Spider-Man: Reign (2007)

Spider-Man hugs a grave in Spider-Man: Reign

by Gary Sundt

As Printed in The Lumberjack

Comic books were a dying breed in the ‘80s. The old readers were moving on, and the new readers weren’t picking up the slack. Enter Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight Returns, the book that redefined Batman and brought comics to adults. Today, comics are selling better than ever, but that doesn’t mean we don’t need a book strictly for adults. Spider-Man: Reign is one of those books.

The four-part miniseries is set in New York City, 35 years in the future. Spider-Man has hung up the costume, and Peter Parker struggles to make ends meet in a very different NYC. The Big Apple has become an independent state, and without Spider-Man, all the other superheroes and villains have mysteriously disappeared. The story is placed in a future similar to Miller’s Returns and Alan Moore’s V for Vendetta – one that shows what lengths governments will go to “keep us safe.”

The city is planning to activate a shield around the city that lets nobody in or out. But what good is it to keep everyone inside, you might ask? Retired newsman J. Jonah Jameson is asking the same question. He finds Parker and returns the old red and blues, thus Spider-Man is out for one last swing to save New York City from the unknown threat lurking in the shadows, just waiting for the shield to go up.

Kaare Andrews, the author and illustrator of Spider-Man: Reign, has not only tapped into an exciting world, but also one we all know very well. The book carries with it the definite post-9/11 presence, and features leaders using fear to keep us in our place. The tale has a dark tone to it, one that weaves itself through the writing and the art. And while the comparisons to Returns cannot be overlooked, Reign works exceptionally well as a look into Spider-Man’s potential future and as a book on its own.

It seems every generation has writers that will change comics forever. From Stan Lee to Brian Michael Bendis, there will always be storytellers who are considered the “best of the best.” It would appear Spider-Man: Reign has put Kaare Andrews up with the greats.

Ghost Rider (2007)

A special effects-ridden Nicolas Cage stares in Ghost Rider

by Gary Sundt

As Printed in The Lumberjack on February 22, 2007

How many times have you gone to see a movie and you just really wanted it to be good? Well, sometimes a movie is what it is, and you can’t deny it was just a bad movie. Welcome to the Ghost Rider experience.

The story goes that when Johnny Blaze was a young carnie motorcycle stunt rider, he sold his soul to Mephistopheles in exchange for his cancer-ridden father’s health. When Mr. Blaze gets his health back, the devil causes the old rider to have a fatal accident on his bike, and Johnny is stuck working for old ‘Stopheles forever.

Cut to modern times. Nicolas Cage is Johnny Blaze, and he has used his deal with the devil to become famous for doing insane stunts that should rightfully kill him. To sum up the film’s long beginning, Johnny hooks up with his childhood romance, Roxanne (Eva Mendes), and they want to rekindle their old flame.

Meanwhile, a demon called Blackheart is coming to our world with his evil gang to do some evil stuff. This is not Devil-Certified Evil, so Mephistopheles wants Blackheart stopped. He taps Blaze and gives him the powers of the Ghost Rider, which means he is bulletproof, has the ability to stare and his head catches on fire. On his fiery motorcycle, Ghost Rider goes off to fight Blackheart and his cronies in what ends up being one very underwhelming fight after another.

Mark Steven Johnson, the guy who gave us the not-so-good Daredevil, and the outstanding Daredevil Director’s Cut, is at the helm of Ghost Rider, and from the very beginning you can’t help but feel that he really wanted to give us a comic book. On one side, we have a fun look, one that never seems real, but more comic book-like, which I appreciated. On the other hand, Ghost Rider, with its cheesy dialogue and strange story-telling, never feels like a movie. Also, I don’t really understand why Johnny Blaze turns into Ghost Rider, and suddenly he only churns out horrible lines and laughs really hard.

Honestly though, the real problem with Ghost Rider, besides its horrible dialogue and story that doesn’t translate well to film, is the fact that the audience never feels any dread. When you watch Spider-Man fight Doc Ock in Spider-Man 2, you have the feeling of “Oh crap! Spidey is in trouble!” In Ghost Rider, you never feel anything like that. You always know how it is going to end: Evil will be punished, the girl is not going to die and Ghost Rider will ride off into the sunset (and in this movie, he actually does).

The Number 23 (2007)

Jim Carrey reads the writing on the wall in The Number 23.

by Gary Sundt

As Printed in The Lumberjack on March 1, 2007

Many people have said, “The book is better than the movie.” But has anybody ever said it about a book that doesn’t exist? Well, I will today. The book is “The Number 23,” the movie is The Number 23 and there are far more than 23 reasons why this movie doesn’t work.

Jim Carrey leads this “suspense-thriller” as Walter Sparrow, a dogcatcher who has just celebrated his 32^nd birthday (23 backwards). As a gift, his wife buys him a book called “The Number 23.” Sparrow scoffs at the purchase, insisting that he doesn’t need to fill his head with such drivel. But when he starts to read the book, the number 23 begins to rule his life, just as it rules the life of the character in the book, a detective named Fingerling.

The Number 23 does it right by giving the viewer a glimpse of this number-obsessed book via scenes acted out through Sparrow’s imagination. It is essentially a crime noir story wrapped around the number 23, and this actually turns out to be the most interesting part of the movie. The book is thrilling, dark and moody. It uses sharp and clever dialogue, as only a good noir book could, while providing interesting twists and turns that reminded me of a good Chuck Palahnuik novel.

Unfortunately, Director Joel Schumacher (whose career will always be stained by Batman & Robin) and actor Jim Carrey seem to put all their eggs in the book’s basket. The result of this is an entirely unbalanced film, with more book qualities than movie, complete with a performance by Carrey that reminded me of Batman Forever (“Bummer!”), which worked for The Riddler, but was a bit too loony for an obsessive detective.

However, what is strangest of all in this mismatch of director/actor/film project is that there are filmmakers who can do this right. People like David Lynch or Darren Aronofsky have the ability to make the kind of movie The Number 23 should be. These people know how to twist and drag their audience through a nightmare, but keep them fascinated all the while.

With Schumacher at the helm, all I could do is sit and wait for the next section of the book. Unfortunately, the book only goes so long, and that leaves the movie to pick up the slack. Needless to say, there are more than 23 minutes of this movie that are book-less.