Welcome to my updated website

Use this space for anything from simple blocks of text to powerful widgets, like our Twitter and Flickr widgets. Learn more.

To access Website Management, hit the 'esc' key or use this Login link.

My email
Blog Index
Powered by Squarespace
This list does not yet contain any items.
This list does not yet contain any items.

Entries in film (7)


AQUAMAN Movie Review


Origin Story?  Yes…kinda.  It starts off giving us the early years of Arthur his dad and mom but then about after 10mins we’re into the modern day.  A few times through the film they do show flashbacks but that’s it.  So don’t worry about this entire film being an origin film.


Enjoyable?  Definitely.  


If you liked Jason Momoa’s character from Justice League but wondered if he could lead a film.  Yup.  His Arthur is a relatable character that understands his weakness and at times displays some great intelligence.  James Wan several times very creatively segued between scenes.  I hope more directors take note.  Everyone one acted well.  The cgi for the money scene is well worth going to see it in 3D(I didn’t see it in 3D but I can tell this film was made with 3D in mind).


Any Surprises?  A Couple.


1.  The villain isn’t killed by the end of the film and another might be redeemed in future films.  

2.  One of the villains(Black Manta) has a very valid reason for hating and wanting to kill Arthur.

3.  I was expecting another sacrifice to happen at the end of the film.

4.  I kept thinking “Okay when is Willem DeFoe going to backstab everyone.” Didn’t happen.

5.  I enjoyed Arthur’s and Mera’s relationship.  Especially considering after reading the comics and no what is in front of them.


Any annoyances?  A couple.  


1. A few jump scares(it makes since since director James Wan has a history in horror)  


2. While for the most part the cgi is great there are a few times it just failed.  But it’s when it fails that’s the most baffling.  It’s not during fight scenes or when we see Atlantis.  It’s when someone is standing on a cliff or people standing on a boat.  Those scenes look like really bad stage sets. 


3. During the getting to know you or falling in love scene the music playing sounded like the lovable whimsical theme that always plays in modern Hallmark romance movies.


4. I think the continuity is a bit messed up after seeing Justice League last year.  Based on this film this is Arthur and Mera’s first meeting but in Justice League they seem to know each other(They even reference Justice League with in their first meeting in this film).


Any easter eggs?  Yes!


I won’t go into spoilers but if you know your comic book covers then that VERY LAST SCENE(before the credits)has Jason Momoa do one of Aquaman’s iconic poses.


Any Negatives?  Not really.  


I’m sure people are going to say that this film follows a formula but so what.  All films follow a formula.  The key is did the filmmakers execute it well and I think Aquaman did.  After seeing “Man of Steel”, “Wonder Woman” and now “Aquaman” I believe Warner Bros(or Warner Media) biggest mistake was releasing Justice League last year.  They should have release all of single films of the Justice League members first and then the team film(hmm I need to write or make a video on that in the future…).  Because it’s evident in these 3 films that time and care was used in making them.  As well as trusting the vision of the director and working with them.  


Hopefully Warner Media has learned it’s lesson.  I can’t wait for the Billy Batson/Captain Marvel Movie now(and no, I’m NEVER CALLING HIM SHAZAM!  To me that will always be the wizards name!!!).


Thar B Spoilers Review: Nutcracker Fantasy (1979) Script

The Nutcracker Fantasy 1979


Last year for the holidays I ventured into the “Realm of the Forgotten” again and talked about the forgotten oscar winning tv animated short film version of “A Christmas Carol”.  How did that work out(shows pathetic view number,  play sad sax music)?  Uh yeah…well since I’m a Taurus and that makes me a bit of a knuckle head I’m going to try again.  This time with “The Nutcracker”!  Well, it makes a bit of sense.  A recent adaptation of the story just came and went in the theaters last month.  Plus when you think nutcracker you think of the holidays right?  This version however is a tad different.  In what way?  How about someone known as the Rag Man turning kids into mice if they don’t go to bed on time?




