GHOST WITH THE MOST

Posted By: Peter DavidPosted On:

Just came back from the advance screening of “Ghost Rider.” Discussion with some minor spoilers below.

Long story short: Entertaining eye candy with some great action set pieces, nifty FX, decent acting from Nic Cage and a plot that doesn’t make a lick of sense.

Short story long: And by not a lick of sense, I mean tons of no sense. Internal rules that don’t remain consistent (Satanic beings can’t enter a cemetery because it’s consecrated…but they CAN enter a church?). The concept that, like Slayers, every generation has a Ghost Rider, except later we learn there’s been 150 years since the last one. Characters who appear and disappear for no reason. Elemental demons who conveniently attack Ghost Rider one at a time over three successive nights, thus allowing themselves to be dispatched without much trouble, rather than attacking him en masse.

But the film has a lot of energy, moves along briskly, and features a solidly tongue in cheek performance from Nic Cage (his halting explanation of his current status quo to his disbelieving girlfriend is a stitch.) It’s an hour and forty five minutes of entertainment, and–sadly–even with enough holes to drive a truck fleet through, the plot STILL makes more sense than “Superman Returns.”

PAD

96 comments on “GHOST WITH THE MOST”

  2. Also Ghost Rider doesn’t come off as a creepy stalker like Superman did. Using his x-ray vision to spy on Lois and then breaking into her house to see the kid at the end of the movie was just disturbing.

    After seeing that movie I think the X-Men franchise picked just the right time to dispose of Singer.

  3. Maybe they meant “once every generation in demon years.” Eh? EH?

    Noooo, I can’t save it. And everytime I see that commercial with Cage going “Feels like my skull’s on fire,” I feel like it’s a personal challenge for me to kick his ášš and Mark Steven Johnson’s.

    And yet I know I’ll eventually see the movie willingly. ARGH!

  4. I pretty much predicted what your thoughts on the movie would be, Peter, and I turned out to be right. And there’s a very simple reason for this:

    It’s from the same director as Daredevil.

    ‘Nuff said.

  6. “Probably a good thing you didn’t write the movie novelization, PAD. Your brain might have exploded and gotten your sweater all messy.”

    If I’d done the movie novelization, I’d have come up with additional scenes to explain it all.

    PAD

  7. I liked superman returns. He wasn’t stalking, he was voyeuring and we all do it and if we all had x ray vision we would be doing worse things than that. well I would be.

    totally off topic…did any one read the psi man books?

  8. >sadly–even with enough holes to drive a truck fleet through, the plot STILL makes more sense than “Superman Returns.”

    Sadder still are the number of people who thought RETURNS was a very good movie. Effects and spectacular scenes are more important than a coherent, intelligent story and solid acting. Pity.

  9. Whats even more sad is to think that previous superhero movies had well written plots. Most of the superman movies, from the 80’s were awful, and I think most of you confuse awesome for well written. Its like people who did not like the new star wars movies, the originals were lame, but awesome.

  10. Should be very afraid for my favorite comic book character, Iron Man? They are making an Iron Man movie too.

  11. [snip]It’s an hour and forty five minutes of entertainment[snip]

    Given that I watch movies to be entertained, I’ll take this as an endorsement. Even though, no shock to anyone, I was already planning on seeing it.

  12. But I liked Superman Returns.. I think I just heard enough negative about it that when I did see it, it wasn’t as bad as I thought it was going to be.
    Plus, Spacey as Luthor was perfect.
    Plot? Okay, ya got me there… Special Effects weren’t perfect… but there was something about it that I liked…

    T

  13. Am watching GR tonight not expecting a lot but ready to be entertained. If only, I want Nick Cage to enjoy a success with this one, after all his efforts to get into a superhero franchise, any superhero franchise. It seemed like if Snipes hadnt bought Black Panther, Cage whould have propositioned himself for the role.

    Someone did a great photo-op about this in a spanish site, with Cage asking for the role of Wonder Woman. Ill try to find it and link it.

