Best Animated Short - 1931/1932

Happy New Year, everypony! Hope it's a good one.

Let's kick off 2014 with my 81st - and final - review...at least until the Oscar nominations are announced on January 16, and there's a new set of five films to review*. After that I'll be doing my darndest to attend one of the showings of the nominated shorts and reviewing those. But for now, this marks the end of the reviews that have dominated my life for a whole 22 months.

*My predictions have somewhat changed since I posted about the shortlist almost two months ago. I talked to Steve Segal, the professor of my History of Animation course a year ago. He had attended one of the screenings and had only raves about The Missing Scarf, which certainly looked interested but the design seemed a bit too new for the old-fashioned Academy. However, he described the film as being surprisingly deep, and as we saw from A Morning Stroll two years ago, new fangled technology has never stopped a film from being nominated. So perhaps we will see The Missing Scarf. I've added it to the predictions, replacing Hollow Land. Of course, almost everybody over at Gold Derby is predicting a nomination for Room on the Broom. It may be populist enough to grab a nomination. Eh oh well.

Read more »

Super Fun Trailer for "The Lego Movie"

A new trailer for The Lego Movie is finally here… And boy is it a lot of fun!



Yep, this film is going to be huge. The trailer's jokes, however, are hit-and-miss for me. The funny jokes, fortunately, are really funny. The others? Kind of "eh" on those at the moment, but the action looks great and the world they've built… Everything just looks amazing. It'll make up for any lame jokes in the finished film, but like I said, the funniest parts of the trailer were really, really funny. I especially loved the end bit with the Batmobile and Wonder Woman's invisible plane. (On a side note, this will probably be better than the actual Justice League movie, sadly…)

It also just amazes how they did this in computer animation, yet it has a stop-motion look and feel to it. I remember people were noting this when the teaser came out earlier this year, but I have to say, Animal Logic and Warner Bros. Animation outdid themselves here. This is Warner Bros. Animation's "restart" film of sorts, and it looks like it'll finally rocket the distributor into the feature animation world. It makes one wonder, "Why didn't they think of this before?"

Thankfully they didn't in some regards, because a Lego movie could've gone either way, say, 5-10 years ago. It seems like they got the perfect team to pull this off. Of course, I was already looking forward to this and the cool teaser only gave us a fraction of what kind of potential this thing has… This trailer outright shows how big and awesome this film can be.

What do you think of the trailer? Sound off below!

Non-Nominated Highlight - Porky in Wackyland (1938)

So in my last review I mentioned how Leon Schlesinger allegedly boycotted the Oscars sometime in his career as the head of the Termite Terrace animation department. This is mostly speculative as I've never actually read anything that confirmed if or when he did it*. However, it seems pretty likely for me considering the fact that Warner Bros. received a nomination in the very first Best Animated Short category in 1932/33, and then didn't get another one until Detouring America in 1939.

*but then again I've never read an official biography of Schlesinger or any of his animators recently.

Of course that doesn't mean that Warner Bros. hadn't come out with any good films in that time period. Far from it, that period was full of great films: I Haven't Got a Hat in 1935, I Love to Singa in 1936, and Porky's Duck Hunt in 1937. Yet of the Warner Bros. cartoons from the 1930s, none was better than the Porky Pig masterpiece Porky in Wackyland.

Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1939

Ah, 1939, the last year of the Depressing '30s. It is the year that Germany invaded Poland, thereby turning what had previously been a messy conflict going on in China into a true World War. It was the year a young kid named Ted Williams burst onto the scene fresh from the beaches of San Diego and led the league in RBIs while blasting 31 home runs, but not even he can help the Red Sox topple the Yankees, who went on to win their fourth straight pennant en route to their fourth straight World Series title over Willard Hershberger's Reds.

But for most people, 1939 is the pinnacle of Hollywood moviemaking. Oh, there have been several other great years. 1994 was a particularly good year (Pulp Fiction, Forrest Gump, The Shawshank Redemption), and so were 1951 (A Streetcar Named Desire, The African Queen), 1959 (Ben-Hur, North By Northwest, Some Like It Hot), 1969 (Midnight Cowboy, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid), 1974 (Chinatown, The Godfather Part II), 1976 (Rocky, Network, Taxi Driver), but for most film fanatics 1939 was tops.

Read more »

Non-Nominated Highlight: You Ought to Be in Pictures (1940)

So last week we talked about the 1940 Oscar race which was between two MGM films and a Warner Bros. film, with MGM's The Milky Way coming out on top. Previously, I had covered that year's Oscar race as part of the History of Animation class whose responses I used during the prior hiatus from November through February. The question asked about why Disney was not nominated, and one of the reasons was that because the other studios were putting out films that eclipsed that of Disney after Disney ended the Silly Symphonies. In it I specifically cited four films from the other two major animation studios, MGM and Warner Bros. Three of those four films were the ones nominated for the Oscar and that I wrote about in my review last week. And yet the best of all four films may very well the one that was left off the final ballot: Warner Bros.'s self-referential classic You Ought to Be in Pictures.

Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1940

Well, we're in the year of 1940. It's not quite as memorable as 1941, but it's got its moments. One significant moment was the suicide of Willard Hershberger. Hershberger was a catcher with the Cincinnati Reds. You'd think that somebody that's played baseball at the major leagues would be set for life, but you'd be dead wrong. There is nothing more mentally stressful than a career in professional sports. Think about it, you spend essentially your whole life dedicating yourself to a sport, where you dominated at virtually every level. Then you get thrust into a work environment where all of a sudden your best may not be good enough, and even if it is and you do get to the majors, you'd have to maintain your level of performance lest somebody else takes your job. And you don't have anything to fall back on. Those that are not on solid ground mentally usually do something drastic once their careers end.

History is littered with players that decided to end their lives: Catcher Marty Bergen killed himself and his family in 1900. Popular young star Win Mercer drank gas to end his life. A pitcher named Pea Ridge Day slit his throat after an unsuccessful operation on his pitching arm. And Christy Mathewson's brother Nicholas shot himself in the head from the stresses of trying to maintain his studies while playing professional ball. It's a brutal track record.

Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1941

1941, what a memorable year. It was the year Ted Williams hit a walk-off home run in the All Star game, and went on to hit .406 to become the last hitter to bat .400 in a year they qualified for the batting title. Yet his accomplishment went mostly unnoticed as fellow outfielder Joe DiMaggio stole most of the thunder with his legendary 56-game hitting streak. He later played a role in the Yankees' Game 4 comeback in the World Series that started after Mickey Owen couldn't get his hands on Hugh Casey's spitball. It was the year that Lou Gehrig lost his battle against what may or may not be the disease that bears hi name today. And of course the "date which will live in infamy" happened in 1941.


Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1942

1942. For all intents and purposes, many Americans probably believe that World War II began around this time. Never mind that there has been fighting in Europe for three years and in Asia for over a decade, but 1942 is significant for being the first full year of involvement by the United States of America, and that's when stuff got real. Because America!

Yeah...I'm sure that's how the Europeans and Asians view Americans. Oh well.

Read more »

A Rising Cinematic Universe

Marvel Studios certainly set the bar high when they took a major risk and went all out with this idea of a shared cinematic universe, something that wasn't attempted before. Not too long after the first phase kicked off with a bang with the release of Iron Man in May of 2008, The Walt Disney Company acquired Marvel and the film studio that happened to have the cinematic rights to almost everything... With a massive corporation backing them, the studio was able to pursue that crazy-ambitious plan and really go through with it.

The Avengers was a resounding success, breaking records left and right. Audiences showed up because the idea of seeing all of these superheroes together (as opposed to an established team like the X-Men) on the big screen was unthinkable many years ago. It's only going to expand from there, and audiences and fans alike are already excited. Iron Man 3 was no underperformer, as Marvelmania is in full swing... Now who really wants a piece of that?

Warner Bros. of course, who owns the rights to DC's characters and stories. Warner Bros. struck gold with Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy, in which the first installment - Batman Begins in 2005 - was a means to keep the caped crusader a viable property for the studio whilst re-inventing him in a rather bold manner. The film was darker than the previous Batman films, and happened to delve into the psychology of Bruce Wayne whilst serving up a lot of action and thrills. It was a miracle, especially after the Joel Schumacher Batman films that nearly killed the franchise's reputation.

At the same time, they wanted to make Superman viable again. Superman Returns, with X-Men and X2 director Bryan Singer attached, was met with mixed reviews and ultimately underperformed at the box office, despite the film having some good word of mouth. It's either a sore spot for some, or an okay film at best. Nolan's Batman film got a great sequel which exploded at the box office in the summer of 2008, becoming the highest grossing comic book movie of all time back then and also becoming the 5th highest grossing film of all time. This was before the $1 billion mark was easy to pass.

With that, Warner Bros. saw that Marvel was firing up their cinematic universe. A long-gestating Green Lantern film adaptation was fast-tracked in 2009 when Warner Bros. gave Casino Royale director Martin Campbell the keys to the car, but with executives compromising the script and so much getting cut, Green Lantern limped to theaters in the summer of 2011 with a bloated budget and terrible critical reception. This start to the DC Cinematic Universe did not go as planned, despite Ryan Reynolds' portrayal of Hal Jordan. While Iron Man literally dashed out of the gate 3 years earlier, Green Lantern tripped out and fell on its face.

It was then time to start over, so Zack Snyder was attached to a fresh new take on Superman. Dubbed Man of Steel, it would be the second attempt to jumpstart the DC Cinematic Universe. But like Green Lantern, it was rushed into production, this time because of a rights issue over the origin story of Superman. Work began promptly, as Christopher Nolan was finishing his third and final entry in his Batman trilogy which would open last summer, so he was became executive producer. As this film was being readied, we heard about DC's plans to compete with Marvel. After The Avengers opened, the Justice League film project was immediately announced for a 2015 release, the year the sequel to The Avengers comes out. Again, rushing. Rumors covered everything: Who would play Batman? Will Nolan's trilogy be part of this universe? Will they do this first and then solo films? Or will they make a Man of Steel sequel first, then the Justice League?

