Movie

I saw the weirdest movie last night.  The title was 'Mud'.  I think that was the name of a central character.  I say "think" because it was spoken with a Southern US AND "mumbly-teen" accent (which this old Yankee has trouble with).  And I came across it 1/3 in.

I don't really have the slightest idea what the intent of the movie was really about.  Something about 2 teenage boys struggling to get by with minor thievery and a couple of problematic adult relationships in the background.  It made little sense to me, but I just couldn't stop watching.

The 2 teens are clever in some street-sense ways (but its country-side) but not really smart and unguided.  The adults are all a bit "unsane".  No relationships seem to work.  

I could look it up on Wiki, but I don't really want to.  I want to just "let it sink into my brain" for a day or two...

It sort of reminds me of 'The Last Picture Show'.   Or maybe 'Friends'.  I think some Dickens might be involved.  

I had a friend once who was really into movies.  He could tell you about side notes, meanings, minor actors of nearly any movie.  He even knew what a "gaffer" was.  But I bet he couldn't explain this one.

Have any of you seen it?

Marvel VS DC Comics

I grew up reading Marvel Comics.  DC Comics were beneath me.  I once read a newspaper article explaining that Marvel was aimed at college students while DC was aimed at high schoolers.  That may have been an understatement.  I could tell the difference when I was 14.  Marvel all the way! 

DC:  Superman was invulnerable unless he was exposed to some dozen forms of Kryptonite.  He learned to fly by floating with balloons.  His opponents were silly people.  He had a supergirl, a superdog and there may have been other superpets too.  As Superman, he had muscles like a pro weightlifter, but as Clark Kent he was "less built".  He had no personal problems other than women who's initials were always L.L.  His eyeglasses deceived everyone...

Aquaman was a joke.  Green Lantern couldn't handle anything yellow.  Batman had promise in his darker aspects.  None of the characters were actually adults and most had children as sidekicks.

Marvel used to be (I think) "Timely Comics".  They had the worst junk I ever spent a dime on.  I recall a giant eraser smoothing the surface on the Earth until some genius threw paint in front of it and revealed a weerd creature damaging the Earth (the eraser could then finally erase it).  How it followed the creature just behind was never explained).  And one where a creature on a planet grew to control the whole thibg glorying in its power until a human turned on the tub faucet and washed it away to drown.  REALLY BAD STUFF!

But then Stan Lee came along with some broke artists.  The owner changed the name to Marvel.  And he had seen a new DC comic book of heroes getting together (Justice League) and told Lee he wanted a team.  In a week.  The group created the Fantastic Four.  And later The Avengers.  They later created Spiderman.

Te cause of their superpowers was kind of lame.  Cosmic Rays for the Fantastic Four, Gamma Rays for the Hulk, a radioactive spider for Spiderman.  Antman had a shrinking/expanding ray. 

But the point was that they had "problems?  And as teenagers, we understood "problems".  The FF were normal except for Ben Grimm (the Thing).  Spiderman had to hide his powers from friends and family and was a dud (early on) with girls.  The Hulk had no self control. 

Iron Man was at least self-created, but a real jerk.  Sub-Mariner and Captain America returned from some old 1940s comics.  New villains and heroes were created, and THEY had personal problems.  EVERYONE in the Marvel world had problems.  Thor was originally lame Dr Blake who struck his cane in a special cave and became Thor and had to go back and forth (the cane was somehow Thor's Hammer).

Both DC and Marvel had a letters page at the end of each comic book early on.  DC spoke to children; Marvel spoke to adults. 

But I partly wrote all that to say this...  The movies of the DC and Marvel characters are relatively equal in quality.  That's mostly because the movie-makers aren't the DC writers.  Give a telented production team, and they can do almost as much with Wonder Woman or Superman as Spiderman or The Avengers.  But "relative" is not "equal".

