I AM THE ANGRIEST GEEK IN THE WORLD!
 

CIVIL BORE

 

1. Captain America: Civil War/BV Wknd/$ 181.8 Total/$ 181.8

2. The Jungle Book/Disney Wknd/$ 21.9 Total/$ 285.0

3. Mother's Day/ORF Wknd/$ 9.0 Total/$ 20.7

4. The Huntsman: Winter's War/Uni Wknd/$ 3.6 Total/$ 40.4

5. Keanu/WB Wknd/$ 3.1 Total/$ 15.1

6. Barbershop: The Next Cut/WB Wknd/$ 2.7 Total/$ 48.4

7. Zootopia/Disney Wknd/$ 2.7 Total/$ 327.6

8. The Boss/Universal Wknd/$ 1.8 Total/$ 59.1

9. Ratchet & Clank/Focus Wknd/$ 1.5 Total/$ 1.5

10. Batman v Superman/WB Wknd/$ 1.0 Total/$ 327.3

ALL THAT'S MISSING IS A "MARTHA" MOMENT

Captain America: Civil War opens at number one and I hate to say but this disappointed the shit out of me. Or rather, it was disappointing like I feared it would be. Civil War was a very bad comic book event from a few years ago that shameless exploited the cheapest money making convention of superhero comics: hero vs. hero. This started with the first kid who liked Superman arguing with his best friend who liked Batman, but didn't become a part of comics until Marvel in the 60's, which was all about heroes mistakenly fighting each other before teaming up. DC soon followed suit and eventually it became a self-referential joke in comics that every team-up was preceded by a fight. Then Marvel decided something that was once only part of a story should become the story itself and created Civil War, a story that basically required every hero to go utterly against 50 years of characterization so they could fight one another. But while comics' fans complained bitterly they still bought the damn thing (like geeks always fucking do) so it paid off. So handsomely in fact that Marvel keeps doing it, much in the way Batman Vs. Superman paid off in the comics in the 80's and they've been doing that ever since. And like Batman Vs. Superman it of course had to be incorporated into its cinematic universe. Now, initially the hope was that Civil War would be "in name only" like Age of Ultron, which was another horrible Marvel Comics event that became a completely different (yet mediocre) movie. This keeps the central point of conflict that superheroes need to register with the governments of the world or retire, but has the same basic flaw: one of our heroes has to act like a complete idiot to guarantee a fight. And in this case it's actually the titular hero. Captain America must consistently choose the most antagonistic path possible to guarantee the one thing they're selling: hero vs. hero fighting. The idea that The Avengers operate under some kind of global supervision isn't unreasonable, yet our hero---and mine in particular---must act like the most unreasonable idiot in the world to make sure we get basically even single Marvel hero ever in a movie trying to punch the lights out of ever other Marvel hero in a movie, including its most profitable, Spider-Man. Spider-Man is to this movie what Wonder Woman was to Batman v Superman: a refreshing breath of air. Even Ant-Man comes off better. I'm having a bad superhero year. My three favorite superheroes are Superman, Captain America and Dick Grayson and so far this year I've seen movies where two of them have been made utterly disappointing to me. I'm oddly happy Dick Grayson may never see the light of day in a movie because at least then they can't ruin him. The only difference between this and Batman v Superman is that I never expected that to be any good. I expected better from the Russo Brothers after The Winter Soldier and they let me down. While there are many enjoyable moments, they can't overcome the basic flaw of the story, which is that heroes don't fight each other and they never present a genuine reason why they would. At least not until the last five minutes and that reason is so awful you wish they didn't because it honestly makes any team ups in the future impossible if you have any respect for character. But they clearly don't so I guess I'll see you at the next Avengers movie.

HAPPY'S REVENGE

Speaking of Marvel movies, the man who helped launch them was Jon Favreau, who, no matter what he says, departed under contentious circumstances, one of which was thinking he was going to direct the Avengers movie and that he had Tomorrowland. Neither happened, but the disappointing Cowboys & Aliens did. But then he had the awesome Chef (which was very clearly a commentary on that time), which was nothing short of an artistic comeback. That has resulted in the incredible success of Jungle Book, which on paper looks like a guaranteed failure. Artistically and financially it's been anything but and not only is it great for Favreau, but he did it for Disney which owns Marvel, so the thought of him returning to the fold isn't as unlikely as it was just a few months ago. The movie? Hell, I have no interest in the original animated version and even less in this, no matter what anyone says. But I'm happy for him.