Man of Steel came out two months ago and the response? Well it wasn't so hot on the critical side. It wasn't Green Lantern bad, but it wasn't good. Unlike Green Lantern, the film was a huge hit. To date, it has grossed nearly $290 million at the domestic box office and over $640 million worldwide. Rumors immediately made the rounds, and soon we heard about their DCCU plans once more.

Now, the plan is this... Man of Steel's successor, which is set to open in the summer of 2015, will feature Batman. All signs point to it being "Superman VS. Batman" rather than "Superman and Batman". It's also going to take cues from Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, and Snyder is going to direct it. Screenwriter David S. Goyer will handle the script, just like he did with the first one. Then after that? Rumor has it that we'll be getting a film based on the Flash in 2016 and the Justice League in 2017...

Fellow Disney fanatic and comic book lover PJ Campbell offers what he thinks will be the story of the follow-up to Man of Steel...

"The one thing you can guarantee about 'Batman vs. Superman: World's Finest', that they made abundantly clear with the dialogue excerpt that Snyder chose to announce the film, Batman and Superman are going to be at odds, and those two are definitely going to throw down. I think what we're going to see is that Wayne Enterprises has teamed with LexCorp to rebuild Metropolis after the devastating fight in Man of Steel...

Bruce will see Superman as a threat, who will cause much more damage, and will decide to put him in his place. That'll cause the two to be at odds, as Superman comes to terms with what he did, even though he sees what he did as saving civilians. I think that the public will be at unrest with him as well, aided by Lex Luthor, who begins a smear campaign against Superman. This will be the catalyst which eventually brings Lex and Superman's famous rivalry, and where Superman and Batman will gain their mutual respect and understanding for each other. This will be the movie that absolutely puts the DC Cinematic Universe together, so we'll see and feel a lot of world building around all these characters and events. Expect nods to some of the other heroes in the DCU as well."

Initially, I had very little excitement for this film. Almost none, actually. I wasn't a fan of Man of Steel, as I felt there was more wrong than right with the finished product. I also firmly believed that Warner Bros. was going about the DC Cinematic Universe the wrong way, and before that 'World's Finest' announcement, how could one not?

All you heard were rumors of WB firing up a Justice League movie, and no plans to make any solo films leading up to the big team-up. Then we heard rumors of WB fast-tracking a Man of Steel sequel for a summer 2014 release, followed by the Justice League film in 2015. Earlier in the year, rumors said that it would pit the heroes against Darkseid... Already jumping the gun! Now it seems like Warner Bros. may have something going here.

But my major concern was what the people behind it would do. Namely director Zack Snyder and writer David S. Goyer. I feel that Snyder is not a good director (though in terms of his visual pedigree, that's another story) and that Goyer only comes up with good ideas, but he can't organize a working screenplay. Man of Steel, in my opinion, had multiple problems. Multiple. But I'll elaborate on two, since the others may be redeemed... We'll get to that later!

#1. The tone...

Now I may sound like a broken record here, but the tone of this film was a serious problem for me. I for one didn't like the desaturated color scheme, the angst, the moodiness and just how serious the film tried to be. Now I'm not expecting this to be silly, lightweight fun. I expected something fun, but also epic, dramatic and bursting with great, potent themes. I didn't get that...

I got something angsty and relentlessly depressing. Why the dour score? Why the lack of color? I couldn't have fun with the action scenes... It just looked and felt like a depressing music video. See, I think Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy did "dark, edgy and brooding" the right way. Batman's atmosphere lends itself to a moodier visual and audial approach, but Nolan's films didn't harp on it. At times, all three of his films were genuinely thrilling and fun. Hans Zimmer's score was a mix of dark, bombastic, somber and enigmatic. Zimmer's Man of Steel score was, in my opinion, all depressing and mopey.

But the tone was made all the more worse by the lack of character development. Despite the doom and gloom, I couldn't feel for the characters...

#2. The story structure and character development...

Who was Clark Kent, really? What values did he grow up with? We see Pa Kent as a rather cold jerk, who tells his son that he should've let his classmates drown in order to keep his powers a secret. That line never sat well with me when the trailer came out, and it certainly didn't in the film. Oh, and what about him telling teenaged Kent not to save him from the tornado? That also made no sense. It felt a like a cheap way to kill the character off.

We also have Supes' real father telling him to aspire to something greater. Now at the end of the film, we see Kent as a boy playing in the backyard with a laundry sheet for a cape. Why wasn't that in the first act of the film? Why didn't we get more on Kent's anxieties when he was a child? Remember when he hides in the restroom at school because he gets frightened? I wanted to know more about that struggle, along with (again) how his parents raised him. Why was he always angsty? How did his adoptive parents really bring him up? A couple flashbacks laced with Jor-El's exposition didn't really say much about Kent, if you ask me.

