... FOR "RANDOM UPDATES TO THE SITE"

When I first embarked on this blogging adventure in February of 2010, I'll admit I was a novice at it in more ways than one. Learning to let my freak flag fly, for one thing, figuring out how to stand toe to toe with (and sometimes head and shoulders above) the millions of other movie blogs out there, by offering up a different spin on the basics of filmcraft - technique, trivia, retrospectives, reviews - than you're probably used to. Or struggling to stay relevant, by paying respect to the films of the present (which, let's be honest, is all people really want to hear about) and also to the films of the past (which, let's face it, is where all modern motion pictures get their ideas). Also learning that you can't be everything to everyone all of the time; sure, people love their Comic Book Movies and their MacGuffin With Egg, but try blogging a quiz or two (or three, or eight), and readers will have nothing to do with it. (It took me too long, perhaps, to realize that once one person responds with the answers, it's pretty much pointless for everyone else.)

Still, the thing that's disappointed me the most is that I haven't been able to build up an audience to the degree I'd initially hoped for. I have my core readership, of course, to whom I'm eternally grateful. Ultimately, though, the responsibility of bringing traffic to the site rests entirely on me, and only me, and I've been slow in making that happen. Never one to toot my own horn, I was uncomfortable at first posting updates to Facebook, or anywhere else for that matter, expecting, I guess, to succeed on the strength of my words alone. But it takes a certain amount of shameless self-promotion to make it anywhere in this world, a fact I've only started warming up to, and now that I've started posting to Twitter and Medium.com, we'll see what that does for the site. (Special thanks to Ether Ling for crafting a marketing plan to help bolster the blog.)

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 16 - 'SPIDER-MAN' EDITION)"

The fun of the Spider-Man comics has always been that Peter Parker is intrinsically One of Us. We just may be too modest to admit it. We all feel the awkwardness of our teenage years, we all dream of greater power and responsibility, we all yearn for the courage and the conviction to swoop in and save the day. Swinging through the spires and the skyscrapers of New York City, Peter's world feels grounded in the everyday (well, as "everyday" as a kid in a red-and-blue leotard fighting crime, anyway), and his quips and his wisecracks give him the edge over his enemies, not only stronger and faster but smarter and wittier than they are too. With skills like that, who wouldn't want to be Spider-Man?

Despite his enormous popularity, however, the concept for Stan Lee and Steve Ditko's iconic creation almost didn't make it off the ground. When pitching his initial ideas for the character, Lee recalls that his publisher, Martin Goodman, asked, "Don't you understand what a hero is?" Goodman felt that the idea of a teen-aged superhero - especially a high school nerd who was unpopular with the ladies - wouldn't appeal to readers, since most teens in comic books (think "Bucky" Barnes or Dick Grayson) served only as sidekicks to more experienced crimefighters. Little did he realize that audiences were clamoring for a character they could call their own; unlike Superman, say, with his godlike powers and chiseled physique, or Batman, with his unlimited gadgets and millions of dollars at his disposal, Peter Parker struggled with more conventional problems, like passing his classes or trying to hold down a job. And comic book fans fell immediately in love with him. Spider-Man debuted in Amazing Fantasy #15 in June 1962 and sold in record numbers (in 2011, a near- mint edition of this issue sold for $1.1 million to a private collector). He has since become Marvel's flagship character and company mascot, appearing in multiple comic titles, cartoons, radio plays, movies, books, video games, even a Broadway musical (with music by U2's Bono and The Edge).

... FOR "IMAGES ('X-MEN' 2000-11 EDITION - PART THREE)"

Part Three of our X-Men movie retrospective, in which we take a visual tour of the franchise's special (and not-so-special) pleasures.

Hidden gems and history lessons. Callbacks and cameo appearances. The X-Men movies are perhaps the most richly textured of all comic book franchises, with plenty of subtext and shout-outs for fans and non-fans alike. Take another look, though, and you'll see the films cribbing not just from themselves but from other popular series as well.


Fearful Symmetry

I spoke last time about the X-Men of First Class learning firsthand from President Kennedy, via television, of the impending Cuban Missile Crisis. Here it is again, in case you missed it:

... FOR "IMAGES ('X-MEN' 2000-11 EDITION - PART TWO)"

Part Two of our X-Men movie retrospective, in which we take a visual tour of the franchise's special (and not-so-special) pleasures.