  14. Posted by Luigi Novi at February 16, 2007 02:08 AM
    “I pretty much predicted what your thoughts on the movie would be, Peter, and I turned out to be right. And there’s a very simple reason for this:

    It’s from the same director as Daredevil.”

    Well, for fairness’ sake, the Director’s Cut of ‘Daredevil’ was a very different and – IMHO – much better movie that the one released to theatres, so maybe we shouldn’t shoot the messenger too badly…

    ‘Superman Returns’ was just a train wreck from start to long overdue end. Terrible, terrible movie.

    Speaking of movies; one to definitely watch out for is ‘Hot Fuzz’, from the same team as ‘Shaun of the Dead’. Saw it yesterday, and I’m still chortling occasionally.

    Cheers!

  15. It’s from the same director as Daredevil.

    When we went to see Daredevil, I was expecting total crap. So, I was pleasantly surprised when I saw the movie and thought that it wasn’t total crap after all.

    Still, Ghost Rider will be a DVD rental for me.

  17. Wow, Peter David giving an honest and critical opinion of a Marvel-related production? Did we travel back to 2002?

  18. I think that I will reserve judgement until I come out of the theatre later today.

    Although I will say Ghost Rider being compared to that CRAPTASTIC Superman Returns doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies.

    Suffice to say that as fanboys we are living in exciting times. At least movies are being made about our Comic Action Stars.

    Regards:
    Warren S. Jones III

  19. PAD,

    My impression was that the inability to come onto consecrated ground only applied to the elemental “spirits” and not to either Mephistopheles or Blackheart. But come to think of it, they were in the church with Blackheart, weren’t they?

    Except I think they were with him in a lobby area, so maybe it doesn’t count. I don’t know. I’d have had them wait outside to avoid any confusion.

    Overall, I liked _Ghost Rider_, despite flaws like that. I thought it was respectful to the source material, even though they took a few liberties. In the comicbook, Johnny Blaze makes his deal with the Devil to save “Crash” Simpson, Roxanne’s father from cancer, not his own father, Barton Blaze, who’d already died some years previous. Also in the comicbook, Johnny willingly summons “Satan” (later revealed to be Mephisto. In the film, Mephistopheles comes to him. What’s more, he never actually agrees to the deal. He’s just _reading_ the contract when it cuts him and spills his blood on it.

    Also, in the comicbook, Johnny becomes Ghost Rider the night he makes the deal, not decades later.

    A bit more about the comicbook, before I return my attention to the movie: My first encounter with _Ghost Rider_ (in any incarnation) was issue 58 of the Johnny Blaze series, which I picked up off the spinner rack at a drug store. The cover shows a group of guys in a car fleeing from a motorcyclist with a flaming skull who’s visible in their rear-view mirror. I opened up to the first page and read the “Stan Lee presents…” caption and thought it was “cute” that this character was called Johnny _Blaze_.

    Anyway, I bought the issue, and every one after that until the series ended with #81. I really liked how (especially as the series grew closer to the end) _Ghost Rider_ developed into a metaphor of a man dealing with his personal demons. The more Johnny Blaze became Ghost Rider, the more the demon within him, Zarathos, was able to gain independent control when he was Ghost Ridering. As a result, Ghost Rider went from being an extension of Johnny’s personality to someone Johnny had to fight to keep from getting too far out of control. Zarathos was both literally and metaphorically Johnny Blaze’s personal demon. Like the alcoholic tempted by “just one drink”, Johnny was often tempted to give in to the desire to become Ghost Rider because it was an “emergency.”

    I eventually bought all the back issues, and I have to say what ended as a _great_ book had a less than great beginning. Or rather, certain elements of the early stories are… unfortunate. “Satan” comes to collect Johnny’s soul, but is prevented from doing so by Roxanne Simpson’s virginal purity (so he gives Johnny the Ghost Rider curse instead). puh-lease. The idea that sexual inexperience would make one so good and pure they could ward off “Satan” is laughable. There are evil, wicked people who’ve never had sex and good and “pure” people who have.