In short, the structure of this film made the characters one-dimensional, which is a shame because such great actors were cast. Snyder and Goyer told the story through flashbacks, rather than telling his backstory from start to finish. The first 10-20 minutes is the destruction of Krypton, which could've easily been 5 minutes long. 10 minutes tops. Then you have room for character development. I never really got an idea of how Kent was brought up, nor did I see much chemistry in his relationship with Lois Lane. It just felt completely rushed... Then the last 45 minutes take over, no development anymore. Now, action! Let's destroy stuff!

About that... Superman and General Zod's epic showdown really tore up Metropolis... How many lives were taken? Superman kills Zod and screams in agony over it? He recklessly killed a bunch of innocent people! That fight could've easily been moved to another location, but that probably wouldn't have allowed the filmmakers to destroy buildings and destroy things with the visual effects they had in hand whilst hammering 9/11 imagery onto the audience. (Star Trek Into Darkness also fell into this trap.) But still!

My other fellow Disney and comic book enthusiast Tyler Kelso had this to say about that particular finale, as he compares it to The Avengers and how that film showed the team members actually trying to help the civilians whilst averting disaster and stopping an alien invasion...

"Throughout most of the film I was mildly okay with it, but not wowed. What had me leaving thinking 'This was Superman????' was that his fights with General Zod (and his minions) toppled a nice amount of downtown Smallville, as well as a ton of Metropolis yet he never has to answer for doing this. Literally building after building gets knocked down and he makes ZERO effort to move the fight away and into a less densely populated area. This just wasn't OK in my mind and makes me feel like he was an accomplice to a massacre.

"In The Avengers however, they are fighting off a massive alien invasion. Very early on in the fight, the police don't really understand whats going on so Captain America tells a cop 'You need men in these buildings, there are people inside and they're going to be running right into the line of fire. You take them to the basements or through the subway, you keep them OFF the streets. I need a perimeter as far back as 39th.' The cop is skeptical and asks why he should takes orders from him. Then Cap fights a few Chitauri right there and impresses the cop, who then radios the orders Cap had just given him.

"So from a very early point you can see that the Avengers want to minimize the amount of civilian casualties. When they are huddled getting their marching orders Cap says 'until we can close that portal our priority is containment'... Near the end of the fight, a nuke comes flying in and Tony Stark re-aims the nuke and sends it to the Chitauri mother ship on the other side of the portal, in a move where he was willing to sacrifice himself. Then after the invasion has been stopped we get this montage of news clips and a senator points out 'who's going to pay for the damage?'"

Many felt that the lack of addressing the Metropolis damage was a serious problem, as did I. However, going back to PJ's theory on what the follow-up film's story will be, it's possible that these problems can all be corrected with a single film. If Superman faces the ramifications of that final battle, that could not only strengthen Man of Steel... But it could also make for an incredibly compelling story arc and also give Superman more character development than he arguably got in Snyder's film.

Another question... Will they apply that dreaded tone to future DC films? Will they try to imitate the Nolan style? Or was Man of Steel simply on autopilot? Did they just piece it together and rush it just to jumpstart things knowing that a Nolanesque Superman film would be box office gold to begin with?

PJ had this to say...

"I do believe Man of Steel was quickly rushed together to beat the rights issue. At the time it was put together, DC was on a "Snyder High", having him come off the success of 300, the critical and fan praise for Watchmen, and they LOVED how Sucker Punch looked. Plus, you had Nolan and Goyer, how could you go wrong? It was an autopilot move, without a real final destination of where this universe was headed, something I think they're remedying now. It was a mistake, but one with good intentions, even though it bothered at times."

PJ also feels that Nolan's Batman universe would've worked well in this DC Cinematic Universe and then some...

"The tone of this universe has started out a bit stark and vapid, a little more serious than some would like. But towards the end of Man of Steel, I realized something... I was smiling. Because those last five or ten minutes, the tone shifted. There was levity to this world that hadn't been the previous two hours. Clark seemed to have some humor, as did the people around him. He was smiling. He seemed to actually be, well, Superman. Part of me thinks the films will still have this muted palette look to them, giving off a more serious vibe, but clearly, there's some fun to be had in the universe, and as much as Man of Steel hated to admit it, it popped up in the end.

"If they had actually tied Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy into the series, as I still firmly believe they should, I think the tone would be the much more serious and dreary side. That's one of the few reasons I'm okay with Nolan's series not being a part of this world, even though I firmly believe, if they used those, and Man of Steel as the launchpad for the entire DCCU, the audience would be behind everything WC/DC threw at them from here on out. Nolan's trilogy beat it over our heads that Batman wasn't just one man, he was a symbol. We were left in place where there was a new Batman, and a new way to explore the world. It would be a bold choice, but I think in order to really thrill people, they should add Gordon-Levitt into the mix as the new Batman, because the moment you add Nolan's series into the mix, you went from having one film in the DCCU, to four, almost five.