First some backstory.  Author E. T. A. Hoffman originally wrote a (short) story in 1816 called “The Nutcracker and the Mouse King” which followed a young girl and her toy nutcracker battling a heinous Mouse King as well as said nutcracker whisking her to a enchanted land inhabited by dolls.  In 1882 composer Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky(along with Marius Petipa, Lev Ivanov and Alexandre Dumas(he adapted the story)into a ballet only called “The Nutcracker”).  *In 1882 a ballet was made based off of the story.*


The story has been adapted who knows how many times since then.  The most well known versions done however are probably a segment from “Fantasia”, “Nutcracker The Motion Picture”(1986), Holiday performances held across the world to some of the most eyebrow raising ones were (ex.) “Care Bears Nutcracker Suite”(1988), “The Nutcracker in 3D”(2010), “Barbie in the Nutcracker”(2001) to this version “Nutcracker Fantasy”(1979) and that’s the one that I’m tackling today.


This is an odd take on the story.  It uses some to the framework of the initial tale and them makes a run for it.  Also this is a stop motion animated film.


The film opens with an adult Clara recounting the tale(play some narration).  Welp!  I guess I know that she’s going to make it to the end then!  We’re introduced immediately to “The Evil Ragman” and it looks like he graduated from “CREEPER SCHOOL” with honors!  He creeps around looking for any kids that stay up too late and turns them into mice and then tosses them into his sack.  A couple questions: 1. Why ONLY KIDS?  2.  What, are the parents just fine with this practice?  What happens when they come in the morning with their kids missing?  Are they just going to shrug their shoulders and say “That brat got just what he deserved!”?  Also where is the FBI, MIB or BPRD when you really need them?! 


(02:47) I find it interesting that they call this Nutcracker Fantasy.  Isn’t that redundant?   Of course it’s a fantasy.  Since when have living toys and magical creepers not been a fantasy(ohh…yeah…)?  Anna is told to go to bed by here aunt but she’s too excited because her childhood friend Fritz is coming to visit tomorrow.  (03:32)It’s around this time I’ve noticed a couple of things.  One, Anna’s image of Fritz looks like a bishonen character from Utena!  Two, the design of all of the characters is off putting.  I didn’t know why at first but now I do.  No one blinks their eye’s!  Every character has the same thousand mile stare.  There is also a lack of movement with the faces.  Because of this the characters have a disturbing feel to them.  I haven’t heard a lot about this film but what I have heard is that it’s crazy.  I’m thinking the appearance of the puppets has something to do with that.


Well after Clara claims there ain’t no Ragman and I’m adult she’ll stay up as long as she wants(play lonely island song)she then like a scaredy cat she hops in bed and closes her eyes(?)!(04:31)  Wait, why after almost 5 mins did the animators decide now was the time to show animation?  Sigh, you know if I keep asking questions this review will be one hour long.  Which isn’t good since the film is only 1 hour 13 mins long!


Over the next few mins Uncle Drosselmeyer does his best ragman impersonation to creep out Clara, argues with his wife and just acts weird.  It’s here where Clara get’s the titular nutcracker(why was he shot creepily at a dutch angle at (07:00)?!)during which Uncle Drosselmeyer explains that while he is a clock maker his true love is doll making(he also states that something isn’t right about the doll he gave her).  Clara’s reaction to this is your 8th and 9th nightmare for tonight.  What’s worse about this horrifying image is they reuse this shot about 5 seconds later(08:09)!  After Uncle Drosselmeyer acts creepy one more time Clara falls asleep via a 1970’s rock ballad (09:30).  The song is pretty good(even though it explains everything that is happening on the screen at the time!) Unfortunately the song ends and Clara wakes up noticing that some rotten mice just kidnapped her doll.