    It’s also obvious in the early days that _Ghost Rider_ was just a way to cash in on the then-popularity of Evel Knievel and _The Exorcist_. In and of itself, that’s not a bad thing, but the later internal battle between Johnny and Zarathos made for better stories than those about a supernatural “superhero.”

    Returning to the film, like I said, it respected the source material. It had Johnny Blaze and Roxanne Simpson; the deal with the Devil and subsequent double cross; and Johnny’s subsequent curse. The film also acknowledged the western Ghost Rider, Carter Slade (who used theatricality to give the _illusion_ of supernatural powers in the comics; he wasn’t a demon-possessed Ghost Rider, like Johnny), and threw in a few nods to Dan Ketch, the 1990s Ghost Rider. Those were the chain, the “penance stare” and a villain named Blackheart. I also understand “The Caretaker” is a Dan Ketch-era character, too. In the film, the Caretaker is an amalgam of two characters from the comics, but I’ll say no more to avoid spoilers.

    By the way, what happened to the Stan Lee cameo? Did I miss it, or did he not do one this time?

    It is puzzling that every generation has a Ghost Rider, yet the last one appeared 150 years ago. A minor change in the narration (or in the conversation between the Caretaker and Johnny) could have fixed that. All they had to do is let us know that the Carter Slade Ghost Rider defied Mephistopheles (apparently the first to do so), but that there had been others between him and Johnny.

    But now we’ve got another puzzle (and here we _do_ have a SPOILER WARNING

    S
    P
    O
    I
    L
    E
    R

    W
    A
    R
    N
    I
    N
    G

    When Mephistopheles offers to free Johnny from the Ghost Rider curse, stating that somebody else can bear that burden, it suggests that he can only have one Ghost Rider at a time. Or was he just mad when Johnny refuses to give up the power _because of_ Johnny’s refusal? If the former, how can Johnny have become a Ghost Rider when the Carter Slade Ghost Rider was still around? And if there’s no “rule” against having more than one Ghost Rider at the same time, why didn’t Mephistopheles just say, in essence, “fine. I’ll just make another Rider and send him after you.” Or, for that matter, “fine. I still own your soul. Drop dead.”?

    Ah well, it could have been better. But then, it could have been worse. Anyone remember the treatment Thor got in the _Return of the Incredible Hulk_ TV movie? Instead of Don Blake _becoming_ Thor, he summoned Thor _as a separate person_.

    If I was still doing my movie review column from 1994-1995, I’d probably give _Ghost Rider_ a B- or C+.

    Rick

  20. Just out of curiosity: any acknowledgment of Roy Thimas, Mike Ploog or Gary Freidrich in the credits?

  21. DVD: “Probably a good thing you didn’t write the movie novelization, PAD. Your brain might have exploded and gotten your sweater all messy.”

    PAD: If I’d done the movie novelization, I’d have come up with additional scenes to explain it all.

    Dave…he made Batman Forever into a respectable, logical story. I doubt this one would be much of a challenge.

  22. By the way, what happened to the Stan Lee cameo?

    As far as I’ve noticed, Stan’s cameos have been limited to the films based on the characters he had a hand in creating.

  23. Mike Stanczyk: Should be very afraid for my favorite comic book character, Iron Man? They are making an Iron Man movie too.
    Luigi Novi: You don’t like Jon Favreau?

    Peter J Poole: Well, for fairness’ sake, the Director’s Cut of ‘Daredevil’ was a very different and – IMHO – much better movie that the one released to theatres, so maybe we shouldn’t shoot the messenger too badly…
    Luigi Novi: I didn’t know there was a Director’s Cut. What was different in it? Did they dispense with the stupid notion that DD’s radar sense came from his sense of touch? Or the fact that he tried to kill Quesada in the beginning of the film? Or the fact that he was prosecuting Quesada despite being a defense attorney? Or the fact that his radar view of Elektra was totally different from his radar view of the Kingpin, and didn’t look at all like a view created by soundwaves? Or the unmasked DD’s ridiculous assertion to Kingpin as to why he didn’t have to worry about Kingpin being revealed? Did they include or mention Stick, or some mention that Matt had martial arts training after losing his sight? Did they make Elektra a better fighter than she was in the movie, and make a better stand against Bullseye before he killed her? Or make the pool hall fight less silly?