"People are going to be a lot happier with that, and feel a lot safer thinking that WB/DC, Snyder, Nolan, and Goyer all actually have a plan, and aren't making it up as they go. Plus, realistically you have the entire team behind that trilogy working on this film. It would seem like a waste not to incorporate what they've done before. However, we know that isn't going to end up being the case, and we're going to see Bruce Wayne played by another actor in this series. For better or for worse on their part, but it's a choice they've decided to make. It's a fair decision, even if I don't necessarily agree that it's the right way to go."

Personally, I'm okay with Nolan's trilogy being a separate universe from this one because I believe that Nolan aimed for a high level of realism with each film in the series. Something like Superman or Green Lantern, to me, seems out of place in his trilogy. His trilogy is arguably a series of crime epics featuring Batman characters, rather than a series of Batman films. Man of Steel was certainly much more fantastical with its depiction of Krypton, alien ships and Superman's powers.

Plus I'd like to see Kal-El with Bruce Wayne, rather than John Blake. It doesn't sit well with me for some reason, though yes... Batman Beyond. In fact, I do get what PJ is saying. A younger person being the next Batman would be interesting, and it would deviate from the norm a bit. But at the same time, it would seem kind of weird because Nolan's films are mostly dead-set on realism, they feel like a separate entity to me. But Nolan's Batman could very well mesh with this universe they're setting up now, but personally I'm more interested in seeing a new Bruce Wayne.

What do you think?

As for Warner Bros. and DC's planning, how will they go about everything now they have a better idea of what'll happen? PJ shared how he thinks WB will go about this cinematic universe, and how he feels they should go about it...

"Before the Comic-Con announcement of 'Batman vs. Superman' happened, the initial report leaked that WB was going to announce that film, as well as 'The Flash' for 2016, and 'Justice League' for 2017. I think we're going to see a Flash film first, but I think it'll be "Flash featuring...", sort of like this 'World's Finest' film will be. That way they can introduce more characters and continue building their universe before a 'Justice League' film. I think it would be too risky to jump into that after just two movies. You need to have a lot of world-building done to earn it, and make people want to see it. That's what Marvel did. They teased us with every film since the release of the first Iron Man, with Sam Jackson's Nick Fury visiting Stark to talk about The Avengers Initiative...

"WB and DC already dropped the ball by not adding a tease like that into this one, but there were enough little things in the film that showed that this is definitely a shared universe, that they don't necessarily need the tease for fans, but general audiences may not have caught these things. But by doing 'Batman/Superman', and then 'Flash featuring...', you might have earned the general audience's trust and they may be ready for a 'Justice League' film at that point. But really, in the end... Have DC/WB earned it? Or will it just seem forced? That's the line they need to walk right now. I think they need four or five films to reach the correct build up for it, but if they can do it well in three, I'm game as well. I honestly just want to see these characters on screen together...

"The other thing they SHOULD'VE done, and taking a page from Marvel's book, was to tie their TV universe into it. Marvel's MCU isn't just the films anymore. There are comic tie-ins for every film, and now a TV show that expands a side we wouldn't normally get to see in the films. WB/DC has a great show in Arrow, one that fits the more realistic world, and you could easily tie it in, but WB isn't interested in that, which is disappointing. It would be great to have that character developed and then put in the films, because it could easily have taken the place of a full movie. Marvel is laying groundwork to entertain audiences in any form of media they can, and WB/DC should be doing the same thing. It's a huge missed opportunity not including 'Arrow' into their film universe."

A film based on The Flash featuring someone like Aquaman or Wonder Woman would be a good idea, considering that it may very well work for "Superman vs. Batman". At the same time though, it would be nice to see a fully developed origin story for the character that's going to be "featured" in said film. But it would also be different from Marvel's plans, as they make separate films for each character. True, Black Widow didn't get her own film and neither did Hawkeye, but I feel that someone like Wonder Woman or Aquaman is deserving of their own film.

"Okay, so I think that they should do more then just the next movie before going full-blown Justice League... I'd like them to give Wonder Woman her own film, and then maybe another Batman film and another Superman film with introductions to either The Flash, Green Lantern or Aquaman in those (Flash w/ Supes, Aquaman w/ Bats) but have them be similar to how we got introduced to Hawkeye and Black Widow through Thor and Iron Man 2 respectively. For the first 'Justice League' movie you have to have it be a core team of 5-6, but no more including Bats, Supes, Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Flash. Villain-wise, I think a team up of villains would be nice, not just one. But here's the thing...

"While it will no doubt be big, the thing I'm worried about is that because it's coming after 2 (or more) Avengers movies, people might feel like WB and DC are just trying to get their hands in the pot and it'll almost feel like they're trying to copy Marvel. The biggest thing is that they have to lighten the tone up at least a little bit, the only character that can be in a DARK world is Bats. The rest live in a brighter world... Trying to make them all be dark like they did with Supes? Then they won't be doing the characters justice... (No pun intended.)"