I liked the Superman movies.  They actually made a fairly real person out of him.  Batman seems the realist of the DC characters.  But Marvel has really done it right.  I can't rewatch the Superman movies (I can rewatch the Batman ones, sometimes), but I can rewatch the Marvel ones.  And that includes the critically-panned FF movies.  *I* liked them!  Though they really did mess up Dr Doom and Galactus a bit. 

I haven't watched the 2 last Avengers movies.  Cable wants too much.  I may check out streaming on my Amazon account...

Movies

I'm not a great movie-watcher.  Mostly sci-fi.  But I've watched some good movies.  One was 'True Grit'  (some movies are just unique) and today I found a remake offerred from 2010 free TV.  I had some doubts.  The Texas Ranger seemed sexist.  I mean, when I first switched to the movie, he seemed a bit "stalkish".  So I went elsewhere, but I went back.  I mostly never like remakes.  And I hardly ever remember names.

So, the girl character was right, Rooster Cogburn was right, the Texas Ranger was mostly right (Glenn Campbell seemed more honorable in the original) but got better as the movie went along.

The bad guys were good as actors (and bad guys are seldom good actors). 

In fact what impressed me was that all the characters were as good or better than the originals.  I think even the bad guys did a good job of being bad.   If there was an award for "best remake", I would suggest the 2010 version of 'True Grit'.

Watch it if you get the chance...

Scary Movies

Cat blog friend http://www.15andmeowing.com asked about scary movies and I realized I had more to say about one than would fit as a comment. 

When 'Alien' came out in 1979, a friend and I went to see it opening night.  We stood in line for hours in the rain, and missed the first showing by only 3 people.  We thought is was about bad things from an alien's POV.  Boy were WE wrong.  When the first viewers cane out, they were pale and shaken!  I turned to my friend and asked what we had gotten ourselves into?

Neither of us were particularly frightened by monster movies.  I'm realistic, and my friend was a cinema buff, so we weren't either really TOO worried.  Space aliens were generally silly, and Earthly ones too unlikely. 

But as the movie started darkly, and a sense of unease came over us, and we thought about the looks on the faces of the first audience as they came out, we began to worry.  When we first saw the queen alien skeleton in the derelict ship, we both said "Oh crap"! 

And even then, we weren't prepared for the first egg.  How harmful can a newly-hatched creature be?  We found out!  And it all got worse from there.  By the time Ripley was searching for her cat Jonesie, I was watching most of the screen with partially-shielded eyes.  The SUSPENSE was what was killing me!

Right up to the end, I wasn't sure who was going to win.  The movie had been unique enough that it might well have been the alien left, sending the ship to Earth...

It is the only movie I have ever left with popcorn uneaten!  As we left the theater, I turned to the nearest people in line and said "You aren't prepared for this one".

I still have a T-Shirt I had made afterwards that says "Alien" on the front and "Here, Jonesie" on the back.  But I have never watched that movie on TV.

The following Alien movies were easier to watch, but not by much.  Enough (since I knew Ripley would win) to watch though.  My favorite parts of the later movies were when Ripley confronted the Alien Queen using the personal equipment-mover outfit in Alien2, and when she let herself fall into the molten iron pit in Alien3.  I cried as she fell holding the newly-irrupting Queen hatchling to her to prevent it escaping.

Tgere was Alien; Resurrection, but if I saw it, I can't recall anything about it.

But I was surprised some years ago by the movie 'Prometheus'.  I watched for a few minutes and realized it felt a bit like 'Alien', so I kept watching.  I had no idea it was a prequel.  As prequels to movie series go, it was much better than most.   It involved a superior humanoid species (likely  space-faring ancestors to ourselves in some way, 8' tall, built like giant wrestlers, and technologically-advanced) developing dangerous interstellar creatures as weapons.  I didn't watch the whole movie (in and out of the room cleaning) but apparently the human heroine is fighting and losing to the humanoid when a cage is damaged and a dangerous captive octopus-like creature gets loose. 

Apparently, it was like a dozen strong humans could capture a panther, but one would have a very hard time of it.  And even then, it was a close struggle but the humanoid loses.  And the octopus-like creature absorbs him - and his DNA.  Making the Alien of the original movies...