So we've already established some of the many Easter Eggs and character cameos which make up Marvel's mutant movie universe. This includes, during an early sequence in X-Men: The Last Stand, a direct homage to Claremont/Byrne's two-part Days Of Future Past, in which our heroes are rounded up and herded into WWII-type internment camps.

That the latest X-Men sequel to enter production is also called Days Of Future Past raises some interesting theoretical questions, namely: Did they plan this sort of thing from the beginning, with every intent to revisit this particular story thread in the future? Or did the producers of X-Men 3 simply include the scene as a shout-out to fans, because they couldn't find room for it elsewhere? Evidence seems to suggest the latter, though wouldn't it be fun, in today's post-Avengers climate, to think that the makers of this $1.9 billion franchise had a particular endgame in mind?

... FOR "IMAGES ('X-MEN' 2000-11 EDITION - PART ONE)"

Some final thoughts on X-Men before we move on to bigger (and brighter?) things. I don't know if these types of posts will follow every Franchise Face-Off from this point on, but these Comic Book movies have definitely sparked my interest as of late. Perhaps this is because both comic books and the cinema are purely a visual medium: It's the images that catch your eye, after all, and if the story connecting them together happens to keep your attention, then so be it. That's just gravy for all those concerned. The best CBMs understand this and deliver on it, twofold.

The X-Men movies, like Batman and Superman before them, have gone through many different permutations over the years, each time trying desperately to please fans of the comic and kowtow to the demands of the cinema. Below, and during the next two X- centric posts, we cover a few examples of how the filmmakers attempted to do both:

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 15 - 'X-MEN' EDITION)"

If Batman & Robin signaled the death of the Comic Book Movie, then X-Men (2000) is undoubtedly its rebirth - a reverent, star-studded extravaganza that rang the box office bell in ways very few people expected. Sure, there were attempts to revive the genre in between - Blade (1998) springs to mind, starring Wesley Snipes, or Mystery Men (1999), with Ben Stiller and William H. Macy. But those were low-key adaptations of lesser-known characters, not the big-budget, big-name properties fans took to heart.

Consider, too, how the biggest Comic Book films up to that point, Richard Donner's Superman: The Movie (1978) and Tim Burton's Batman (1989), seemed to spawn only Batman and Superman sequels. X-Men opened the floodgates for future box office spectaculars including Spider-Man (2002), Daredevil (2003), Hulk (2003), Fantastic Four (2005), reboots of the Batman and Superman franchises, plus Marvel Comics' Cinematic Universe, culminating in The Avengers (2012) - currently the third highest-grossing film of all time. Superman '78 may have set the template for comic book verisimilitude (Richard Donner was an executive producer on X-Men), but it was X-Men that permanently whet the public's appetite for cinematic superheroics.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 15 - 'FRANKENSTEIN' EDITION)"

That flat-topped square head. The electrodes that stick out on the sides of his neck like the positive/negative terminals on a car battery. Those tromping, stomping platform boots. At one glance, the monster of James Whale's moody, melancholy Frankenstein (1931) will be instantly recognizable among horror movie aficionados, film history buffs, and to anyone even vaguely aware of the existence of movies. The makeup design by Jack Pierce has become so iconic (it is currently under copyright by Universal Pictures until 2026), and Boris Karloff's performance as the woe begotten creature so definitive, it hardly matters that the character bears little resemblance to Mary Shelley's original novel.

Conjured up by 18-year-old Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin during the summer of 1816 (on a dare from George Gordon Byron and future husband Percy Shelley), Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus, tells the story of Victor Frankenstein, a scientist whose experiments with human tissue result in a living, breathing monstrosity (which he promptly denounces). In the book, Frankenstein's creation is limber, literate and capable of intelligent speech; he exacts a horrific, painstaking revenge. This will no doubt come as a shock to anyone who grew up on a steady diet of Franken Berries, Abbott and Costello, or the "Monster Mash," in which the monster is depicted as lumbering, dim-witted and/or mute. (To be fair, the 1931 film is based on play adaptation by Peggy Webling, rather than the novel itself. Victor's name is changed to Henry, and the creature is named after its master, though it does retain the ability to speak.) Whale's version still managed to horrify audiences, with its unflinching sequences of grave robbery and murder.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 14 - 'BATMAN' EDITION)"

He is the antithesis of Superman in almost every way: dark, brooding, prone to violence (all in the name of justice), and powered only by his sheer determination and will. He is a detective, a scientist, a master strategist and multiple martial arts expert. And his rogues' gallery - the Joker, the Riddler, Catwoman, Two-Face, Scarecrow, The Penguin, Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze - is unprecedented among comic book heroes. Yet despite his accomplishments, despite all his formidable skills, Batman's greatest battle has always been with Hollywood itself.