  24. Posted by: Luigi Novi at February 16, 2007 02:16 PM

    I didn’t know there was a Director’s Cut. What was different in it? Did they dispense with the stupid notion that DD’s radar sense came from his sense of touch? Or the fact that he tried to kill Quesada in the beginning of the film? Or the fact that he was prosecuting Quesada despite being a defense attorney? Or the fact that his radar view of Elektra was totally different from his radar view of the Kingpin, and didn’t look at all like a view created by soundwaves? Or the unmasked DD’s ridiculous assertion to Kingpin as to why he didn’t have to worry about Kingpin being revealed? Did they include or mention Stick, or some mention that Matt had martial arts training after losing his sight? Did they make Elektra a better fighter than she was in the movie, and make a better stand against Bullseye before he killed her? Or make the pool hall fight less silly?

    But aside from all that, how did you like the movie? 😉

  26. One more thought about _Ghost Rider_.

    When the inevitable sequel appears, I hope Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider doesn’t just fight external foes. I’d like the filmmakers to take more pages from the comicbook series and develop an _internal_ conflict between Johnny and the demon Zarathos. As in the comicbook, that conflict creates a conundrum for Johnny. The more he uses his abilities to help others and/or fight evil, the control Zarathos gains over their shared form. And the more that happens, the greater the likelihood that Ghost Rider would _deliberately_ hurt innocents. And to add to the conundrum, Johnny _wants_ to use his powers to help people/fight evil. That’s pretty clear from what’s established by the end of the first film.

    True, we don’t know if the Johnny Blaze of the film is possessed by a demon (Zarathos or otherwise), but I’d hope they’d go in that direction. It’d be a more interesting film than if he just fought bad guys.

    Rick

  27. Thanks, for the link, Peter, but I didn’t consider most of the things I mentioned to be nits. I found them to be reasons why the film, the plot and the execution of the character was flawed on a fundamental level. Matt Murdock killing a guy isn’t a nit. It’s goes right to the heart of the character as he’s portrayed in the book.

  28. Luigi, I believe the Daredevil director’s cut clocked in at about 133 minutes, as opposed to the theatrical cut, which was 102 or 103. I agree with those who found the director’s cut more enjoyable, although frankly I could have done without the deleted scenes featuring Coolio as a defense witness. That said, I think the longer version offered a bit more to the fans than say, the upcoming special edition of Spider-Man 2 that adds about five minutes of material just so they can Lucas the fans one more time.

    Funnily enough, I agree with most of your points about the Daredevil film, although I always believed that on a conceptual level, Daredevil was going to be a difficult character to capture on film, considering his key abilities are mostly internal and thus a bit more esoteric. I had a few fundamental problems of my own with the film, but I still felt that Johnson put his heart into the project and that it worked more than not. I just wished that they had stayed away from the CG stunt doubles, which the technology was not able to handle even a couple of years ago. Which was my major criticism of Blade 2, by the way.

    As for Superman Returns, I’m so happy to hear that there are other people out there who didn’t enjoy it. Personally, I found it an overblown, over-long, pretentious piece of work, with a miscast lead actor who seemed a bit too effeminate to me, directed by somebody who’s been pulling the wool over the eyes of the fan community for too many years. But my biggest complaint is that Superman just didn’t come across as, well, super. Other than one major set piece, we really don’t see Superman doing much of anything for the first 45 minutes or so, by which time I had pretty much lost interest.

    Finally, I’m not all that sure I’m going to rush out and see Ghost Rider either. With the window between theatrical and DVD releases shrinking all the time, I feel relatively sanguine about waiting until maybe June to see it on DVD.

  29. I loved Superman Returns. I don’t get the plot complaints from the rest of the geek set (of which I’m a part of). The flick received exceedingly positive reviews when it came out, just check out rottentomatoes.com. And I don’t think Richard White ever really believed that Jason was his child. Lois was the one fooling herself on that front. And yeah, I guess there was a moment there where a tsunami could have hit Metropolis, but that’s more an omission in extraneous action than a plot hole. Other than that I doubt you can find a better example of applied physics in a superhero movie (shuttle rescue).