She very stilted-ly chases after them.  She saves the doll but it looks like the mice got away and then this happens(12:10).  What the hell is going on?!  Who is this?(play We are siamese if you please)  Okay just how far are we into this film.  13:10(ding sound effects)  I’m not sure I’m going to make it the next hour.  I know there both different types of film but I’m starting to get “Abar The First Black Superman” flashbacks now.  Okay so I don’t know if I’m tripping or if the film is here.  This, these ladies(?) order the mice to get the doll and suddenly the nutcracker comes to life and this leads to the laziest most anticlimactic fight in history(13:35).  During this Clara falls asleep and wakes up with the nutcracker gone.  So we’re not going to see the conclusion to the fight then?  Sigh, fine!


(15:08)  Okay with the playing of the nutcracker and the aunt walking like this towards Clara I defy anyone to tell me this isn’t a horror film!  It seems Clara is sick now so the aunt goes to get a doctor and I really didn’t think I’d see the day were the Filmation and Hanna Barbera practice of limited animation would make it’s way to stop motion but, man(16:17)!  So anyway Clara falls asleep and she seems to be having visions from the previous night.  She climbs into the downstairs clock when she thinks she sees her uncle(18:00).  She continues to chase his image until she winds up in a castle I think and in a room with pictures of her.  A bunch of women and a king greet her and says that she’s his daughter named Mary(22:11).  The king doesn’t take her presence too well.  Okay the king gives Clara the lowdown about what’s happened.  That 2 headed rat witch thing from earlier is name Morphea and she went to war with the king.  He lost because he soldiers are wind up toys and they unwound themselves.  DESIGN FLAW!!!  How did he not see that happening from the beginning?!(24:30)  As part an agreement the Queen insisted on an arranged marriage with her son and his daughter.  He said NAH and she very sensibly turned his daughter into a mouse and put her to sleep to this day.  (25:43) Okay so after seeing Fritz as a soldier to the doll kingdom Clara is just not going to say or do anything?  Really?  Oh, brother.


Then for the next 2 mins what I can only describe as nonsensical nonsense occurs.  (27:58)After a bunch of random things happening finally the Russian stereotype states that he has a plan to wake the princess.  AH!  So that’s what’s supposed to be going on?  Then what was all of the dancing and a robot cat chasing a toy mouse for?!  Was there an actual script to this movie or was everything done in a stream of consciousness way?  Don’t believe me?  For the next several minutes we have characters wanting to chop off peoples heads, say sonnets, do explosive experiments and run around kissing everyone in order to wake up and change the princess back to normal(32:00)!  


This silliness goes own for about another 2 minutes and the kings response to these so called wise men plans?  “There is no hope.”(32:57)  That is probably the saneness thing said in this film so far!  Okay so we’re 35mins in I think we now finally have the plot for the film.  To return the princess back to normal.  One question though, where is the Ragman?  He’s been gone for over 30mins.  If he plays no part in the story they why introduce him as the main antagonist in the first place?!  Later on Clara is seen walking in the dark streets when she is acosted by a creepy man in black asking “What are you doing out here little girl?”(35:57)  When even a creeper is questioning your sanity then you really know you have problems!  Fortunately he doesn’t do anything to her but after she tells him the story of the princess he tells her to find the gypsy fortune teller and say “Queen of Time” to her(37:30)duh, Duh DUH!!! Uh, no I don’t know what that phrase is supposed to do.


Clara greets the Queen of Time as well as some choppy editing!  The Queen says that she might not be able to to help her and then shows Clara Morpheme and the mice.  Their having a ball and she promises her son(?) that he will marry the princes.  The boy then proceeds to french a picture of the princess!  Ewwwwwww…!(40:19)  Okay so we have about 33 mins left in the film and still haven’t seen the Ragman return.  What was the point of him then?!  Well anyway Clara finds out she has to break Morphea’s “shell of darkness” to break the curse.  Later on Clara tells Franz(who she seems to be not surprised that he’s here)the info so he’s off to war now(43:03).  I know the intent for the end of this scene is supposed to be an emotional goodbye the the acting is as wooden and choppy as the marionettes!  


