Hey folks, Harry here... Now I'm dying to have tons of reports on Cronenberg's SPIDER, but for now, I'm having to settle with a spy named SPYder talking about a film called COMIC BOOK VILLIANS which sounds... unfortunately lame... though who knows, I like the concept, maybe it doesn't suck as much as SPYder says so. Beware of lots of spoilers...
Hail to the Head Geek,
SPYder, here. Bon soiré from a rainy, cloudy, breezy Croisette. Evidently, it rains every year at Cannes, but they never show you the pictures from the rainy days, just the sunny glamorous beauty shots of the elite on the red carpet at the Palais. Enough about the weather…
When I awoke this morning, I found that a pass to Lions Gate’s “Comic Book Villains” had fallen into the slender strands of the web I have spun over Cannes. Moi, a comic book fan since third grade, at Cannes, with a chance to see a picture called “Comic Book Villain.” How could I pass that up? Quite simply, I couldn’t.
The rest of you, however, can feel free to skip this picture entirely. Some of you may get suckered in by the title and the premise, as did I, only to find yourselves profoundly disappointed when the end credits roll and the house lights come up. Feel free to make good use of my trip to France as a bit of free advice.
The basic idea behind “Comic Book Villains” is that there are these two comic shop owners who learn of a mythical comic book collection spanning 45 years that belonged to a recently diseased shut-in. Considering the era collected, the books represent a veritable Holy Grail of comic-collecting. Both shop owners need the potential bonanza to reach their respective dreams, and will stop at nothing to obtain the collection for themselves. The only obstacle in their path is the mother of the dearly departed, who flatly refuses to part with her son’s possessions; like most stereotypical comic book fans, the 55 year old deceased still lived with his mother. The stage set with our players, hilarity ensues… or at least it’s supposed to.
Donal Logue (“Blade,” The Big Tease”) is Raymond, the “good guy” because his is a shop for pure fans, and who possesses an encyclopedic knowledge of comic book lore. Michael Rapaport (“Metro,” “Mighty Aphrodite”) is Norman, his arch-nemisis who owns a more successful shop that peddles not only comics but also the abominations of Pokémon, Magic, etc. Obviously, the latter is blasphemy to sincere fans. (Personally, I’ve started to feel the same way as most of the newer “comic” shops carry only a paltry selection of the current crop, staffed by people who only know they’re supposed to push the Pikachu crap.) Natasha Lyonne (“Slums of Beverly Hills,” “American Pie 1 & 2”) is Judy, Norman’s wife and fellow shop owner. Raymond considers Norman to be a “dabbler” in the comic arena, and Judy to be a money-grubbing Yoko corrupting her husband’s inclination toward a peaceful solution. DJ Qualls (“Road Trip,” “The New Guy”) is Archie, a loyal shopper of Raymond’s store, who finds his comic-obsessed life lacking and is beginning the search for deeper meaning in his life. Archie is the narrator of the story. Eileen Brennan (“Private Benjamin,” and other work) plays Mrs. Cresswell, the mother of the dead fan who refuses to part with her son’s massive comic archive.
You can kind of tell where all of this is going. Raymond and Norman both pursue the collection. Raymond is driven by his own dire financial straits, while Norman is pushed by the desire for greater financial security and his wife, who wants to have a baby (although this is only mentioned in one line and never really followed-up). Archie, of course sides with Raymond, but in the course of the story finds himself befriending Mrs. Cresswell and learning about the world beyond this nameless town by listening to her tales of her honeymoon in Spain. Both Raymond and Norman escalate the conflict, leaving Archie and Mrs. Cresswell caught in the middle. When the scales turn violent, as you can tell they’re going to, Raymond brings in an outside man, J.C. Carter, played by Carey Elwes (“The Princess Bride,” Robin Hood: Men in Tights,” “Kiss the Girls,” “The Pentagon Wars”). Carter is Raymond’s former high school nemesis and all around bully, whom Raymond engages to steal the collection from Mrs. Cresswell before Norman and Judy can get their money-grubbing dabbling hands on it.