The heroine escapes the planet in a makeshift spaceship and instead of returning to Earth goes after humonoid race seeking revenge.  That last part is a bit weak, but I guess they couldn't have the Earth being warned about the dangerous aliens.

I understand that there is a Prometheus 2 movie in the works which may explain how the Prometheus heroine fights the sperior humanoid race

But I still can't watch "Alien'...

Ender's Game

In a sci-fi world of the future, some evolved ant-like Beings left their homeworld to establish a colony on a suitable planet in another solar system.  That world was Earth and it was occupied.  After a war, they retreated.

The Earthlings felt threatened and decided to fight the invaders (the only intelligent beings they had ever met).  To that end, they trained and tested all sorts of young humans, seeking the best natural war-generals.  To make a long story short, they eventually found a youth with unusual strategic and tactical skills.

His name was Ender.  He succeeded at the military games in the academy by unusual tactics.  Slowly he learned strategic skills.  But he had odd dreams of the Enemy.

After successes at the academy, he was brought to the advanced training center where he was challenged in harder ways, but always succeeding. 

I know the story from the book, but I saw it as a movie a few nights ago.  Movies seldom present the nuances of a book, but this one did at least a B grade.

In the book, Ender advanced slowly through all the training sessions successfully until the end.  The Enemy was not much presented or understood.  In the movie, the Enemy was often shown and even explained.

In both, Ender is presented with increasingly more complex battles until the Government is convinced he can be a Battle-General.

In the book and in the movie, there are points where the reader/viewer can see the truth of the situation.  But there is a difference.  In the book, the moment of truth sneaks up very gradually.  In the movie, it is pretty obvious. 

I remember reading the book.  There is one spot where you suddenly, horrifyingly, realize that Ender (without his knowledge, thinking he is engaged in just another training simulation) destroys the Enemy completely and utterly.  He destroys an alien race not knowing that his "battle" is real.  And you, the reader, know before he does.

Few stories raise the hairs on my arms and neck; that one did.  The sudden understanding that the simulation was reality was a shock.  I have only felt that way with one story before (The Star).

They did a reasonable job of it in the movie, but of course nuance is not a movie trait.  Ender's discovery that he had destroyed the Enemy in what he thought was a training session was presented a bit too suddenly.  The book gave gradual hints; the movie just thrust the fact on you.

But most movies made from books are worse.  If the book was an A+, the movie was an A-.  Compared to other book-to-movie attempts, that's not bad.  Consider either version of Dune, or Howard The Duck, Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy, Alice In Wonderland, and How The Grinch Stole Christmas movies.

I'd watch Ender's Game again.

And BTW, I met Orson Scott Card once before he was famous.  He was a speaker at a conference.  He had a routine called "The Speaker On The Monitor" (I think) and it was hilarious.  It was back in the days of computer greenscreens and was a rif on biblical chapters (no disrespect meant - simply humor).  Like he would refer to the god of the computer and make the sign of the monitor (fingers shaping a square).  I actually shook his hand afterwards.   

I also met Issac Asimov once at a college presentation, but he seemed dead drunk.  Not like I could be sure, being a bit high myself at the time.  But he was beet red-faced and slurred as he spoke, and he made no sense at all.  Meeting famous people sometimes isn't all that good.

So read the book 'Ender's Game' and get the real story.

The HD TV

It went full circle tonight.  Years ago, when I first shopped for an HD TV, one on the showroom HD TVs showed a dinosaur stampede among humans.  I was stunned both by the action and by the realism!  I asked "What is THAT and the salesman said it was the new King Kong movie.

I bought a 60" plasma tv that day, but not so I could watch the movie.  I prefer nature/science/biology DVDs.  But every time the newer King Kong movie was on, I checked it for the dinosaur stampede.  Never caught it...  Too early, too late, whatever.

But I caught it tonight.  Saw the listing and just as I turned it on, the dinosaur stampede started.  Watched that whole part.  Finally!!!  And then I turned it off.  The movie itself is both too depressing and too weirdly violent.  Movies where too many people are just obliterated are Not My Thing...