NO YOU DON'T GET A PASS 'CAUSE EVERYONE LOVES THEIR MOM.

Mother's Day is down to number three even on Mother's Day, which tells you how awful this latest entry in Gary Marshall's series of "bad movies based on holidays" really is. And it's almost two fucking hours on top of it! I realize Julia Roberts basically has to do this given she owes him her entire career and Kate Hudson is looking for an easy comeback to being a box office commodity and Jennifer Anniston is just lucky to have a career after "friends" to begin with. (same for fucking Jason Sudekis after SNL). But this is awful and they all need to understand it's better to rule in the hell of a really good cable TV show than serve in the heaven of big studio releases. I'm talking to you most of all, Jennifer Anniston. The seemingly permanent erect nipples you sported in the 90's won't carry you forever. Or will they? The young men who were your fans in then are probably making the casting decisions now and hoping in vain for that one movie where you'll finally drop your top.

'CAUSE HONESTLY, HER'S IS BIGGER

The Huntsman: Winter's War is down to number four and is yet another blow to the idea of Chris Hemsworth as a leading man even though he's doing exactly what he should be doing and supporting strong female actors. What it is however is another reason to respect Kristen Stewart, as she's the only thing missing from the marginal success of the first. Has it occurred to you fuckers that she's the reason why this prequel didn't work? Not to mention outside of Twilight she's had at least one financial success with Snow White & The Huntsman and critical success with Still Alice and Clouds of Sil Maria. Robert Patterson has neither so how about you all get up off her dick!?!

BETRAYER OF MY PEOPLE

Keanu is down to number five and I was briefly interested in this when I found out that Keanu Reeves was doing the voice of the kitty. He initially refused---or at least his management did---but when his sister saw the trailer and told him about it, he called them to be a part of it. But I never really watched Key & Peele either, so not seeing it is par the course for me. Sorry, fellas. Yeah, it only cost $15M, but it's only made that made much, which means it hasn't even paid for marketing yet. Maybe it'll be a home viewing success, because that's the only place I plan on seeing it.

I WANT THE NEXT ONE TO BE BARBER SHOP: GOOD HAIR

Barbershop: The Next Cut is down to number six and between this, NWA and Ride Along, Ice Cube has reemerged as box office force to be reckoned with mainly because he's not pretending to be catering to White people at all. He's making Black movies for Black people and not giving a fuck and it's working for him. I didn't see the first barbershop because while I understand its place in the community, I've been shaving my own head since the 90's so it's not really a part of my existence any longer. Plus, I can't take anything seriously that takes Common seriously as an actor. He. Just. Sucks. Why are we pretending he doesn't?

DO NOT AS WE DO, LADIES. BUT AS WE SAY.

Zootopia is down to number seven, followed by The Boss at number eight and honestly I feel the best jokes were in the trailer so why bother? But I'm happy for Melissa McCarthy. Fuck the haters, baby.

THIS IS NOT ONE OF THOSE SUCCESSES

Ratchet & Clank is down to number nine and it's yet another movie based on a video game. Apparently this will never die no matter how many of these movies fail. All it takes is one success to make people forget the other nine failures.

ZACK SNYDER SUCKS. THERE'S JUST NO OTHER WAY I CAN PUT IT.