(44:50)We then get a scene with the King’s army getting wound up to go into battle.  I think the king is off his rocker.  He admitted earlier that his troops lost before because they became unwound.  Now he’s doing the same thing again?  Plus it looks like their made of wood, KINDLING!  How successful of an army can you have if an entire regiment can be taken out by the “little match girl”?  Elsewhere Queen Morphea and the rat pack are having a grand ole time.  The party is intercut awkwardly with the nutcrackers marching.  I believe someone forgot to point in their marching theme at the 45:25 mark.  That’s a weird way to drink alcohol but hey whatever works right?


The Nutcrackers finally arrive and begin their assault(46:15).  Their trying to blow up the shadow shell.  Okay I know it’s supposed to be industructible but is it wise for the queen just to have it out in the open like that?  The mice make a successful counter attack by using recycled animation to knock the nutcrackers down.  So let me get this straight.  The kings army prior to this film was beaten by coming unwound, is losing here because someone can tap them and make them fall over and a lit match could take them all out?  Why is the king still in power?  IMPEACH HIM PLEASE!  The only way he could come up with a more pathetic plan is with all of his soldiers were made of cheese!   Look at this nonsense!  Now a human just got defeated by getting tripped.  It’s as if he doesn’t have any object permanence(48:05).  So what is Franz big comeback plan?  To rewind the nutcrackers.  Is everyone in the Kings army this stupid(yep!)?


Okay just what the hell is going on here?  I think Morphea just unleashed a cat and is surprised when it attacked her and the mice.  Clara sneaks into the palace and Franz takes out the shell but Morphea transforms him into a nutcracker for the rest of his life(the transformation takes about a minute for some reason) and the princess is turned back to normal(49:48).  Whew, that’s a lot how long did that scene take?  What under a minute?  This movie isn’t playing around.  


Sometime later at the kings palace the princess is dancing with herself in front of a mirror(51:00).  Everyone seems to be happy but uh, Franz is an unmoving nutcracker and didn’t you earlier Mr. King say that if he defeated Morphea and turned Princess Mary back that he would marry her? (51:50) Okay now the king mentions him but wonders where he is.  So basically once Mary turned back the king had a party before the general of his army returned and give them any news of what happened? (face palm) The film has 22mins left so I’m going to assume that the 2ndary or 3rdary plot is Clara trying to get Franz turned back to normal.  Clara returns and gives everyone the sad new about Franz.  Princess Mary doesn’t take it well and refuses to marry a doll(wait aren’t there real people that have married dolls?).  Clara tries to convince Mary by saying “don’t knock it until you try it”.  Mary counters with “Well why don’t you marry it?”  (52:59)Huh, so did this film inspire millions of kids and Pee Wee Herman with that phrase?  


The princess then proceeds to go I’m to pretty for all of this now everybody let’s go back to the party!  So Clara and and inanimate Franz are on their own.  Just how is Clara supposed to get back to the real world?  By WAKING UP! (Shhh you!)(54:24)  Clara makes her way back to the “Queen of Time” to help Franz but she just tells Clara to look into yourself and then disappears.  Ugh…thanks for nothing lady!  Then for about 4 seconds we get a doo-wop chorus?!(56:00)  For the next 2 mins Clara wonders in the dark why some I think 1970’s folk music plays.  Also one of the injured mice is stalking her?  After getting minimal help from a puppeteer (who refers her to see the time keeper)she meets the time keeper who tells her love will save Franz.  She doesn’t get it(01:01:30).  In order for him to be transformed back a sacrifice must be made.  “Equivalent Exchange”(Did Hiromu Arakawa get inspiration from this film?!)?