Movies Again

I changed it enough to repost it...

You ever have one movie that you can just watch over and over?  It may seem odd, but for me it it "The Incredibles"; the 2004 animated Disney tale.  Mr Incredible is super strong, Mrs Incredible is super stretchy, Viola can become invisible, Dash can run superfast.  Baby Jack Jack only shows up latter as being able to change his body form and elemental structure. 

They aren't the regular superhero family.  They live in surburbia under a government "superhero protection program" because superheroism is banned due to the massive destruction to property.  Mr Incredible is an insurance adjuster (who quietly helps clients beat the company rules - well he IS a "good guy") going gradually insane from the restrictions.  Mrs Incredible is a seemingly happy mother and wife (and may be showing some angst there - Disney may not have been comfortable getting into that).  The kids have powers they have been taught not to use, but do (guiltily) at times in minor ways.

There is, of course, a villian.  "Syndrome" was rejected as a sidekick by Mr. Incredible years before (having no special powers) and becomes a tech mastermind in revenge.

Mr Incredible loses his job and seeks income when a secret message invites him to "help test weapons".  He sneaks off on a "business trip".  And he and then they get into some trouble involving Syndrome...

I can't describe everything;it would take all night.  But the action never ends, the morals of the story are great, and there are scenes I love over and over. 

Mr Incredible tells his wife (Elastigirl) that he is too weak.  Weak, because he thought he lost her once and he can't handle losing her again...

Elastigirl telling the kids that they aren't going to to die out in the ocean if they just trust her...

Dash learning he can run over water (coolest single scene ever)...

Viola the first time she made the energy field after failures.

Syndrome catching the 4 Incredibles (Jack Jack shows no super ability yet and is back at home) and focuses on Mr Incredible, but then sees Mrs Incredible and the matching uniforms.  "You married Elastigirl"?  Then realizes the 2 kids and says "And you got BUSY"!  Cracks me up every time...

But I can't help thinking they were a homage to the Marvel Fantastic Four.  The leader was strong (like The Thing).  Elastigirl was stretchy (like Mr Fantastic).  Viola was able to go invisible and create force fields (like Invisible Girl), and Dash was able to move real fast like The Torch.

I liked that too.

But mostly, the action is ON nonstop.  If you haven't seen, do.

I can watch that every couple weeks always.  For some years so far...

Not to distract from The Incredibles,  but speaking of scenes in CGI superhero movies, I would like to nominate one scene from an Avengers movie as "funniest".  Loki faces the Hulk and says something like "you can't defeat me, I'm a God".  Whereupon the Hulk grabs him by both feet and beats him back and forth on the floor like me trying to break a baseball bat on concrete in a fit of rage (an allusion, don't worry that never happened).  The resulting immortal Loki is left broken and wheezing noisily and pathetically.  The Hulk walks away muttering "Puny God". 

I laugh at that scene everytime too. 

I DID It!

I actually did it.  I wired the old VCR player into the DVD-Recorder AND got it to show on the TV!

I know it may not sound like much, but it took 2 days and I wasted (maybe) a recordable DVD figuring out how.  And it only took 3 trips to Best Buy (for cables) and a few hours studying the DVD-Recorder manual.

And to be honest, I wasn't sure it was recording right (and it wasn't at first).

See, I tried the DVD recording function and the "clock" stayed on 00:14 with a blinking red light.  That didn't seem good!  So after 15 minutes, I decided to waste the Recordable DVD to check and see if it was recording.  It was, but it was in 3 segments.  Well, those were when I kept hitting the "record" button.  But after 2 days of trying different cable hookups and a few hours of finding the right replay setting (not HDMI1, not HDMI2, not TV...  Component1).

But I found the pattern for my particular equipment!  I'm recording Heavy Metal right now.  I have about 3 dozen worthwhile tapes to record.  Well, yeah, I could buy them on DVD from Amazon, but that's not the point.

I figured something out that was a challenge.