Bruce Wayne and his menacing alter ego were created, in fact, as a blatant attempt to cash in on Superman's success. The brainchild of 24-year- old artist Bob Kane (with an uncredited assist from writer Bill Finger), "The Bat-Man" made his first appearance in Detective Comics #27 during May of 1939, and was an immediate hit. (National Publications - soon to be known as DC Comics - now had two popular comic book characters under their belt, having also published the monthly adventures of the Man of Steel.) A self-titled series debuted in April 1940, followed by a 15-part film serial starring Lewis Wilson in 1943, followed by a second 15-chapter serial in 1949, starring Robert Lowery as Batman and Johnny Duncan as Robin.

Batman's popularity soared during the late 1960s, when Twentieth Century Fox's high-camp Batman television series premiered in January 1966. It was a tongue-in-cheek parody of superhero tropes, produced by William Dozier and starring Adam West and Burt Ward (plus a bevy of 60's stars as "guest" villains), and it's this incarnation - for better or worse - that defined the character for the next twenty years. No longer a lone, mysterious creature of the night, Bob Kane's creation had now been reduced to a figure of fun, dancing the Batusi and POW! BOFF! and ZWAP!-ing his way through Gotham City while a bright-eyed, green-bootied Boy Wonder spouted catchphrases by his side. This reputation had ingrained itself so much into the public consciousness that Hollywood producers were literally dumbstruck at the idea of bringing Batman back to the screen.

... FOR "ABANDONED PROJECTS ('BATMAN: FULL CIRCLE' EDITION)"

A break from tradition here at FTTW (as if this was ever a traditional blog to begin with)...

About three years ago to the day, I'd written the introduction to a book I fully intended to finish, about Warner Bros' 1989-1997 Batman franchise and its gradual fallout with the moviegoing public. But like so many things in life, the idea sort of fell by the wayside - another unfortunate victim of my brain trying too hard to tackle too many projects at once. I'd forgotten about it until recently, as I was putting the finishing touches on our latest Franchise Face-Off, so to preface that upcoming post, I thought I'd share the introduction here, so you can fully appreciate the depths of my deepest, darkest obsessions. Think of this as a precursor to the FF-Os as you know and love them today:

__________

BATMAN: FULL CIRCLE

INTRODUCTION

I can't exactly tell you where my obsession with the Batman got its start, or how, but I'm pretty sure it started sometime inside the womb. I say this because I can't honestly recall a time when the character did not play an integral part in my life – when images of his comic book escapades didn't flood my brain on a daily basis, even to the point where I hear the faint flapping of bat wings as I drift off to sleep. (Yes, this happens.)

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 13 - 'SUPERMAN' EDITION)"

He is easily the most iconic and recognizable of all superheroes: Why, if the red boots, cape, and blue tights don't give him away, then the red-and-yellow "S" insignia at the center of his chest most certainly will. His name has become synonymous with all things "Truth, Justice and the American Way." And few phrases in pop culture iconography bring a smile to people's faces like "Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's Superman!" can. Born Kal-El of Krypton, and later adopting the guise of mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent, the Man of Steel would not only emerge as Earth's greatest protector – he would turn out to be the archetype for all comic book heroes to follow.

This response no doubt took even Superman's creators by surprise. Hailing from the suburbs of Cleveland, Ohio, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster originally envisioned their "superman" (or "Übermensch," as coined by Friedrich Nietzsche) as a bald-headed telepathic villain bent on world domination. Years later, they completely re- jiggered their concept, and in April of 1938, the character as we all know and love him debuted in Action Comics #1, which sold on newsstands for 10¢ an issue (to compare: a mint-condition copy was recently auctioned off at $2.16 million). His popularity only skyrocketed from there, selling millions of comics in multiple languages all over the world. He soon became the star of his own radio show, a string of popular Max Fleischer cartoons, two movie serials, and a weekly television series starring George Reeves. Usurpers to the throne (including Batman, Wonder Woman, Spider-Man and the Hulk) could only look on with envy.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 12 - 'SHERLOCK HOLMES' EDITION)"