First off, Tyler believes that a Flash film may not do well on its own, hence his mentioning of The Flash being "introduced" in a film with Superman. But I think a film based on The Flash could do quite well, considering that Green Lantern at least opened well ($53 million is nothing to scoff at) despite how badly it ended up doing in the long run.

Another Superman film introducing someone else could work, as this could be Warner Bros. answer to making three solo films each for Wonder Woman, the Flash and Aquaman. Green Lantern is tricky, because it's unknown right now what Warner Bros. plans to do with him. The 2011 film was a bomb, but they may include him in the shared universe rather than reboot it

Another Batman film preceding the Justice League film could work, since the origin of the character is well-known and they aren't re-telling it for this cinematic universe. Also, him being with someone like Aquaman or someone would make things interesting. But at the same time it could slow things down. Prior to The Avengers, we had a total of five films released in the span of three years. Warner Bros. may want to go quicker, but I have a feeling that their Justice League film might not appear for a good while.

Multiple villains could work, partially because it already differentiates it from The Avengers. We don't want to see a Justice League film that looks and feels like The Avengers. We want to see a unique Justice League that is its own beast.

As for audiences, I think they'll be fine with the Justice League film by the time it comes out since it'll be another big team-up film. If Avengers: Age of Ultron destroys the box office completely in 2015, it'll only prove that audiences will keep coming back for superhero team-up films, no matter who is in them. Superman and Batman in the same film? Who can resist? Add four more well-known characters and boom! Instant success!

The last point I truly agree with. I don't want WB/DC to apply the Nolan "formula" to any future films, because it did not work at all in Man of Steel. Again, no mopey tone or anything. At the same time, I want the films to be compelling and develop the characters. They can still make their work stand out, because they don't have to go the Nolan route to make their films look different from Marvel's. There are other ways to do this, and I think if the teams hit the right beats, then we'll have a great slate of films.

Now as for the new Batman, what should he be like?

"I think at this point, we need a mix of Batman between what Nolan's and Burton's films gave us. Just having Batman living in Superman's universe means we'll get a Batman who will finally get to delve into the more fantastical side his universe, using characters like Mr. Freeze, Killer Croc, Two-Face, the Riddler and the Joker."

"I think in terms of how good he is in a fight, it should be more like Nolan's trilogy, but I want to see the villains in more colorful outfits like in the Tim Burton movies, like use the face of the new Two-Face and use the costume of the old one..."

Someone like Killer Croc or Mr. Freeze wouldn't have been seen anywhere near Nolan's take on the character, so this new Batman being more fantastical than the Nolan trilogy could open the door to a lot of possibilities. Audiences took well to the villains in the Burton films, and even the first of the Schumacher films. Those days are over, yes, and the attitudes of the time went with them... Would audiences today like to see Batman fighting a more colorful adversary? A more fantastical one?

Muted color scheme and all, Man of Steel at least pit Supes against extraterrestrial foes. Give them some credit, they didn't completely copy Nolan's style, because they simply couldn't for this kind of story. The "rooted in reality" approach was one of the better things about the film, because it wasn't overdone and the aliens and their technology still made sense without seeming painfully unrealistic. PJ expands on his choices of villains, suggesting that the next iteration of Batman should resemble the great animated series from the early 1990s.

"What should be clear about my list is that I want a Batman on screen that's very akin to the 1990's animated series by Bruce Timm. That is my definitive version of the character and I think it's the one that mixed the detective side of Batman, something we really haven't seen in any of the films, while balancing the heroic, kick-ass version of Bruce. It was also beautifully noire and grounded, while still having the fantastical side of his universe. [Kevin] Conroy and [Mark] Hamill ARE Batman and the Joker for me, and I would love to see versions very similar to their cartoon alter egos on film. That's the Batman I want, and the one I think will work best in this new DC film universe."

Like PJ, I want the new Batman to resemble the animated series and just the whole look of it. When The Dark Knight Rises capped off the Nolan trilogy, my first idea of a Batman reboot would be less rooted in reality but one that would keep the serious tone of Nolan's films, so nothing comes off as silly or campy. Again, the look of the animated series alone is something I'd like to see translated into a big budget Batman film. They can pull it off without making it look cartoonish or over the top, which I think Burton's films achieved.

Back to the villains though. If anything, they could introduce a wide variety of villains into the series now that they've established that they are willing to use less realistic ones. Again, Supes is from another planet and he faced enemies from that planet, complete with crazy-looking ships and suits. Now this leads to another question... What will they do with Green Lantern? Will Ryan Reynolds' film be part of this universe? Or will they start over with someone else portraying the character?

PJ feels that while it would be nice to have Reynolds reprise his role as Hal Jordan, it's best to leave him out for the good of the series...