I've read (an seen in science shows on TV) that the best way to not grow mentally old is to take on mental challenges and learn new things.  Well, I sure got a month's worth of new learning the past 2 days, LOL!

Now all I have to do is straighten out all the cables!

I have lots of VHS tapes to record to DVD.  So it means I'm not going to be watching my live TV for a few days, LOL!  Bewt I play a LOT of Scrabbles and Risk for a few days...

New Cosmos TV Show

If you are like me, you worry when you read that some Hollywood type is going to make a movie of your favorite book, or old comic mag, or a remake of an older favorite movie.   I went through the 60s to 80s with bad results from Hollywood.  The first Dune movie was horrid, and I still have horrible thoughts about 'Howard The Duck'.  When the first Marvel Comics movies were announced, I prepared to cringe.  But they came off well, as did The Lord Of The Ring  and I sure never expected they could do THAT right.

Somewhere along the years, Hollywood realized that a good book (or even comic book) could make a good movie "as is".  Even the slight changes in the movies were well done.

So I've come to expect decent adaptations from Hollywood.  But I was still worried when I read that someone was remaking 'Cosmos', the outstanding "Life, The Universe, and Everything" of my younger years.  I was relieved to read that Niel DeGrasse Tyson would be the host.  A decade ago, I thought that he could do that, but doubted it would ever be done.

Some themes can be redone wonderfully.  "West Side Story' was a wonderful adaptation of 'Romeo and Juliet'.  "The Wiz' was a great redo of The Wizard of Oz'.  And I'm sure Movie majors in college would name many "redos" of Shakespeare.  But good "redos" were few and far between.

'Cosmos" appears to be a great "redo", and Mr. Tyson after the first 2 episodes.  Tyson has the best relaxed and yet enthusiastic approach to science since Sagan, he doesn't drown you in professional terminology, and he just makes things sound exciting.

No "redo" would be good if the "redo" was just a copycat of the original.  There are differences between Sagan and Tyson.  Sagan came across as someone talking just to YOU across a pleasant small restaurant table.  Tyson is talking to a small group of amateur science enthusiasts.  The difference is real, but maybe not very important.

I have watched the first 2 episodes of the new 'Cosmos".  I gave been re-watching the original on other evenings.  I can't wait for the series to be completed so that I can add the DVDs to my library.

Favorite Movies

Everyone has some favorite movies.  But I mean the ones you can just watch over and over again.  I suspect they are not ones with a surprise ending.  Who would watch a surprise ending more then once?

My first is "The Incredibles".  Yeah, I know, its animated.  But it's non-stop action.  And I love the idea that superheros get married and have superhero children.  As someone who bought Fantastic Four #1 (and stupidly had no idea it would be worth a lot someday), I like the idea of some real life in comic book heroes.  I love all the characters in "The Incredibles", but a real enjoyment of Dash.

The 2nd is 'Independence Day".  There is no way I cannot cheer for the human race surviving.  Yet we also did in "World of The Worlds" and I find that movie generally boring.  So there is something else about "Independence Day'.  The characters. 

The 3rd is more recent.  "Battleship".  I read the description of it and went "ho hum" (aliens vs a battleship, right). But I was bored one evening and watched it.   Blew my socks off!  I've watched it 4 more times in the past month and have thoroughly enjoyed it each time.  Twice tonight!

The aliens made some sense.  I loved the idea of a hand with only 4 opposable  "thumbs" (all thumbs, LOL).   They seemed pretty good with machinery.  I also liked the chin bristles.  No apparent purpose and no consequence to the movie but it probably has some meaning on their world.  Maybe they were ancient quills that pevented them being eaten.  A little evolution thought in there.  I liked the idea that they came from a dark world (or were nocturnal).  And I liked that those differences weren't explained.  It wasn't related to the outcome of the movie, but it was a nice touch. 

There are also some interesting differences with the aliens.  They move in sudden jumps with their weapons ships on the sea (just imagine their railroad system).  And they were bipeds but had some problems with light.  I'm thinking intelligent cave frogs here. 

