” aired last night and I was missing Larry Hagman.

Although Hagman’s illness reduced his presence on the first two seasons of the new take on the classic nighttime soap, I have to say I wish that, before his death, producer Cynthia Cidre had shot several hours of Hagman talking on the phone, riding in the back of a limo and just walking across the room that she could generously salt through upcoming seasons.

But I guess that wouldn’t be right.

Anyway, in this, its first season without the venerable J.R. Ewing, “Dallas” will have to make its way on its own soapy power. I think it can do this … if it gives us a few things we want to see.

Plenty of the young’uns. I’m really growing to like the new generation of Ewings. Josh Henderson (John Ross) and Jesse Metcalfe (Christopher) are getting to be pretty good antagonists and I’ve already fallen for Julie Gonzalo as Pamela and Jordana Brewster as Elena.

But plenty of the original Ewings too. Patrick Duffy is stalwart as Bobby and Linda Gray is plainly filling the Hagman role in some scenes with their son John Ross this season. I’m enjoying both. And even though I’m wincing at the thought they’re going to have Sue Ellen fall off the wagon and begin drinking again, it would give Gray, a wonderful soap opera actress, a juicy season.

Faces from the original “Dallas.” We’re seeing plenty of Ken Kercheval (who is 78!) as Cliff Barnes, but I want to see more of Gary Ewing and Lucy Ewing and Val Ewing and Ray Krebbs. I’d really enjoy seeing Ted Shackelford in several episodes, clashing with nephew John Ross over the fate of Southfork.

More of Judith Light. Last season, the “Who’s the Boss” star made a big impression as the mother of Mitch Pileggi’s character … despite the fact that Light is, at 65, just four years older than her on-screen son. I didn’t like Light much when she first appeared, but she’s just the right kind of looney character the show could use.

The drama. The drama. Not just drama from the Ewing Global boardroom, but from Southfork, where it looks like most of the characters will be in residence this season. We need more dinner scenes with all the Ewings staring daggers at each other from their spots around the bar.

Here’s to another good season.

‘Fiddlehead’ wraps up steampunk series with a bang

1 Reply

cherie_priest

Cherie Priest has been the best working purveyor of steampunk – the genre that mixes sci-fi, alternate history and 19th-century technology with a twist – for several years now with her “Clockwork Century” novels.

The series – and if you haven’t tried it, you should – is set around 1880 and presents an America that is pretty radically different from the history books we know: The Civil War still rages on, with battlefield skirmishes and Union and Confederate spies crossing borders in clandestine missions. Often the action plays out in a series of skirmishes not only on the ground, in horrifying lethal “dreadnaught” locomotives, and in the air in high-flying dirigibles.

As the war rages on, another menace proves to be a great threat. In the first book, “Boneshaker,” a digging machine opens up a fissure in the earth in Seattle that releases a yellow gas. The gas turns humans into flesh-eating creatures and, even more fiendishly, is used as the basis of a highly-addictive drug that soldiers and other combatants on both sides of the Mason-Dixon Line willingly ingest, creating even more zombies.

fiddlehead cherie priest

By the time of “Fiddlehead,” Priest has brought these storylines together in an explosive climax. Gideon Bardsley, an ex-slave and scientist, has created the Fiddlehead, a steampunk computer that predicts that neither the Union nor the Confederacy will win the war. Both sides, weakened by nearly two decades of fighting, will be lost in a tide of zombies that will not only destroy the United States but the entire North American continent.

It’s up to Bardsley and Pinkerton Detective Agency operative Belle Boyd and their associates to stay alive long enough to get word out about Fiddlehead’s forecast – and stop the machinations of a war profiteer who hopes to use the zombie gas to not only make money but deal a devastating blow.

“Fiddlehead” is a fun thriller that not only brings back many of the characters from Priest’s earlier books – one of the author’s techniques is to mix up her sprawling cast, making some the leading players in some books and the supporting players in the next – but a couple of important figures who have been just outside the parameters of the page in the earlier books: Abraham Lincoln and U.S. Grant.

In Priest’s storyline, Lincoln wasn’t killed that April night in Ford’s Theatre, but he was seriously injured and had to leave the presidency. By the time “Fiddlehead” takes place, Lincoln and wife Mary are patrons of scientist Bardsley and thus leading the campaign to spread the word about the horrors of the zombie gas.