"As for Reynolds and Green Lantern, there's no chance he's asked back. I like the guy, I do, but he's box office poison now. His movies don't go anywhere at the box office, unless it's some sort of romantic comedy. Green Lantern underperformed worldwide so badly. On top of that, it wasn't even really liked by audiences. There's nowhere to go with him, and bringing him back would be a huge mistake, even though he wasn't the problem with the movie. They'll recast and move on. I'd be surprised if we don't see another solo Green Lantern film for quite some time. That movie really blemished the character, and WB won't want Reynolds anywhere near it once he comes back to screens, be it in a 'Justice League' film or another solo outing. He's struck as leading man, sad to say. He deserved better."

Tyler on the other hand thinks that they should stick with Reynolds despite the first film's box office performance...

"I think that they should keep Ryan Reynolds, even the people that didn't really enjoy the movie at all say he wasn't the reason and that he was the best part of it. That said, due to a financial lack of success, I wouldn't be surprised if they reboot him as well. I could see either being an option. Plus if you think about it, his world isn't as dark as Man of Steel was (something I'd say is good) and I feel like Zack Snyder plans on having all the characters all fit that mold."

That's all for now, as rumors and news continue to circulate from the Batman casting to the plot details. As more information is unveiled before our eyes, we'll be back!

What is your take on Warner Bros. and DC's plans? Do you think their shared universe has a lot of potential? Do you think things are kicking off to a good start? Or do you think it's a colossal mess inside and out? Sound off below with theories, thoughts and more!

Best Animated Short - 1944

Aah! It's July 31, which means that not only is it the 23rd anniversary of Nolan Ryan's 300th win, but it's also the first anniversary of my epic drive from Texas to Virginia, my first of six marathon drives of at least 12 hours with no more than one hour break in the middle at one time. I've never come close to driving that long before so my memories of that night and day is pretty well implanted in my mind. It's hard to believe that a year has passed since then. You can enjoy my live blog of the drive.

Anyways, back to where we were. It was 1944 and war was raging in the east and in the west. So many young men in the prime of their lives were being sent to Europe and Africa and Asia to die in the name of freedom. On June 6, 1944, the Allied nations landed on the beaches of Normandy to begin the reclamation of western Europe from Germany. Despite the loss of over 12,000 troops - that's 12,000 young men who would forever lose conscious even as time stretches on for a googleplex years - it was still a successful landing that eventually lead to the end of the war.

Meanwhile, while young men were out their losing their lives while fighting for the Allied way, citizens in the United States were still able to enjoy forms of entertainment, including baseball and film.

Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1945

Well, we're into 1945, and that means we're into the years that I've been dreading. Now there are rules in place limiting the maximum number of nominees in the Best Animated Short category to five. There were no such rules in place in the early 1940s, so there were more than five nominees every year from 1941-1945, with as many as ten in one year. Considering it's been taking me upwards of eight hours to write a review for a five-nominee year (although most of the time is spent distracting myself on sites like Facebook and Equestria Daily), I can't fathom how long it'll take me to write these reviews. Especially since I have the equivalent of a full time job now. But we'll try to power our way through.


Read more »

Non-Nominated Highlight - Rhapsody Rabbit (1946)

So I'm sure you've noticed in my last review that I kept alluding to a great controversy, the greatest in the history of the Best Animated Short category and one of the greatest in animation history. As you know, The Cat Concerto took home the Oscar. Unfortunately, it was not the only film that year from a major studio that featured a popular mascot character playing Liszt's "Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2" only to be bothered by an uninvited guest. For at the very same time Friz Freleng and his crew at Warner Bros. was making their own film of a similar nature: Rhapsody Rabbit.


Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1946

We're at 1946, and what it year it was! It was the year after World War II ended, and emotions were running high throughout the entire year. It was the year the Boston Red Sox finally made it into the World Series for the first time since 1918, but saw it all fall apart around them in the final game thanks to the hustle of Enos Slaughter. It was the year that the newly formed United Nations finally came together for their first meeting. And it was the year of the greatest controversy in the Best Animated Short category, but we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves.

Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1947

Sometimes I've been thinking, why do I even bother? I've been putting hours upon hours into this blog, and the posts with the most views have had nothing to do with Oscar nominated shorts. Granted I've done more advertising with those posts, but that may be because I don't feel like the actual reviews are good enough to warrant advertising. If I post it on reddit like I did with the Rainbow Dash film I'm sure it'll get a negative score so fast it'll make my head spin. So yeah, with my work ramping up exponentially I'm thinking I may have to go into another hiatus. But if a blog that nobody reads go into hiatus, does it matter?

Whatever.

Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1948

Aah! Residency has begun! I'm now experiencing the joys of working a full time job for the first time in my life! Now I'm not sure if I'll ever have time to finish up these last 17 reviews! And whatever you do don't go to a teaching hospital for the next few months. In reality I'm writing this a week before orientation starts, so I've got a little bit more time to churn out some more  reviews, but I'm not looking forward to losing all my free time...for the rest of my life. But hey, that's what I was getting myself into when I chose this profession so might as well suck it up and go in there with drive and ambition! It's what Rainbow Dash would do!