  30. There IS an Iron Man animated direct-to-video film out already. There may be a live-action, and if it’s anything close to this, start weeping.

    Besides the fact that it bears little resemblence to any Iron Man story line I’ve ever encountered, it’s drained of any reason why we might admire Tony Stark as a man.

    One visual factor steams me personally; the steam-filled scene where Stark takes a bath with a readheaded bimbo, with the steam precisely covering the “naughty bits.” And the climactic scene has a posessed, beautiful woman whose flowing semi-transparent robes are transparent enough to show the shape of her body, but not the details of said body. If you’re going to do semi-nudity to try to make this thing PG-13 and make it seem “adult,” do it with a little more artistic style, folks.

    I probably wouldn’t have been irritated by all of the above if the film had an involving storyline.

  31. Overall, with comic films, how does everybody feel? Do you guys want STRICT ADHERANCE TO THE WRITTEN/DRAWN TITLE or are you going in thinking, “Well, let’s see what they do with this?” Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with either view. Sam Raimi caught everything right with the two Spidey movies, although I have to admit being disappointed when I found out about the organic 2099-rip off web shooters.(That’s literally what I thought at the time.) On the other hand, Brian Singer caught similarly everything right with the first two X-movies, he nailed the characters dead on with the exception of Rogue, but even that worked. But the X-movies were a little less comic-conforming than the Spidey ones, and I know a few people who despise them because Storm wasn’t a first generation X-character the way the movie portrayed her. Now, just in case there’s any question, I feel that if the movie, well, stinks close adherence to the source won’t save it. Just wondering.

  32. Sean, I can only speak personally, but I don’t really mind if a comic-based project veers off in a different direction from the source material, provided there is an internal logic to it, which is one of the points that Peter brings up in his review above. Which is one of the reasons that I’m not a huge fan of the first two X-Men films. Why go through the trouble of introducing Storm with a faux African accent in the first film if you’re just going to dispose of it in film two? I know the behind-the-scenes reason doubtless had something to do with the fact that Halle Berry decided she didn’t want to do the stupid accent anymore, right around the time she didn’t want to wear the long wig or contacts, but in terms of an internal logic, that sort of thing pìššëš me off. The same way as Peter Rasputin seems to lose his Russian accent along the way, or Rogue loses her Southern accent. Those are tiny details I admit, but when they start piling them up, they have a cumulative effect.

    And believe me, I really didn’t have a problem with plot holes on Superman Returns. To me, the bigger problems were in casting, direction, editing and overall story structure.

  33. Just got back from seeing Ghost Rider, and frankly, I didn’t see it as having that many logic problems. The hallowed ground thing I’ll grant (although, for all we know, the Caretaker just meant the Nephilim when he said “they can’t enter hallowed ground,” not Blackheart, who he didn’t know was involved), but the “no Ghost Rider for 150 years” seems wrong. The caretaker gave the impression of having seen several Riders come and go (messily) in his day.

    Mind you, I did find the plot pacing way too videogame-y. Boss fight, cut scene, mooks, boss fight, cut scene, etc.

  34. Did they make Elektra a better fighter than she was in the movie, and make a better stand against Bullseye before he killed her?

    As I recall the original Frank Miller story, Bullseye DID take her out without much problem. “You’re good…but me…I’m magic” as he cuts her throat with a card. Elektra became a far more powerful fighter after her ressurection.

    Overall, with comic films, how does everybody feel? Do you guys want STRICT ADHERANCE TO THE WRITTEN/DRAWN TITLE or are you going in thinking, “Well, let’s see what they do with this?”

    keep what works on the sccreen, change what must to make it work. I had no problem with the changes to the Fantastic 4 origin–who today would buy 4 people sneaking onto a rocketship? The changes to Doctor Doom were pointless and added nothing.