After learning that only true loves sacrifice can transform Franz back this happens(01:03:00).  Okay I’m not sure what’s going on here but I will admit the non stop motion animation looks impressive.  It’s the most creative use of animation I’ve seen in this film.  It also reminds me of the experimental use in the animation medium in the 1970’s.  This scene would mean more to me if I believed in Clara’s love for Franz or in their relationship in general.  Clara is then transported to the land of the happy times and for the first time since the opening of the film music from the ballet is played(or rather a variation of it)(01:05:00).  Are they about to get married.  This was all a dream because Clara wakes up with that gimpy mouse trying to snatch the nutcracker away from her(01:06:30).  That mouse is Morphea’s son and he wants to kill Franz.  So is Morphea dead then?  After a brief wrestling match Clara sacrifices herself to save Franz but she has that glow and this happens(01:08:00 - 01:08:31).  She then proceeds to wake up.  This was all a fever dream.  Fritz arrives and Uncle quotes Walt Disney “Dreams can come true”(or paraphrase).  After a couple of birds make out the film ends with Fritz and Clara staring awkwardly into each others creepily dead eyes and they lived happily ever after.


Wait! Franz looks to be a teenager(about 16-17) and Clara is probably about 8-10.  Quick somebody call the cops!  Also Where was the Ragman?!  You could have cut him out and nothing would’ve been lost.






The film tries to do something different with the Nutcracker story.

The film has good to great actors involved.

Some of the songs were pretty good.  Especially when their sung by Christopher Lee which reminds me - 

Christopher Lee is the “real” MVP of this film.  Between singing and doing voices for multiple characters this made the film bearable to sit thru.  That said he wasn’t perfect.  He didn’t differentiate his voices enough between each role.  He sounded like Christopher Lee in every one.  

Some of the effects and action scenes are good.



Bad acting.  Stiff and wooden(NATCH!) many characters lack any personality or feeling.


Choppy editing.  OY! Repeating footage as well as awkward cuts in scenes were head scratching.  Did the filmmakers run out of money or time for this film?

Doesn’t follow the original story or ballet.  Which wouldn’t be a problem except it’s obvious they then didn’t have enough story to make for an entire film


Bad writing & storytelling. Padding out a barely more than an hour long film.  It looks like they only wanted to use the nutcracker as a framework and nothing else but then realized that they didn’t have any idea to make up the rest of the film’s running time.


Bad character models, design and animation.  There is a creepy feeling to the film some of which I’m sure is intended but also unintended.  The blank thousand mile stare.  The overly stiff movements.  The fact that nearly everyone has the same face/expression ALL THE TIME!  I asked myself why did this fail but the Rankin Bass shows/films succeed?  For one the Rankin Bass have a sense of fun and wonder.  Their stories are paced out well.  Also the design of their puppets are more expressive.  The characters are still stiff(they are wood after all) but with there overly exuberant movements and felt or cotton or cloth that makes up their mustaches and eyebrows they move around giving them a feeling of humanity.  That’s it!  This film lacks humanity.  Also there are times when characters are supposed to be talking out loud but their mouths never move.


Recommend:  Oddly, Yes.


This is a terrible film however I do recommend it for only 1 type of person.  The person that that claims that there isn’t any truly strange, weird or bad holiday films then they need to see this.  I think it really says something that the studio that made this since then hasn’t made another stop motion film.  Oh yeah that reminds me do you know what studio made this film?  SANRIO.  If that sounds vaguely familiar that maybe because their the company that puts out “HELLO KITTY”.  The mind boggles that a company that has that as their mascot made this.  But maybe it shouldn’t.  I did some checking and have found out that some of their other films around this time(their 2D animated) are a bit weird but in a way completely different from this film.


HALLOWEEN (2018) Film Review

A direct sequel to the 1978 original. Odds are if your seeing this you’ve seen the original.  This film eliminates all of the sequels as well at the 2007 remake.  Overall a good film but here are some things I noticed about it.  It’s executively produced by Jamie Lee Curtis and John Carpenter.  Once I saw that I knew this was going to be taken more seriously than the previous sequels.  During parts of the film long tracking shots are done.  For about half of the film there are times we see Michael as a out of focus shape.  I see what you did there movie.  Updates to John Carpenters musical score was done.  Personally they didn’t do that much for me.  They were okay but if this is what the result is going to be I’d prefer the filmmakers to use some of the original 1978 score and then for the rest of the film come up with something more interesting.  