I also liked the way the aliens disregarded perceived non-threats.  Anything not aimed directly at them was simply ignored.  I could surmise they were once (and recently) a prey species. 

But they are all great nonstop action movies of a type *I* can watch repeatedly

Movie Thoughts

I sometimes talk about awkward subjects (more often in the past then lately).  Things that might upset some people.   So recent readers may be a bit surprised at this.

I don't watch many movies and the ones I do are usually old.  Not OLD old like 'Wizard Of Oz' but not "new" like the newest movies on HBO.  I watched 'Red Dawn' (1984, I think) tonight.  Well, sometimes the nature and science CDs start to feel repetitive, you know?

The movie is about WWIII when some collection of Soviet-based countries decide to attack the US in the "near future" *hey it was 1984 at the time of the movie*.  It had a decent explanation, not about the reasons, but about the methods. Some Coloradans decide to fight back. 

So some older teenagers/young adults were away from home hunting in the countryside when the attack hit.  With typical hollywood bravado and skill, they fought back.  They got better at it with experience.

No deaths were glorified (much), some of it was difficult, some was sad.  A person had to kill his brother after a betrayal; a young mortally-wounded woman saved her last grenade to take an enemy soldier with her; a sacrifice was made for honor...  One of the best things about 'Red Dawn' was that it ended ambiguously; no resolution to the war is provided. 

 What struck me was the practical lethality. And this is what causing me to write about this tonight. And let me state upfront that I was never a soldier and never had to face that choice of killing another human being.  But if there is something abhorrent about killing someone who is trying to kill you for no really good reason, I don't know it.

The deaths were mostly long-distance rifles and machine-guns and anonymous.  Bombs set off at distances, grenades dropped into tanks, simple ambushes.

I do not like death.  I stopped hunting deer when I killed a lactating doe with an arrow, realizing that there must be a fawn somewhere that would die of starvation slowly.  I cried about that.  I cry when I read of a cat who dies, even though all such deaths are inevitable.   I weep for the innocent...

But I just can't feel the same for those who attack other people.  One of the lines in the movie was something like Enemy: "Why are you killing us"; and the response from the US partisan was "Because this land is mine".  I understand THAT!

Killing in that situation wouldn't cause a single tear from MY eyes...  I wouldn't know the enemy's family (or beloved cats).  My conclusion after watching the movie was "I could do that easily".

Having said that, I am taking some time to decide whether or not to post this.  8:56 pm  Post or not, hmmm...  Could be a lot of objections; could be angry responses from veterans who say I don't know what killing a person is like; could be angry replies from anti-hunting people.  I'll think on it a few hours...

OK post it.  I'll be interested in the responses, if any.

I Watched Two Movies Recently

Which may not seem odd to many of you, but I generally don't watch movies in theaters or at home.  Most are about "human drama" which I don't need more of, action movies wore me out after Rocky and Diehard, and most sci-fi movies weren't faithful to the books or comic strips.  Especially the sci-fi.  Seriously, I'm old enough to have seen mostly bad sci movies when younger.

Most of my life, favorite sci fi comic books or real books have been made into truly dreadful movies.  Have you ever seen "Howard The Duck"?  A thoughtful mature social-satire comic was turned into a Grade D farce.  And the first Dune movie was little better. 

So I've been pleased the past decade or so as sci-fi and comic book characters have been turned into quality movies.  The second version of Dune was suberb, Siderman was very good, and the movie industry has done a decent job since.  They still mess up the characters badly (Lord of the Rings was most accurate).

But while Marvel comic characters have done reasonably well (being written toward college students), DC comic characters have generally not (Superman and Batman being exceptions).  So when I saw that Green Lantern was a movie on TV tonight, I cringed, but need something to watch while eating dinner.  Well, Green Lantern was probably one of the hokiest shallow undeveloped  characters DC comics ever created.  Really a magic ring lets you create anything you can imagine (no origin of the power or anything.  That's 1940s sci-fi stuff...