    Oraganic web shooters? Yeah, I liked it–it is too much to swallow that it just so happens that Peter has invented the perfect weapon for a guiy named spiderman. One that could make him a fortune and get his aunt oout of poverty, I might add. (Yes, he tried to sell it to a glue company and they rejected it because it was temporary–my ášš! Like the department of defense wouldn’t give half their fingers and both of their thumbs for something like this!). Anyhoo…

    Just came back from Ghostrider. Packed house. The crowd seemed to enjoy it. The movie is pure popcorn fluff but I wasn’t expecting anything much more–Ghostrider was never more than a niche entry in the Marvel Universe to me. They got the visuals down well–the fire effects were excellent and I’ve had some experience trying to use CGI fire. It isn’t fun or easy.

    On the other hand, I think they should have done more with the skull. I know a skull can’t change expressions but if you look at the comic the artists would cheat now and again to give him a slightly evil look or whatever was needed. The movie didn’t do that. When he laughed they just made his jaw move up and down.

    Aintitcoolnews really lowered my expectations for the film and I enjoyed it quite a bit more than I thought I would. Nicholas Cage has a lot of charisma.

    I did feel bad for the iguana though.

  35. I’m a Ghost Rider fan from back in the 1980’s, and have been waiting eagerly for this film ever since it entered production. (Before that actually, because the movie had been attempted several times over the years, but never got made until now.) Routine visits to the Ghost Rider Movie Blog and the official web site helped get me through until the premiere, but I was so ready for the movie that when the Spider-Man 3 trailer came on I was wishing it would hurry up and finish so Ghost Rider could start. And I can say that I was impressed with it.

    Johnny’s origin is told in an efficient manner, and sets the story up nicely. The script keeps things moving at a smooth pace, with no area of the film really losing momentum. There was also quite a bit of humor in the film, and it worked surprisingly well.

    As far as the special effects go, when Johnny transforms into Ghost Rider it looks amazingly cool. All the Ghost Rider powers I was hoping to see were present, like the Penance Stare and the ability of the Hellcycle to defy the laws of physics. I think Mark Steven Johnson did a great job of taking the comic and changing it just enough to work on the screen, but not so much that it loses the essence of the characters. He manages to blend the best parts of the various Ghost Rider incarnations into one, and even manages a nod to the western Ghost Rider.

    Were there certain things that bothered me? Sure. The scene where he whistled for the bike threw me, and it took a couple minutes to get back into the movie after that. The hallowed ground thing I was able to explain to myself by figuring the Fallen were once angels, so churches shouldn’t be off-limits to them. Strangely enough, the part that bothered me the most was the idea of moving and entire cemetery. I know you can’t make things too easy for the hero or villain, but that seemed like a ridiculous obstacle. All of these oddities were still minor compared to the enjoyment I got from the film.

    Overall, it was a very good movie, and I look forward to seeing it again.

    By the way, I did stay all the way through the credits, and I want to let you know that this is not one of those movies that throws a little scene in at the end, like X-Men: The Last Stand. So it you want to head for home when the credits start rolling, you can do so with a clear conscience. (A credit that did catch my eye was one of the caterers: Hel’s Kitchen. If ever a production chose a caterer because of the name, that was it.)

  36. “Superman Returns had a plot??????”

    Yes it did, however it was leaked to the public back in 1978 by Richard Donner.

  37. Thanks for your comments, Joe. As to DD’s power being mostly internal, well, I don’t see how this would make him any more hard to capture on film than say, Professor X or Wolverine. DD, after all, has acrobatic/martial arts abilities that make for nice visuals.

    Also, in what way do you feel has Singer pooled the wool over the fans’ eyes over the years?

  38. Luigi, in hindsight I might have been a bit too flip, but what I was trying to say is there seemed to be some kind of cult of personality that sprung up around Singer’s work on the first two X-Men films. After he left the franchise to work on Superman Returns, there seemed to be a lot of gnashing of teeth and rending of garments, as though this was a disaster of biblical proportions. I never really felt that Singer was as emotionally invested in the material as say, Sam Raimi on Spider-Man who for my money is still the perfect director for the right superhero franchise. Mind you, I’m not saying the Spidey films are perfect either (I’m still not prepared to forgive Raimi for the bonehead move of getting rid of the Green Goblin’s iconic mask in favor of a helmet that masked his features) but for me, they’ve always had a lot more resonance than the X-Men films. I think Singer did a perfectly acceptable job with them, but I never thought of them as the ultimate comic book films that some fans have made them out to be.