For the most part I liked the characters and story.  The only issue I had was with Ally’s portion when she was at the dance.  It was awfully conveniently that she lost her phone the way that she did to setup for what happens in the 3rd part.  Considering what it was going to lead to she didn’t have to lose it.  Also it was pretty predictable what was going to happen to the good friend after the misunderstanding after the dance.  


A couple negatives I have is one there is a clip that is in the trailer that isn’t in the film.  In the trailer the character is sneaked upon by Michael and you assume that they might get killed there.  What happens to them in the film tells me that there must’ve been some heavy reshoots because it introduces a plot point almost out to nowhere.  Which leads me to my second problem(mild spoiler) the new doctor.  Jamie Lee Curtis character jokes that he is a 2nd Loomis.  He really isn’t.  He’s more of an anti Loomis.  What he does right before the 3rd act took me out of the film. It didn’t need to be there.  That sequence added nothing to the film.


Sigh I don’t want to really spoil the film so I’ll try to dance around it a bit but a problem I have with the film is that Michael Myers isn’t the only villain in the film.  There’s a twist villain in this film.  Good gravy I thought this was just a thing in recent cgi animated films(PIXAR and DISNEY ANIMATION I’m looking at you!!!).  This added nothing.  I’m sure that people are going to say “Oh, no your wrong!  There were hints cleverly dropped!”  Uh, no.  Yes the character in question was inquisitive about Michael but that doesn’t mean that they would still do what they did.  It came out of nowhere.  Twist villains are a problem because their a lazy story telling devices.  When their done it’s as if the film-makers are saying Welp! we don’t have any other ideas of what to do.


I don’t want to come across as being completely negative so here are some positives.  The film was directed well.  There is good comedy in the film(then again one of the writers is Danny McBride so…).  The only black character in the film(a sheriff I think) 1. isn’t the first to die and 2. doesn’t die at all.  AMAZING!  It’s well acted especially by Jamie Lee Curtis.  She comes off well as someone that has suffered enormous PTSD to the point that it’s most destroyed her and her families lives.  I do find it a bit funny that everyone calls her crazy and thinks she’s nuts for being as over prepared for a possible incident BUT in the end she proves them right.  It’s like that old joke: “I’m not paranoid if someone IS coming after me.”.  


The way the action and gore happened was interesting.  First it seemed to be all practical (thank you film-makers!)and it wasn’t over indulgent.  There were times when a murder happened but it didn’t all occur onscreen.  I wonder during the reshoots did they have to show restraint because of the MPAA or was this a creative choice.  Hopefully it was the latter.  Personally I would’ve been fine if the action scenes(murder)were all shown onscreen.  With the way the action was done I can see parents taking their kids to see the film.  Actually I did see this in my theater.  Question what is Jamie Lee Curtis made out of?  Most of the victims die after a couple of slams by Michael but she takes a ton more and keeps on trucking.  It’s actually a bit funny when you see some of the hits she takes(I think that was the point during some of the scenes?).  I’m glad to see Judy Greer in a film finally were she has more to do.  Her character does something to Michael that put a smile on my face.


Overall a really good film.  I may have to see it again because I didn’t see it in the best condition. After seeing it again I may like it even more.  The film is well under 2 hours(maybe 1 hour 38 mins?)it doesn’t overstay it’s welcome.  The film ends in a way where there could be a sequel or this could just be the final part.


If you liked the 1978 film then check this out. Heck if you like the sequels then check this out as well.  However if the only Halloween films you’ve seen are the Rob Zombies ones then don’t see this film until you re-watch the original otherwise it won’t make any sense.



1.  Proud Mary

2.  Black Panther

3.  Early Man

4. Isle Of Dogs

5.  Avengers Infinity War

6.  Deadpool 2

7. Solo A Star Wars Story 

8. Teen Titan Go! To The Movies

9. Smallfoot

10. Venom

11. Halloween

12. Maquia: When the Promised Flower Blooms

13. Spider-Man Into The Spider-Verse

14. Aquaman





Well, this is better.  The difference between this and the teaser trailer is huge.  I felt the the teaser trailer seemed unfinished a and was basically just a couple characters running around and the studio saying: “Eh, the sfx would be added in later” and I was right.  I do wonder why SONY decided to release this trailer now?  Were they confident with the footage they have now?  Or are they trying to bandwagon on any good will “AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR” will have this week(also since Spidey will play a part in that film even though in the Venom universe(ugh)I don’t believe Spider-Man exists).  