Imagine my surprise when I enjoyed the movie.  There was actually character development!  There was a theme.  There was even some philosophical discussion (the difference between fearlessness and courage for example).  I enjoyed it.

And there was a scene which I absolutely positively delighted in.  Green Lantern touched down on the balcony of his love interest (like in Superman).  She was amazed at his mystery and power (just like in Superman).  Then she looked at him, sniffed him, and identified him at once (unlike Superman).  I cracked up!  I don't know what writer got that scene in the movie, but I sure hope s/he got a raise and a bonus.  I flashed Two Thumbs Up and decided to watch the rest of the movie.   The rest was Ok, concluding with a reasonably good fight and a clever resolution based on information offerred earlier in the movie.

But I only watched Green Lantern because I had watched an anti-hero movie a few days ago.  Hancock.  If you haven't seen it, Hancock is the only superperson anywhere.  He is no hero.  He is lazy, irresponsible, drunk, stupid, carelessly destructive, and amnesiac.

In fact, he is only named "Hancock" because the hospital told him to put his "John Hancock" on the forms and he thought they knew that was his name (note to foreign readers - a "John Hancock" is a generic term for a signature because the real John Hancock wrote his name so LARGE on the Declaration Of Independence)

I would have thought about the amnesiac part earlier, but I assumed that some OTHER character would come along to straighten him out.  Well, actually I was right about that, but sure not in the way I expected.  There was no character to "straighten him out" by being stronger and wiser" (deus ex machia). 

Hancock goes through life stopping minor crimes by destroyed massive amounts of property just because that's the easiest way to do it, acting like an idiot physically and socially, and living a lonely boring life punctuated by violence.  The citizenry is thinking they might be better off without him but there is nothing they can do about him.  He is invulnerable and seemingly immortal.  He's sort of like the vigilante semi-crazed Batman with Superman powers, except that he doesn't seem to care about crime other than than that he gets to really beat up on the bad guys.

And then, oh so slowly, a past begins to emerge.  He begins to recognize that he is destructive.  The wife of his best friend turns out to be a superperson too.  Not different (ie, "feminine" powers),  to oppose Hancock; identical! 

After the obligatory fight scenes (equal to the last iota of energy) where they seem to destroy a large part of a city (after which it seemed to me that even Hancock looked around appalled), the truth starts to come out. 

Hancock first lived in ancient times, created by ancient deities.  Beings like him were created in pairs, male/female.  As they found each other, their powers waned so that after so many years they could live mortal lives and love, raise families, and finally die (often called the "mortals blessing" in mythology).  Hancock and Mary (the female superpower) were the last of the pairs. 

In a touching scene, she explains all his scars as examples of what happens when the two of them are close and their powers weaken.  Though nearly mortal, he fought off swordsmen in Sumeria (Persia?), saved her a few more times through history.  They always had to separate to regain their powers. 

But the last time they were together, he was injured so badly he was amnesiac, not eve remembering who he or Mary was.  She left him so he could survive, determined to stay away from him forever to keep him alive.

After getting in touch again (Hancock saves Mary's husband's life) the weakness begins again,  Hancock is shot in a minor robbery.  While stopping from (unexplained?) assassins from killing Hancock, Mary is mortally wounded.  Hancock (near death) manages to kill the assasins efficiently (throwing several out of high windows) and Mary's EKG flatlines.  Hancock understands what is happening and leaps out the high window himself to increase the distance between himself and Mary.

He survives the fall (barely) and so jumps further away, gaining strength as he gets further away.  Mary de-flatlines!  Her fingers twitch, she breathes again, she lives.  Her husband Ray (who understands everything by now) rushes to her side with the young daughter.  All is well in her world.

The resolution is basically that Hancock has learned responsibility, purpose, and control in line with his original created intent, and that Mary will have a temporary loving marriage with Ray.  That she and Hancock will have a new relationship in the future, and that Earth will have a superhero. 

I note (cautiously) that Hancock and Mary seem to have not had any children in the times they were together.  There might be an origin movie someday.