    That said, I give Singer a huge amount of credit for putting anything decent on screen considering how little respect Fox has had for this property, rushing the X-Men films into release dates that made it all but impossible for even the most talented director to put together something really great. But that’s a whole other discussion I think.

  39. I thought both Raimi and Singer did good jobs, Singer moreso. While I thought that Spidey 2 was the best comic-based movie since the original Superman, I thought that the first one was merely good, but not great. I didn’t care for the camp, which was toned way down for the second one. As for Singer, I thought both of his X-Men films were great. Perhaps resonance is more difficult to convey with a team property as opposed to a single-star property, but I thought Singer did it well. I admit that I myself was skeptical about the third film, even though I liked Brett Ratner’s work on Red Dragon, but it turned out that X-Men 3 was great, whereas Superman Returns sucked ášš.

    As for the Green Goblin’s mask, I thought that was a legitimate change in the adaptation, since the costume from the comics wouldn’t work in a film.

  40. Luigi, I’m not sure if the Green Goblin costume would have worked, but the mask certainly would have. If you’ve ever seen a photo of the original Goblin mask created by ADI for the film, I think you would agree, especially on Defoe’s wonderfully Goblin-like facial features, but for whatever reasons, Raimi vetoed the idea in favor of the helmet.

  41. Completely off topic, but this just seems like a natural fit for you, Peter!

    Press Release

    In the end, they couldn’t resist the glamour, the allure of multi-colored shoes, the subtle symphony of pins colliding, and, well, real heavy balls.

    MegaCon guests Adam Kubert (penciler on Action Comics), Moose Bauman (colorist on Green Lantern), Barbara Kesel (Legends of the Dark Crystal) and anime voiceover artist Vic Mignogna (Full Metal Alchemist, Macross, Dragon Ball Z) have all added their names to the honored few who will bowl with the fans on Saturday night, February 17th, to benefit the Hero Initiative.

    In honor of the additions, Hero Initiative has extended the Bowl-A-Thon ticket sales on eBay for three more days, rounding out a series of auctions all scheduled to coincide with the annual pilgrimage to Orlando for MegaCon.

    http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll…m=300081210152

  42. My wife and I saw half of “Ghost Rider” last night.

    No — we didn’t walk out in disgust. As a matter of fact, we were pretty much enjoying it.

    But I guess the film was such a “hot” commodity that the fire alarm strobes and sirens started going off, and we had to clear the AMC cineplex. Seriously, there was a fire somewhere in the mall, and thousands of people had to exit — including the thousands of people who were in all the theaters. And, since it was, like, 10 degrees outside, and we could just imagine the administrative goat-rope that was going to take place at the cineplex once the “all clear” was sounded, we just left.

    It was the first time in all my years of going to the movies that I had to exit in the middle of a picture because of a fire alarm. How ironic is it that it occurred while watching a film about a blazing biker from Hëll?

    We’ll take our ticket stubs back later and see if we can see the rest of it, courtesy of AMC. It’s times like that I’ll bet being a theater manager is a bloody nightmare.

  43. Luigi, I’m not sure if the Green Goblin costume would have worked, but the mask certainly would have. If you’ve ever seen a photo of the original Goblin mask created by ADI for the film, I think you would agree, especially on Defoe’s wonderfully Goblin-like facial features, but for whatever reasons, Raimi vetoed the idea in favor of the helmet.