Will the real Sherlock Holmes please stand up? The great thing about the original stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is just how much that question is left open to interpretation. Recounted in the first-person by the estimable Dr. John H. Watson, M.D., Holmes's flatmate and partner in (solving) crime, it is next to impossible to tell what the world's "first consulting detective" might be thinking at any given moment; indeed, Watson can only stand back and observe, in awe and wonderment, as that great and fevered brain goes on about its business. If we're lucky, Holmes might even key us in on his investigative process - how, for example, he is able to deduce (correctly) a killer's age simply by the gait in his footprints. More often than not, though, we're left to ponder the evidence all on our own - not just about the mystery at hand, but also about this strange, enigmatic cipher at its center.

This is no doubt why readers have been so enthralled by Holmes's adventures over the years. Doyle published the first, A Study In Scarlet, in 1887's Beeton's Christmas Annual, and even now - four novels and 56 short stories later - we have only pieces of the character's true psychological makeup. What we do know is mostly limited to the external: Watson, upon their first meeting, describes Holmes as well over six feet tall, thin, with a "hawk-like nose" and "sharp[,] piercing" eyes. He is emotionless, distant, prone to fits of manic depression when his mind isn't busied on a case, and is a master of deductive reasoning. He will never miss a chance to remind you of this last important fact.

That's all well and good, but what about the man inside - his hopes, his dreams, his thoughts, his fears? Is there more to him than meets the eye? Or do his actions speak for themselves? Why is he so driven, so intensely focused, so difficult to identify with on a personal level? (Modern theorists attribute this behavior to Asperger's Syndrome.) He's been the subject of countless films, radio adaptations, literary spin-offs, TV series, even a Disney cartoon - each with their own personal take on the character, but sharing one common trait: Sherlock's obsessive love of the chase. And he's just as popular as ever. My, how we love a good mystery man.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 11 - 'RUSH HOUR' EDITION)"

Brett Ratner is a chameleon. This might explain why the self-promoting, self-aggrandizing director - whose films have amassed a collective $1 billion plus worldwide - has been able to slip into so many franchises without ruffling the feathers of fans. He did it in 2002, with Red Dragon, part three of Dino De Laurentiis' Hannibal Lecter series starring Anthony Hopkins. Then in 2006, he took over the ­X-Men franchise with The Last Stand, the most successful entry in Fox's genre-defining ensemble superhero saga.

(On the non-franchise front, you could view his 2000 holiday hit The Family Man as an unofficial remake of Capra's It's A Wonderful Life, or November's Tower Heist as an attempt to copy the con-artists-as-heroes cool of Soderbergh's Ocean's Eleven. The list goes on.)

Whether this qualifies him as an A-list copycat or a B-grade Hollywood hack is up for debate. The fact is, Ratner copies the style of his predecessors so well, you'd be hard-pressed to tell that they were made by a different director, unless you were acutely aware of the behind-the-scenes dramas that plagued their productions.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 10 - 'MEN IN BLACK' EDITION)"

Question: How many people actually realize that 1997's Men In Black is based on a comic book? No doubt you saw the commercials and you bought your ticket and laughed at all the jokes and the witty special effects, and you probably own the VHS or the DVD or the Blu-Ray, but did you ever stop to think that you were, in fact, watching a Comic Book Movie?

Maybe, maybe not. Originally published by Marvel/ Aircel Comics as a three-issue mini-series in 1990, Lowell Cunningham's The Men In Black was optioned by producers Walter F. Parkes and Laurie MacDonald in 1992. The project went through various incarnations (and a director or two) before finally settling at Columbia Pictures, under the tutelage of Barry Sonnenfeld (The Addams Family, Get Shorty) and executive producer Steven Spielberg. When it opened on July 2nd, 1997, MIB was met with all the fanfare and fervor of your typical summer blockbuster. It grossed $587 million in theaters worldwide (Columbia's highest-grossing movie up to that point), and cemented Will Smith's reputation as a bona fide box office star. 
 