Read more »

Best Documentary Short Highlight - So Much for So Little (1949)

So the 1949 Oscars was a good night for Chuck Jones's reputation and Edward Selzer's ego. The duo won the Best Animated Short Oscar for For Scent-imental Reasons with Jones doing most of the work and Selzer getting most of the glory. However, that wasn't the only stake that two Warner Bros. titans had that night. For they had another film in the running in another category. Their animated documentary So Much for So Little, a film commissioned by the Federal Security Agency Public Health Service, was up for the Best Documentary Short Oscar.


Read more »

Non-Nominated Highlight - Canary Row (1949)

So I started the Non-Nominated Highlight to introduce films that are great but did not get an Oscar nomination. I haven't done very many of these because I've been too lazy to write extra about films, and many of the really great ones have been dissected to death by people that actually know what they're talking about. So so far I've only written about The Cat Piano, Oink, and What's Opera Doc. However, in this particular year there's a film that I have to write about, because it's closely tied with the history of the Best Animated Short category.

So if you've read the 1949 review, you might have noticed that there were four official nominees. However, what you may not have known as that when the nominees were announced in early 1950 there were five nominations! What happened to the fifth nominee? Well, this was the controversy I was talking about. Apparently shortly after the nominations were announced the producer actively withdrew the nomination. This was a highly unusual move. There's been plenty of times that the Academy rescinded a nomination because of eligibility issues*, but having the nominated party actually withdraw their own nomination was a highly unusual move. It happened only four times, twice times in the Best Art Direction category in 1941 and 1944, and once in the Best Motion Picture Story category in 1956. And once was of course in the Best Animated Short category. The film that got its heart ripped out? The Tweety and Sylvester film Canary Row.

*The most notorious case of a rescinded nomination was with Young Americans, the documentary that was nominated for Best Documentary Feature in 1969 only to have it declared ineligible AFTER it had WON the Oscar. It was one of a few time that somebody had to return an Oscar they thought they had won.


Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1949

I love my grandma. At 91 she has been through so much, from the Sino-Japanese War to the Chinese Civil War and eventual exile to Taiwan, but she is still sharp and optimistic. I enjoy listening to her stories about growing up in China in the 1920s and 1930s, about her mischievous adventures with her older brother*, and the embarrassing story involving my dad and aunts. Of course, she also had some difficult stories, such as stories involving Japanese brutality or the difficult times in the post-war Shanghai. One of the most haunting stories was how she was at the bedside of my great-grandmother when she passed away. In my sheltered existence it's hard to imagine how difficult it must have been. My grandma was only 27. She had just fled to Taiwan, and now she was watching her mother-in-law-to-be die in front of her eyes. The moment is still sharp in her memory, especially since she recently observed that two of her children had lived to be 60, which was how old my great-grandmother was at her passing.

*Most of her tales were involved middle brother, four years her senior. She also had an eldest brother that was nine years older. She usually held him in higher regard because he was so much older and more mature than her. I am nine years older than my youngest sister. I wonder what sort of stories she will tell her grandchildren when she is 91. How I am obsessed with a cartoon pony? How much of a baseball fan I was? Gosh, what would people think about animation like My Little Pony in 2085? And how many 300 game winners would there be by then? Sometimes I wish to have a time machine like in Doraemon to figure out the answers to these questions.

Gee...that's some heavy stuff. Why am I telling you all this? Because that happened in 1949. Yeah...let's move on to the Oscars.

Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1953

Well, I've officially graduated from medical school this past weekend, so that would make me officially a doctor. I suppose it's weird thinking of myself that way, along with taking on the responsibilities of such a title, but it's something I've been working towards for almost ten years so it's something that I'm quite pleased about. Now I still have about a month before I have to start orientation for residency, but I have over 20 reviews to go, so I'll still have to work on reviews while I'm in residency. Hopefully I get enough of a queue that I won't have to take any more hiatuses.


Anyways, onto 1953, a full 60 years ago and the year of George Brett's birth. It must be a bit disconcerting for Kansas City Royals fan to think that their best player, the one that led them to seven playoff berths and one World Series title, is now 60 years old. That's the same age that legendary manager John McGraw was when he died shortly after retiring from managing in 1934, and nobody was saying he's a spring chicken (especially not after a 33-year managerial career that includes 2,763 wins - second of all time.) But hey, he still displays quite a bit of vitality for a guy his age.
Read more »

Best Animated Short - 1954

So today is George Brett's 60th birthday, and it is also one of the saddest days of my trip. Yes, as this post is going up I will be returning from Taiwan to prepare to return to my normal life, which includes graduating from med school, either moving or getting my unexpected roommate to move out after seven long months, and onto residency and beyond. Considering I'm only in my first week at Taiwan, it's a bit sad to think that in a few short days I'll be leaving, but that's just a consequence of the inevitability of the passage of time. That's something that has been bothering me for ages and is now still haunting me.

Read more »