Well let’s look at some pro’s & con’s of the trailer.  




We get a better idea of the story.  Reporter Eddie Brock is investigating the nefarious dealings of the “LIGHT” company.  They have symboite’s and want to use them to help spearhead human evolution(I don’t think they know what evolution means).  They try to prevent Eddie reporting on this and he get’s one of the symboite’s inside of him wackiness ensues.


The Look of Venom.  I’m okay with the look for 2 reasons.  


1. I liked the look of Venom in Spider-Man 3.  So this film resembling that one isn’t a problem for me.  

2. While it does look unfinished the film comes out in about 5 months so I’m sure the effects of the suit will continued to be worked on.


Using aspects of the comic.  Well really only one thing.  The Light company.  They play a big part in Venom’s and the symboite’s history.  Adding them in as the main villain is a good idea if you’re not going to add in any other part of Spider-Man’s universe.


The feel of the trailer…at first. For about the first 45 seconds this looked and felt like a horror film.  That would actually work because when Venom first appeared in comics his appearance was shrouded in darkness and there was a horror movie feel to his presence.




After about 45 seconds this looks like a generic action film.  Segueing from the horror feel of the 1st half of the trailer to the action of the 2nd half felt haphazard.  It looks like this becomes a chase film.  Which I like and which sounds good however if the film-makers utilize all of Venom’s powers then that means he can camouflage and even turn invisible.  That makes chasing him difficult and usually a pointless endeavor.


The design & creation.  The lack of the white spider on his body(which granted could come later)and that ridiculous tongue.  I’ve never liked it in the comics.  It always came off as too silly to me.  Most people probably won’t remember this but that flapping tongue was there in his first appearance in the comics or the first time he battled Spider-Man in The Amazing Spider-Man #300.  The rumors about Peter Parker existing in this films universe have been all over the place.  Sometimes we’re told he isn’t in the film other times we’re told he makes a cameo.  Either way Peter won’t play a role in Venom’s origin.  Which will make major parts of of Venom’s identity questionable.  Here’s what I mean.  Venom’s powers are based off of Peter’s(spider-sense, wall crawling, agility, etc.)  The symboite and the race that it comes from in the comics replicates whatever abilities it’s host has.  So without a spider-man how will the film explain why Venom has the powers that he has?  Will all the symboites(because it looks like there are going to be at least a couple more in the film)have the same powers?  Will the other symboite’s spin off from Venom just as Carnage did in the comics?


Story and sequel potential.  The story doesn’t look that interesting.  Also where can it go if Venom is the only meta-human in on the planet?  No one will be able to take him down.  Will Venom’s villains in possible sequels be other symboite’s?  Like Carnage, Hybrid or Anti-Venom?  Sony is trying to make other films with Spider-Man characters but have them exist in their own universe.  This stymies their growth as a franchise.  If they never run into Spider-Man or even each other they lose a bit of their uniqueness.  A big part of what makes these characters great is how they affect Peter Parker and his larger universe.  With the way Sony is working with these Spider Man “spin-offs” is the equivalent of making a Lex Luthor film and having Superman never existing in it.  Or better yet it’s like having a “JOKER” tv show but Batman doesn’t exist…oh wait that’s “GOTHAM”.


Despite my initial and current feelings on this property I will still give it a chance.  After all the director Ruben Fleischer did direct “Zombieland”(well he also directed “Gangster Squad”).  The writers wrote “Beautiful Girls” and “High Fidelity”  but they also they did “Kangaroo Jack”, “Fifty Shades of Grey” & “Gangster Squad”.