Yet rarely, if ever, will you find MIB counted among the most successful Comic Book Movies ever made. Why is this? Perhaps because of the way it was marketed – as the Next Will Smith-Versus-Aliens Summer Blockbuster (after Independence Day). Or perhaps in the wake of Batman & Robin (released to critical and commercial disdain just two weeks earlier), the filmmakers thought it best to distance themselves from their genre roots as far as possible.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 9 - 'PARANORMAL ACTIVITY' EDITION)"

So The Blair Witch Project made close to a gazillion dollars back in 1999, and suddenly, "found footage" copycats were everywhere. Noroi, Diary Of The Dead, [REC], Cloverfield - everyone wanted a piece of the action. The reasons for this were fairly cut and dry: they were cheap, they were easy to shoot, you could cast relatively unknown actors as your leads and no one would raise a fuss, and better yet, audiences seemed to get a kick out of them, so you had the luxury of making loads of money off of very little. Hollywood, as we've made it abundantly clear, is always looking to replicate its own successes.

Granted, Blair Witch was hardly the first "found footage" feature ever made. The Last Broadcast, about a cable-TV crew on the hunt for the mythical Jersey Devil, was released just one year previous, and might have been a direct influence on Blair Witch directors Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez when creating their movie. And perhaps the most notorious of these, Ruggero Deodato's Cannibal Holocaust (1980), was banned in several countries for its graphic depiction of tribal rituals in the Amazon Basin (Deodato was later brought up on murder charges by the Italian government, who believed he'd made an actual "snuff film").

What The Blair Witch got absolutely right, which its predecessors only hinted at, was the way it tickled our deepest, darkest fantasies - and invaded our pop culture consciousness. First came the legendary marketing campaign, which started on the Internet and then quietly gathered word of mouth at the Sundance Film Festival and in various college towns; a Sci-Fi Channel TV special, which aired just prior to the film's release; and finally, a limited-screen engagement that became the see-it-or-be-square event of the decade. Then came the movie itself, sold as the real thing, so you felt like an active part of the film's mythology. It was a con, a hoax, and audiences ate it up, hook, line and sinker.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 8 - 'LETHAL WEAPON' EDITION)"

In almost every movie romance, there's a thing called the "meet cute," in which a boy and a girl are brought together in some deliberate comic fashion - often the result of an awkward social mishap or hilarious misunderstanding. This is, of course, just their first step toward falling in love: both characters usually come from opposite sides of the tracks, and will spend the rest of the plot bickering and flirting and generally getting on each other's nerves – until finally, at the end, they realize they are Made For Each Other.

Some noteworthy examples of this. In Frank Capra's It Happened One Night (1934), runaway heiress Claudette Colbert meets down-on-his-luck reporter Clark Gable while arguing over a seat on a bus. In Disney's One Hundred And One Dalmatians (1969), Pongo the dog "arranges" a meeting between humans Roger and Anita at the park (they argue for about two seconds before falling into a pond together). In Grease (1978), John Travolta and Olivia Newton-John's "meet cute" doesn't actually occur on screen, but is recounted during a musical number instead ("She swam by me, she got a cramp" / "He went by me, got my suit damp"). And in 1993's Sleepless In Seattle, Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan don't officially "meet cute" until movie's end – on top of the Empire State Building, no less, on Valentine's Day.

When it comes to the Buddy Film – which, you will recall, follows the same basic plot structure as the Romantic Comedy, minus the romance – the concept of "meet cute" still applies. Oh, the end result may turn out different, but the function of it is the same: to unite two characters with conflicting personalities in some fateful, memorable way, thus setting them at odds with each other for the rest of the movie. (This is otherwise known as "conflict.")

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 7 - '48HRS.' EDITION)"

When casting any movie, chemistry is key. Nothing sinks a star vehicle more quickly and efficiently than actors who clearly do not get along – see Marilyn Monroe and Sir Laurence Olivier in 1957's The Prince And The Showgirl for the most notorious example of this, or, more recently, Ben Affleck with basically anyone. Good chemistry, on the other hand, can be like catching lightning in a bottle – can turn even the most routine and cliché-ridden screenplay into something electric, transcendent, sparkling and true.

This is especially important for two genres in particular. First and foremost is the Romantic Comedy, in which an audience is expected to buy into the notion that two characters are destined for each other in all matters of life and love, and that external forces either cannot or will not stand in between them. For this idea to actually stick, the viewer must believe that both actors are fully and truly attracted to each other; otherwise, what is there to root for? Successful examples of this throughout history include Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn (acerbic banter at its best), Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers (whose passion for each other often caused them to break out into elaborate dance numbers), and Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman (I'm kidding).