Finally, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice closes out the top ten at number ten and honestly, $326M domestic from a $250M budget isn't that great even though it has made $865M worldwide. Twice your budget is break even and no matter that they tell you about international gross, the studio gets 40% or less that than so domestic is what matters most and this has made less than Deadpool. Let me say it again, a PG-13 movie with the three most famous superheroes of all time has has made less than an R-rated movie about a character 99% of the general populace has never heard off. Why? Gee, I don't know. Maybe it's because Superman is a miserable narcissist who, while being a party to thousands of deaths, doesn't speak to people yet still wonders why some hate him. Maybe it's because Batman's a raving psychotic who quotes Dick fucking Cheney in his justification as to why he has to cut Superman's head off. Maybe it's a story that makes no fucking sense and seems to take place completely in the dark even in the day. Maybe it's because the director's idea of fun is to have Jimmy Olsen shot in the head in the first five minutes (no, I'm not kidding). Maybe it's because the only bright spot of the movie, Wonder Woman, is only in it for ten minutes. Maybe it's because no matter what sells in the comics NORMAL PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO SEE HEROES FIGHT EACH OTHER! Actually it's a perfect fucking storm of failure and why every day you hear about a director leaving (the director of The Flash bailed, but it's not like he was some great talent either) and learn that Ben Affleck is taking more control over the Justice League movie.

GONNA PUT SOMETHING IN MY BUTT

HBO was supposed to give me a free weekend a few weeks ago, but because Time Warner is a bag of dicks (and tiny ones at that), they didn't pass it on to us. Fortunately, HBO seriously wants my money, which is why it was offering one free month of HBO Now. Now the catch is, unlike HBO Go, you can only watch Now on a device, so I had to watch Mapplethorpe: Look at the Pictures on my iPad. The first legit use I've had for it. The title comes from Senator Jesse Helms' speech about defunding the NEA over their exhibit of Mapplethorpe's work, which he found obscene and pornographic. Well, it kinda is, but the difference is Mapplethorpe wasn't trying to titillate or arouse, which is the goal of porn. Also he was looking to push buttons, to make you acknowledge a world that existed. Watching the doc made me realize my first interest in photography wasn't a few years ago, but back in high school when I first saw his pictures of Lisa Lyon and actually bought the book. It also reminded me of a photographer I met back in college who'd was not a fan of Mapplethorpe's work. He was Black and Mapplethorpe had a well-known fetish for Black men to the point he slept with them exclusively. They'd met in a gay bar and Mapplethorpe actually dropped the "Do you know who I am?" line and my friend replied that he knew in a way that showed he was not thrilled at being fetishized and Mapplethorpe moved on. But it wouldn't have worked. As the documentary showed like most fetishizers he only cared for his stereotypical fantasy of Black men as somewhat thuggish (makes one wonder if he ever crossed paths with Madonna who indulging a similar fetish at the same time in NYC) and not a reality of intelligent, college-educated like my friend or even his most photographed model, Ken Moody, who was not his lover. The documentary oddly contains no interview with Patti Smith who was his lover and best friend for a very formative period in his life (his most famous work may actually be her album cover). The creators insist it wasn't needed because her book, Just Kids, more than covers that period, but that's just bullshit. No way you don't have her input on a comprehensive doc the way this is. Clearly she disagreed with them on something crucial. In her absence the primary source is Mapplethorpe's kid brother, Edward, who initially idolized him and later became his assistant and photographer in his own right. Mapplethorpe is yet another photographer who wasn't formally trained (his father was ironically a hobbyist photographer) and also yet another artist who wanted fame and fortune from day one and made no bones about it (yet another comparison with Madonna). His first patron was his rich lover whom he fully admits he would not have been with without the money. He promoted his shows like a professional ad campaign and towards the end when he was dying of AIDs his concerns were increasing his fame and whether or not he'd die with more money than Andy Warhol. Even his foundation was more about accumulating both after his death. He certainly didn't leave his work for his family. Edward Mapplethorpe also became a photographer and Robert made him change his name so as not to "cash in" on Robert's growing fame. And even though Edward took care of Robert in his last days, there was never any moment where Robert expressed gratitude or love and Edward is still openly pained about it. It's the kind of honesty that makes this documentary so good. Shame about Patti, though.

 

RECOMENDATIONS:

Books

Captain America: War & Remembrance

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Captain America: Secret Empire

Iron Man: Armor Wars

Iron Man: Armor Wars II

Superman: For All Seasons

All Star Superman

Batman: Year One

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns

 

Movies/TV

Superman: The Animated Adventures

Batman: The Animated Adventures

 

Music