And Grant, wearing down in his fourth term in the White House and fighting his own demons, joins with Lincoln in turning back the murderous challenge from the war profiteers and behind-the-scenes manipulators who want to keep the war going.

Priest has created an engaging set of fictional characters but, to me, really shines in her treatment of fictionalized versions of real-life characters like Lincoln and Grant. Maybe it’s no surprise that readers would find themselves rooting for Lincoln, a beloved historical figure. But the Lincoln that Priest presents here is scarred and tough and scrappy as you would hope for.

Priest’s books are fun and clever and fast-moving fun-house-mirror looks at American history. With zombies. What more could we ask?

 

Essential geek library: The works of Les Daniels

Leave a reply

marvel_five_decades les daniels

I come to praise Les Daniels, not to bury him. But it turns out one of my favorite authors of comic book histories died and I didn’t even hear the sad news.

Daniels – who died in November 2011 at age 68 – is one of those authors to whose work I have returned again and again.

And no wonder. While he wrote fiction, his non-fiction work lines a shelf near by bedside.

In 1971, he wrote one of the early serious histories of comic books, “Comix: A History of the Comic Book in America.”  He followed this up with some of the most readable “official” histories of comic book publishers and characters in print, including “Marvel: Five Fabulous Decades of the World’s Greatest Comics” in 1991, “DC Comics: Sixty Years of the World’s Favorite Comic Book Heroes” in 1995, and what I consider his best modern-day work, a three-volume history of DC Comics’ Trinity, Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman.

These  three”Complete History” volumes were published in the late 1990s and early 2000s and, in addition to his clear and concise writing, feature some of the best design in comic book histories to that day. These volumes include covers by Chip Kidd, a star of the book design world.

Daniels was also an author of historical fiction and historical fiction with a supernatural bent.

There’s so much online – and so much crap online – about comic books these days, Daniels’ work seems – and is -authoritative and comprehensive and first-rate by comparison.

RIP Mr. Daniels.

Big spoilers for ‘Captain America: The Winter Soldier?’

1 Reply

redford cap winter soldier

Warning: This is the kind of spoiler that, once seen, cannot be unseen.

I’ll give you another warning before unleashing the spoiler.

I’m torn when it comes to spoilers. I like knowing things that other people don’t know and, through this blog, sharing them with readers.

This is a lifelong condition for me. Back in the spring of 1980, I sat down at the curb outside a bookstore and scanned through the paperback novelization of “The Empire Strikes Back,” which had come out a few weeks before the movie. I remember being startled by the revelations in the print version. I couldn’t blog about it, of course. Pity.

Just like novelizations of movies can vary, to greater or lesser extent, so can merchandising tie-ins.

That brings us to the spoilers for “Captain America: The Winter Soldier.”

As you know, the movie – which comes out in April – pits Cap, now an integral part of spy organization SHIELD, against the title character, a Russian assassin with a bionic arm. This struggle plays out against the bigger backdrop of Cap’s disillusionment with SHIELD, particularly as represented by D.C. insider Alexander Pierce, played by Robert Redford.

Still not in ultimate spoiler territory, so hang in there.

If you’re familiar with the Winter Soldier concept from the comics, you know the character is really Bucky Barnes, Cap’s World War II partner, who seemingly fell to his death in the comics (and the first Cap movie).

And if you’ve seen trailers for the movie, you’ve gotten a pretty good idea that the movie makes Cap and other characters, including Black Widow and Falcon, rebels within the SHIELD organization.

Okay. So here’s where we get into spoilers, maybe. Keep in mind I haven’t seen the movie and don’t have any inside knowledge. I’m reading conjecture online and putting two and two together.

Okay. Spoilers in 

5

4

3

4

1

Ready? 

If the movie follows the storyline of the Marvel Comics “Winter Soldier” book, the Red Skull – Cap’s nemesis from the comics – will play a role in the modern-day.

As played by Hugo Weaving, the Skull seemed to disappear – whooshed away to another dimension or another of the Nine Realms – at the end of the movie. It sure looked that way to me.