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 6 - 'HARRY POTTER' EDITION)"

It is, without a doubt, one of the great rags-to-riches stories of the past two decades: A single mother, living off of welfare, carts her baby down to the local coffee shop in Edinburgh, Scotland, where she writes the first book of what will become the most successful children's series of all time. She goes from poverty to multi-millionaire status all within the span of five years; her novels sell over 400 million copies; are translated into 67 languages; and her iconic creation – Harry James Potter, aka "The Boy Who Lived" – becomes a permanent fixture in households worldwide.

Joanne "Jo" Rowling says she conjured up the idea for Harry Potter in 1990, while on a return train to London. But she didn't actually finish writing The Philosopher's Stone – the story of an eleven-year-old boy who attends Hogwarts School Of Witchcraft And Wizardry – until six years later. During that time, Rowling suffered a series of emotional setbacks that pushed her close to the breaking point: Her mother, Anne, died of multiple sclerosis in December 1990, the impact of which forced Joanne to move from London to Portugal, Spain, to pursue a career as an English teacher. While there, she met and married Jorge Arantes, a journalism student with whom she had a tumultuous relationship. The birth of their daughter, Jessica, in July 1993 only seemed to heighten the tension between them, and following a violent argument in November of that same year, Joanne took the baby and fled back to England. (The couple eventually divorced in August 1994.) Jo's father, Peter, had since re-married and their relationship had become strained, so she moved to Edinburgh to live near her sister. Jobless, penniless, and living on a weekly £69 allowance from social services, she began a daily routine of wandering her neighborhood streets, pushing Jessica in her stroller until the baby fell asleep. Then she would duck into the nearest coffee shop or restaurant and write. She completed Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone in early 1996, and after many rejections from different publishing houses, the book was finally purchased by Barry Cunningham at Bloomsbury, for an advance of £1,500. Scholastic Books followed suit, a mere three days after its publication in Britain, and bid an unprecedented $100,000 to distribute Potter in the United States. The rest, as they say, is history. Rowling would never know poverty again.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 5 - 'TRANSFORMERS' EDITION)"

Michael Bay is the devil. Or, wait, let me explain. If everything that's good and wholesome in this world must have an opposite, then by "devil," I mean Michael Bay is the antithesis of everything the movie gods hold dear – coherency of plot, characters who resemble actual human beings, and most of all, film footage that hasn't been edited together with the skill and proficiency of a jackhammer. Bay's style of filmmaking seems geared toward people with attention-deficit disorder: explosions, gunfire, more explosions, hot-bodied men and women parading lasciviously past the camera every 6-7 seconds (or less), as if smacking you in the face to make sure you're paying attention. It's juvenile, and watching his movies, I'm insulted at the notion that my brain needs to be under constant assault to feel entertained.

I guess on some level, you have to respect what the guy does. There's a market for this sort of thing, for better or worse (Bay's films have grossed over $3 billion worldwide), and he plays to those strengths well. Born in Los Angeles in 1965, Michael Benjamin Bay started his film career early on, when he interned at Lucasfilm at the age of fifteen. He majored in English and Film at Wesleyan University, attended Pasadena's Art Center College of Design for his graduate studies, and started directing music videos and television commercials after receiving his degree.

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 4 - ST. PATRICK'S DAY EDITION)"

I was going to do a post on St. Patrick's Day movies, maybe even a little "Guess the Poster" action, when I realized that, apparently, St. Patrick's Day isn't the most cinematic of holidays. Oh, there's Darby O'Gill And The Little People, of course, but that seemed a little obvious. Instead, all I could really find were these:

... FOR "FRANCHISE FACE-OFFS (PART 3 - 'THE MATRIX' EDITION)"

"Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself."

When The Matrix opened in March of 1999, it hit like a breath of pure oxygen – and a slap in the face to every pretender-to-the-throne action/sci-fi extravaganza since George Lucas' original Star Wars. (More than that, it made those movies look positively old-fashioned by comparison – The Phantom Menace included, which still had a good month and a half to go before its official release date.) Andy and Larry Wachowski's genre-busting fusion of all things cyberpunk, Hong Kong action cinema, and Japanese anime didn't just stand the special effects industry on its head; it turned into a full-fledged pop culture phenomenon. "Bullet time" became a cliché. Wire work and extensive kung fu choreography became the norm for almost every action sequence that followed. It gave Keanu Reeves – he of Bill & Ted's Excellent Adventure, Paula Abdul's "Rush Rush" music video, and Speed – his most iconic role since, well, Bill & Ted. It even spawned its own religion, of sorts.