But it was sure a good movie.  And having watched only 2 movies in several years,  Those were good ones.

Star Trek

In the past few days, I have watched 2 Star Trek movies I never saw before:  'Nemesis' and 'Star Trek'.  I had never seen them before partly because I do not subscribe to premium movie channels, partly because I do not like going to movie theaters, and partly because I thought the Star Trek franchise had died an ugly death with the TV series 'Star Trek: Enterprise'  (starring Scott "Quantum Leap" Bakula, who I always thought was best cast as a handsome fool - I suspect he is the inspiration for Brewster Rockit in the comic strip).

So I avoided the subsequent Star Trek movies, giving up on them after 'Insurrection' and 'Nemesis'. 

I have been returned to the flock!

The original Star Trek TV series started when I was 16 and well into reading serious and thoughtful sci-fi books (at 12 I had exhausted the library collection of "young adult" sci-fi and the librarian had granted me access to the "adult" books - not that there was anything very shocking about "adult" sci-fi back in 1962).  But by 1966, when Star Trek appeared, I could tell it was different from the sci-fi movies of the time.  I instantly recognized that each episode contained a social statement (perhaps a best example being the [literally] reversely half-black and half white opponents in an episode); and no, I am not really a trekkie who can recall episodes by number, name, or cast of special characters.

I was, like many, saddened when the original Star Trek was cancelled and watched it on syndication for years until the new Star Trek: The Next Generation came on in 1987.  I watched a few and quite frankly, I didn't like the crew.  I ignored it for a couple of years.  Picard wasn't Kirk, Number One wasn't Spock, etc.  Then, from boredom, I assume, I watched a few episodes and realized there was some "there" there.  The characters were more defined, the situations were more complex, and "different" wasn't "worse".  I grew to admire the new characters (and the actors who played them). 

Star Trek: Voyager was a whole new leap, but I accepted the whole premise.  Sci-fi requires the willing suspension of disbelief, and I have never had a problem with that in specific situations for a book, a movie, or a cat blog, LOL!  So given the setup for Voyager, I had no problem and came to admire the series. 

I watched Star Trek: Deep Space Nine with interest, but not much engagement.  It was brilliantly conceived, expertly acted, and had wonderful new characters and enemies.  I LOVED the idea of taking control of an enemy outpost and struggling to manage it.  Just as a personal note, as a minor beauracrat with some responsibilities but no authority, I appreciated the day-to-day problems (though writ larger on a cosmic scale).  I only gave up on that when Captain Sisko became a slightly paranormal messianic figure.  I stuck with Voyager til the end, fascinated with 7 of 9 struggling back to humanity (the counterpoint of Data) and the Borg (truly one of the best opponents of all time).

Then came the disasterous 'Star Trek: Enterprise'.  I tried to follow it, really I did, but I couldn't get past Scott Bakula in 'Quantum Leap".  And I actually enjoyed that show many times.  I just couldn't accept him as a Star Trek Captain.  Ever.

I never saw a Star Trek movie I didn't like.  I can't even pick a favorite.  Each one was pleasing and impressive in its own way.  I will nominate 'The Voyage Home' as the most Trekkie cult movie for all the inside jokes and interactions.  I will nominate 'Star Trek' (2009) as one of the best origin prequels.

One of the things I admire about the Star Trek franchise is the "original" characters.  The original had Spock,  TNG had Data, DS9 had Odo and Quark, Voyager had 7 of 9. 

I will place Spock out of the "unique" characters.  He is too integral to the series to be unique to any one.  So Data and Seven were my favorite unique characters.  My apologies to Dr Picard, but he was limited in his interactions.  Still, if I recall correctly, there was a time in the holodeck when he stuggled to the holodeck door to save a patient and he seemed as fully individual and sentient as anyone.

So, the point of all this is that I will wait for the latest Star Trek movie to show up on the non-subscription TV.  Or I will brave the local movie theater.  Its 50-50. 

SO!  I am sure glad I watched 'Nemesis' and 'Star Trek' this week.

Let's see Star Wars match that...