Now, all of this sounds promising. I admit, the basic set up has promise. Sad to say, though, that the film just doesn’t deliver.
There are many, many references to tidbits of comic book history, ostensibly designed to assure us that the writers know their stuff and that “Comic Book Villains” should appeal to anyone who collects comic books. There are almost too many references, actually, and they kind of weigh some scenes down.
That sounds like a relatively minor point, but it was indicative of the pro blems with the script that brought down the rest of the picture as well. There were many areas of the story and script that were uneven. Archie starts us off as the narrator, much like Peter Parker is our guide through “Spider-Man.” The major difference being that Peter was our main character through the story, and that it worked better. At many points Archie is shunted out of sight, and isn’t involved enough with the main plot. Obviously, the central conflict is between the two comic owners, but Archie’s growth is supposed to come from the lessons he learns from their mistakes. The script doesn’t keep him in the action enough or involved in the obsessions of the two shop owners enough to make it entirely credible.
There are a lot of other problems with the script and story. There’s a whole sequence designed to give us back-story on Carter and his stripper girlfriend. I guess they thought that we really needed to know that in order to get that it’s a bad thing when Raymond later takes her hostage to find Car ter when the deal goes bad, or to explain the house that the two have a fight in. The problem is that they didn’t need to take that time to set that stage, because Carter is a fairly tangential character. We don’t need to meet him until much later in the picture, and he doesn’t really need so much exposition. He’s also kind of uneven, a nice guy thinking of settling down in one scene, and a supposed bad-guy in the next. The problem was that the bad guy part wasn’t really set up well; we don’t get any sign that he’s the psychopath he should have been. Example: there’s a scene where Carter is confronted by the ex-husband of said stripper girlfriend. Ex has brought a couple buddies who try to beat Carter up. Carter takes them all down, which doesn’t make him look like a bad guy, just a guy acting in self defense. He takes a shot at the Ex with a baseball bat, but only one. The moment really needed more psychosis with the violence; go back and watch “Silence of the Lambs,” and pay close attention to Lecter when he bludgeons that guard to death when he makes his escape. That’s the kind of moment Carey needed to give us the sense that Carter was dangerous.
Other areas of uneven-ness include the use of vulgarity, which is randomly and senselessly applied. In some scenes where there could have been profanity, the writers passed, only to throw it into another scene where it seemed out of place and gratuitous.
There were also problems with the Norman/Judy relationship, but I’m spending way too much time on a movie I’m suggesting nobody sees. There were problems with lighting, direction, costuming, and other areas as well. I could have overlooked those if the writing had been tighter, if the story had been more focused, but it wasn’t.
Most of the cast has done pretty good work before, and I think they tried to make the most of their scenes. I was glad to see Carey Elwes on screen again, but it was painful to see him have to toil through such a mediocre movie.
The real shame of all of this is that “Comic Book Villains” really missed out on the chance to make a positive statement about comics themselves. The film hits you over the head with a hammer to tell you to put down the books and get outside and live your life, but they don’t take the time to stand up for comics as a medium. From my point of view, if you’re going to try to establish credibility in your knowledge of the medium, take a scene or two to remind people that comic books themselves are a good thing. It’s the obsession that’s bad. Comic books get people reading and thinking, and have a chance to expose kids to ideas and principles in a fun and entertaining medium. They have a real chance to broaden your horizons. There’s a reason some of these titles have been around 75 years.
I’ve heard talk that “Comic Book Villains” is going direct-to-video in the U.S. If that’s the case, then by the time you can find “Comic Book Villains” in your video store, “Spider-Man” will probably be there, too. Rent “X-Men” or “Spider-Man” instead. Leave “Comic Book Villains” on the shelf.
Me, I’m going to see if I can find “Spider-Man” showing somewhere here. Even dubbed in French, it will be a better time than the one I had this afternoon watching “Comic Book Villains.”
SPYder, out.