    Which puts me in mind of one of the priceless lines from Weird Al Yankovic’s Ode To a Superhero (to the tune of Billy Joel’s Piano Man):

    “Now he’s ridin’ around on that glider-thing
    And he’s throwin’ that weird pumpkin bomb
    Yeah, he’s wearin’ that dumb Power Rangers mask
    But he’s scarier without it on…”

  44. Posted by Luigi Novi at February 16, 2007 05:36 PM
    “Thanks, for the link, Peter, but I didn’t consider most of the things I mentioned to be nits. I found them to be reasons why the film, the plot and the execution of the character was flawed on a fundamental level. Matt Murdock killing a guy isn’t a nit. It’s goes right to the heart of the character as he’s portrayed in the book.”

    Fair comment. We’re into personal tastes country here, so I’m not going to argue that mine are better than yours. For the record, I’d say that most of your questions I personally would file under nit-picking, but if they matter enough to you to spoil the movie you probably shouldn’t bother with the Director’s Cut, even though it is a very different movie. (If you count the additional material as well as the footage taken out, there’s probably about 40 minutes of new material in the DC) It’s still no Osacr winner, but it’s a better movie than the one released, which goes back to my original point that having the same director may not instantly be grounds for consigning ‘Ghost Rider’ to purgatory…

    Though if I were being puckishly argumentative I might mention that DD’s origin has him chasing a man through a subway until he dies of a heart attack… >-)

    Bottom line, on the Sean scale, I’m a ‘let’s see what they do with this’ guy.

    Cheers.

  45. About “being true to the source material,” it shouldn’t matter in little details like organic web shooters, or blending Gwen Stacy’s death with Mary Jane’s peculiar romance with Peter. What should matter is whether Peter Parker feels like the character we read in comics, whether he did the specific things we read in comics or not. The little speech at the end of “Spider-Man” nailed the precise feel of the life Peter Parker lived in the comics, whether he said it or not. It also took an audience expecting the traditional clinch and implied sex with the heroine, and threw that assumption in their faces.

    I haven’t seen “Ghost Rider” yet. It’s not a priority for me. But recalling how the character bounced all over as a concept after its first two years, I don’t believe it has to be “true” to very much to be a valid film. Heck, I even enjoyed the H&R Block commercials using the character (one of the smartest things that company could have done to make its commercial interesting).

  46. Ghost Rider was pretty dámņ terrible. Way too much time spent on the Johnny Blaze back story, holes galore in the plot and complete throwaway supporting characters. But the worst part was the unbelievably bad action sequences. Can Ghost Rider possibly move any slower? Ooooh, beware his plodding chain attack!

    I was also disappointed in the demons. They were way too weak and inexplicably dispatched with ease. Making them incorporeal was a bad move. GR flames on in the water and water wraith disintegrates? Come on. Ghost Rider is a physical character who needs to punch crap in the face and beat dudes silly with his chain. After the movie I had to Wii up GR in Ultimate Alliance just to remind myself how kick ášš he actually is.

    Every time I see Mark Steven Johnson talk about his work or I read an interview with him, he seems like a smart, energetic guy who knows comics. But all his final products have been amazingly lackluster. I am very concerned for Preacher.

    -Markisan

  47. Sean Scullion said:
    “although I have to admit being disappointed when I found out about the organic 2099-rip off web shooters.”
    —–
    Yeah, wonder who thought up something like that?

  48. “I am very concerned for Preacher.” My understanding is that Garth Ennis is very involved in the series, so hopefully he’ll be able to keep it from getting too watered down.

    Why do I get the feeling those words will come back to haunt me someday?

  49. Yeah, I thought it was a decent popcorn movie. I’m not particularly invested in the Ghost Rider character, so I’m sure that helped my opinion. Go with some friends to a matinee and kick back and have fun.

  50. Curse you, Jonathan, I just got that song OUT of my head, and you go and put it back IN. Of course, now at least there’s SOMETHING there.

    And now, thankfully, the Sean scale on the internet has nothing to do with a skin condition. Owe ya one, Peter.

    You know what REALLY worried me about the Ghost Rider movie? I had a horrifying vision of the marketing department coming up with the Official Ghost Rider junior-size dirt bike, and on seeing that, my head would explode. So far, haven’t seen that, and my cranium is intact.

Comments are closed.