![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thehefnerWell, I just saw a cheery little movie called Downfall, based on the experiences of Hitler's secretary, who was down there in bunker with him and managed to escape and survive. This movie was apparently controversial for its portrayal of a complex, human Hitler. Which on one hand, sure, I understand why it's controversial, but I'm on the other hand, I'm like, why the hell not? What does it profit anyone to just think of this man as an inhuman monster? What lesson do we take away from that? The thing is, the Hitler in this movie *is* complex and very human, but at the end of the day is most certainly *not* sympathetic. He's a paranoid, bitter, hateful little man, and thanks to Bruno Ganz's (Wings of Desire) performance, is totally believable. Which, of course, makes him all the more horrifying.
The movie was fascinating and immensely watchable, with the exception of the scene that's come to be the film's most infamous. Which is to say without spoilers, the scene with Magda Goebbels. I've seen a lot of things in movies, and hell, I'm the guy who can watch Requiem for a Dream and come out of it with a smile on my face... but man, I had to fast-forward through this scene. Maybe it's just because I was so tired, but man, it was one of the most upsetting things I've ever seen in film. Maybe because it actually happened. Probably. I'm now wanting to do a bit of research to see how much of the film is accurate.
Damn good movie. So good, it makes me wanna read a book. ;)
(I hate having to use emoticons, but there's always that risk that someone's gonna mistake my tone and then a whole thing'll start up. Which is one reason I didn't say here that now I'm interested in researching a bit on Albert Speer. Whoops, just did. I just liked his portrayal in the movie as the guy who says, "Screw you guys, I'm going home." And because I think he was one of the inspirations for John Halder in Good)
The movie was fascinating and immensely watchable, with the exception of the scene that's come to be the film's most infamous. Which is to say without spoilers, the scene with Magda Goebbels. I've seen a lot of things in movies, and hell, I'm the guy who can watch Requiem for a Dream and come out of it with a smile on my face... but man, I had to fast-forward through this scene. Maybe it's just because I was so tired, but man, it was one of the most upsetting things I've ever seen in film. Maybe because it actually happened. Probably. I'm now wanting to do a bit of research to see how much of the film is accurate.
Damn good movie. So good, it makes me wanna read a book. ;)
(I hate having to use emoticons, but there's always that risk that someone's gonna mistake my tone and then a whole thing'll start up. Which is one reason I didn't say here that now I'm interested in researching a bit on Albert Speer. Whoops, just did. I just liked his portrayal in the movie as the guy who says, "Screw you guys, I'm going home." And because I think he was one of the inspirations for John Halder in Good)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 04:13 pm (UTC)I love that cover.
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 04:21 pm (UTC)I love that cover too. Thing is, I think Alex Maleev is a brilliant cover and pin-up artist, but he's shit for comic sequential storytelling. Every person is too directly photo-referenced, making them look stiff and lifeless. And everything's so damn murky. But then, I seem to be a minority in my distaste for his interior art.
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 04:29 pm (UTC)I instantly recognized 4 or 5 covers.
So yeah, he's a cover art guy, whether he knows it or not.
But I generally have bad taste in comic artist. Bacalo and Quitely, Out. Churchill, Cassady, and Van Sciver In.
Frank Cho also really impressed me with New Avengers 14 and 15. I realize his style probably won't work with darker, gloomier books. But I liked it.
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 04:43 pm (UTC)Van Scriver, hell yeah. I remember a few customers at the comic store hated his X-Men art, I have no idea why. His work with Green Lantern has been nothing less than astounding.
The only thing holding Frank Cho back, in my opinion, is that he can only draw one woman. They're all Brandy from Liberty Meadows with different hair.
Back to Typhoid Mary, I've always wanted to do a Batman/Daredevil crossover with her and Two-Face. Those two would have the angrist, most crazy violent sex ever. Plus it'd be the only foursome with two people, now that I think about it.
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 04:51 pm (UTC)Technically, Frank draws two kinds of women: Brandy and Jenn. At least, I feel there are significant differences. Still, Brandy as Spiderwoman and Jenn as Carol Danvers was more than worth the price of admission.
Batman/Daredevil needs to be done for a large number of reasons. Hell, i'd spend one issue on the "I don't know you, therefore we must do battle!" fight between the two. But I agree Mary and Harvey would be just perfectly and brilliantly and flawlessly wrong. The highest order of wrong, even.
sigh. i need better comic icons.
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 05:08 pm (UTC)Batman/Daredevil actually has happened, twice, but both occasions were underwhelming, underpromoted, and forgotten even when they actually came out. The second time was them facing the Scarecrow. Both of them (DC and Marvel's). The first time actually did have Two-Face, but it was Harvey and Mister Hyde, which I suppose makes sense too but, c'mon, would not be as cool as Mary. The only neat thing done with that story is the revelation that Matt and Harvey once debated together in law school.
Yeah, a better Batman/Daredevil story is still out there, needing to be written. Bendis wanted to, but DC wouldn't let him for some reason, which led to this huge spat. I just want my violent Harvey/Mary sex, damn it!
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 05:25 pm (UTC)i think jim at least draws redheads differently, based on that link. but maybe there's something about time periods that i'm missing. maybe it's one female rendition per phase of his career.
But personally, i like the idea of Huntress looking a bit like Catwoman. Untapped neuroses for the Bats.
I was going to say that you should go ahead and write the Mary/Harvey love. But then it occured to me that maybe dialog bubbles weren't what you were talking about.
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 06:36 pm (UTC)Well, I think we all know that to Batman all women look like his mother. Just wait 'till Bruce gives Selina pearls...
Well, I could always end up doing a slash fic, and as much as I don't really care for the genre, I just might have to. But even still, it would ultimately be a poor substitute...
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 06:59 pm (UTC)Now, Matt/Bruce would be slash. I wonder if Bruce ever yells out "Jason" in the moment.
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 07:59 pm (UTC)If Bruce ever called out Jason in the moment, that sure would be *awk*-ward with Tim...
Re: more GIP than substance.
Date: 2006-03-01 08:04 pm (UTC)Jason wouldn't notice. He'd probably be too busy thinking about... ahem... Dick. It's obvious to me Tim's only ever wanted to get into Robin's tights.
no subject
Date: 2006-03-01 05:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-01 06:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-01 07:47 pm (UTC)I mean, I guess I just don't understand it either. He wasn't some two-dimensional boogy man, he was a complex and real person. By refusing to really examine the man and just calling him the Greatest Evil that Ever Lived and saying that a monster like him will never be allowed to come into power again, we prove ourselves to hopelessly naive. Yes he was a monster, but he was also human, and there could easily be another human monster like him that will take power, if given the chance. But I suppose it's easier to play ostrich then to actually examine how such a monster is created.
...of course, I say all that without having watched the movie. But! I think my point still stands. Or not, as I didn't get much sleep last night and I doubt I made much sense. >_o
no subject
Date: 2006-03-02 11:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-03 12:13 am (UTC)