And if you’re a comic reader, you know that the Skull has popped up, in person and in various disguises, for much of the past half-century. So it’s safe to say that the Skull could return without too much surprise.

Which makes the Red Skull action figure, released to tie into the movie, make sense.

winter soldier red skull action figure 

Again, he might not be in the movie. He might just be part of the action figure merchandising from the movie.

Then we remember this quote, from early 2013, in which Redford – who could have played Cap in a 1960s or 1970s big-screen version – talked about why he wanted to appear in the movie.

“I think a career requires a certain amount of reinvention. If you get caught in one track I think that can be dangerous. Success has a dark side to it. you want to be careful if you’ve had success at something, that you not try and follow it by just duplicating it. That’s why I’m doing this Captain America thing. I like the idea of playing a villain…I did that just because it’s a different thing for me to do.”

So is Redford playing the Red Skull in disguise?

What better to re-introduce the character and interject a huge note of suspicion and distrust in how Cap and other heroes feel about SHIELD.

Remember, if you will, that Cap and Tony Stark discovered in “The Avengers” that SHIELD was making new Hydra weapons. The Red Skull channeled the power of the Tesseract, or Cosmic Cube, for those weapons.

Who’s to say the Skull, under the guise of the leader of SHIELD, hasn’t been using SHIELD’s resources to re-arm Hydra?

Speculation online and in interviews with Marvel officials has centered on how thoroughly the Marvel cinematic universe will change based on “Captain America: The Winter Soldier.” The movie is supposed to be something of a game-changer in the year leading up to when “Avengers: The Age of Ultron” comes out in 2015.

What better way to change the game than by taking the organization that’s been a part of every Marvel movie since Nick Fury stepped out of the shadows of Tony Stark’s living room in “Iron Man” in 2008 … and deconstructing it.

And what better way to do that than by revealing that the man ultimately in charge of SHIELD, Nick Fury’s own boss, has been the Marvel universe’s most enduring villain, maybe for decades?

We’ll see in April if any of this is even remotely correct.

Get off my lawn: Geekery is wasted on the young

Leave a reply

wkrp cast

Here’s the latest irregular installment of my view from the perspective of a longtime fan. So if you don’t want to hear it, you’re welcome to come back for the next entry. No hard feelings.

Back in my day (and ohmygod yes I did just write that, but mostly for the ironic effect) young fans or geeks or indoor kids or whatever we wanted to call ourselves appreciated classic books, movies and TV.

I mean, what choice did we have? We could slip back into the past with classic Universal monster movies or we could thrill to “Island at the Top of the World.” We could delight in “The Twilight Zone’s” dated pleasures or stay rooted in the present-day of “Manimal.”

I loved the TV and movies of my time, like “Star Trek” and “Star Wars,” but also loved the classics, like the aforementioned Universal movies featuring Frankenstein or the Wolf Man as well as the films of W.C. Fields, the Marx Brothers and Abbott and Costello.

I like to think of myself as living in the present day. I love the online world, from my ability to blog here to Twitter (two accounts). I can enjoy the treasure trove of information and entertainment available now thanks to the Internet that I couldn’t have imagined when I was young.

But …

Really, there’s no excuse for being ignorant of what’s come before.

Two things I’ve read recently bring this to mind.

robocop original poster

With the release of the “Robocop” remake, a writer on io9 “discovered” the original 1987 movie and wrote, in pretty funny terms, about how awesome the movie is. It was pretty amusing and I didn’t really mind it, but I was thinking, “Really? You can watch any movie or TV show you want now, on several devices, and you seem shocked by your initial exposure to a very high-profile satirical science fiction movie from less than 30 years ago?”

Far more egregious was a recent AV Club roundtable about the 1970s series “WKRP in Cincinnati.” The series, about a radio station, was an MTM production and ran for several years. It’s not like nobody remembers it.

But one writer for the AV Club, who almost certainly wasn’t born when the series originally aired, was very dismissive of the show. She said the look and feel of the show and the characters were so dated she couldn’t get into the story.

Again I’m wondering how this person had never seen a bit of, or even heard of, the series before … and how that qualified her to take part in a roundtable discussion of the series.

Yes, I know. It’s a different world now. The young shall inherit the earth and all that.

But can’t they educate themselves on their way to the throne?