That might be a tough task for audiences to accept, especially when they stroll into the theater for those very conventions. If you seek those, The Green Hornet disappoints. The film-noir styling of the 1940 serials are gone, but not forgotten, and those who seek the Leave it to Beaver trappings of the famous two season TV series, only made famous in hindsight for casting Bruce Lee, won’t get that from this version. It’s an odd bird of a film, but it’s important to note its themes, since the film is essentially and purely a comic book movie. Young American boys who read comic books, didn’t flip the page to grow into a self-loathing, tormented angel of vengeance, but simply for the ‘wow’ factor of the superhero; the POW! BOOM! CRACK! of the action, and that in itself is the origin of why Britt Reid (Seth Rogen) in this version of The Green Hornet becomes a hero. Because it’s cool.

As boys, we seek the mask that will hide us until we grow into a man. The mask gives us the courage and power to do something extraordinary. This child-like assessment of adulthood is the foundation of why superheroes have grow substantially in our increasing tough world, and is also the sense of wonder Gondry uses to craft his version of the superhero film.  Even Kato (Jay Chou) isn’t perfect. The villain? He’s equally unsure of himself, constantly measuring his evil against someone else’s evil. The old “mine is bigger than yours” game.  All of this, I’m expecting, will get lost to most under the film’s silly and often humorous boyish charm. That’s what is so refreshing about what The Green Hornet is offering.

If you never grew up reading comic books of superheroes doing something actually far more super than your own father did, I pity that you missed the American boy experience. Sure, it’s pop art manhood. Boys don’t see their fathers as anything more than a man they can never please, and it’s only until they’re older that they can appreciate their dad. Gondry knows this, and The Green Hornet stings a little nostalgia that the increasingly bloated genre has missed.

3D Note: It’s post-conversion and while at times, it adds a little depth, it also annoying clutters the screen up, especially during action scenes. While it’s not that bad of post-conversion, it’s far from necessary.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

The Film:

Just like the ostrich who steals Udo Kier’s eye glasses, Herzog’s My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done is a weird bird. But what else should we have expected from a Werner Herzog and David Lynch collaboration, with a cast a cult stars? While Lynch hardly had much influence of the creation of the film, other than to help Herzog with this DIY film, he’s unmistakeably everywhere in the film: from the actors, to the humor, to the oddities, Lynch is here. But so is Herzog.

The way the film starts with the conventional layout of the cop genre, only to fold itself into unconventional format is interesting, as evident with the back seat the stakeout takes, as Herzog is focused on the madness of our lead, Brad McCullum (Michael Shannon). Razzle Dazzle. There two scenes where the actor’s actions just stop and they remain still for like a minute as if Herzog switched to a freeze frame. Like the companion film, in terms of genre Bad Lieutenant, Herzog seems bored with how genres have structure, and he is ready to buckle it, even if it makes no sense. But does madness make sense? No, and so Herzog is off the hook here with this experiment.

My Son, My Son reveals levels of Brad’s madness, as this is based on a true story of a man who just one day stabbed his mother with a sword, killing her, after seeing God in a Quaker box and music. If anything, all of this is old news now days, with the God alibi and mental issues. We seen it before, in life and in film. Brad’s loving, but irritating relationship with his mother, is reminiscent of Norman Bates’ in Psycho. Micheal Shannon is creepy, odd, and typically as good as he always is, in a a bizarre film that mixes INLAND EMPIRE and Bad Lieutenant. Look beyond what you expect from a cop-investigation-thriller, into the eyes of Shannon. Madness shouldn’t be so easily defined, and while it doesn’t always click, Herzog’s My Son, My Son isn’t easily defined as well. Razzle Dazzle.

The DVD:

The Audio/Video: Released from First Look Studios, the disc should be a good looking DVD since Herzog shot the film on the RED camera, but I was giving a screener copy of the disc, so I have a watermark at the bottom of the screen saying “Property of First Look Studios/Industrial Entertainment Sales Screener Only” so I can’t faithfully review it until I see the finalized version. Same with the audio.

The extras weren’t included either on my copy, which is a shame since it’ll have a Commentary by Herzog, Interviews with the cast, and Ramin Bahrani’s short film The Plastic Bag. I did, however, have two forced trailers for this film and another First Look Studios release.

Conclusion:

The Film: Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

The DVD: N/A

Jon Peters: In an interview I found, you were quoted as saying “I always wanted to make a horror film, but not with bloody axes and chain-saws. An anonymous fear should rather creep up at you.” I find that interesting, because many would consider your Nosferatu an anonymous character of fear creeping up on a victim from your 1979 film. What defines horror to you and what differentiates the horror between these two films?

Werner Herzog: I think that My Son, My Son What Have Ye Done is clearly different than Nosferatu, which was set in the structures of a genre film. What you were quoting is exactly what I really wanted to do, having some anonymous of fear creeping up on you and that what defines the film best.

Jon: Is that what intrigued you about the loosely based true story on Mark Yavorsky?

Herzog: Yes, but in a way but of course, it was also just a great, strange, story there. There was a great, strange connection between this ancient Greek tragedy and his murder case of matricide, with a strange element of standing still and music. So there’s a whole bundle of things that were fascinating to me.

Jon: How did this story come to you?

Herzog: Through a collaborator of mine, Herbert Golder, who is the co-writer. He is a professor of classics at Boston University and has quite often been my assistant director and he crossed this murder case because he’s fascinated in staging Greek dramas. Like in this play, the lead has to murder his own mother and Yavorsky ended up murdering his mother with s stage prop sword. So we rewrote the screenplay together, with a huge amount of background documentation, revelations by forensic scientists, and just piles and piles of documentation. I just got lost in this and told him let’s just fart this [screenplay] out together, otherwise I wouldn’t know how to do it. We were in Europe and I told him I’ll take you to this place in the mountains of Austria, so you can go before we write this together. He looked at me and said: “I’ll give you five days.” [laughs] And we wrote it together.

Jon: I understand for a brief time you met the real Mark Yavorsky. Did you this process productive or hindering at all, especially since he was argumentative and even created a shrine to Aguirre, the Wrath of God (1972)?

Herzog: Upon meeting him, I immediately understood that it was a mistake. For a film maker, sometimes it’s best to stay away from your sources. It would have been completely disruptive continuing to meet him at the maximum security facility he was at, you could tell he was just not kosher. Stay away from him, keep your distance, created your character from him, and that’s what I told Michael Shannon. He was very interested in hearing the tape records and even wanted to imitate his voice, and I said: “You will not have access to him, we have to invent the character, invent him new, shape him our way, by you, Michael Shannon.”

You do this types of imitations if it’s like a Muhammad Ali. You have to have Ali’s ravings, rants, raps, you cannot invent him. But Mark Yavorsky you had to invent.

Jon: How and when did you know you wanted Michael Shannon for the Brad McCullum role and was his theater background that made him an intriguing choice for a role where the character?

Herzog: I only saw Michael Shannon in one film prior, and I’m sorry I don’t remember which, but it wasn’t the film that he got the Academy Award nomination [Revolutionary Road], and I saw him and immediately said that’s the right man to do the film. I contacted him and said let’s warm up, since I was doing Bad Lieutenant and had a strong part for him. I said: “Do this and let’s warm up, see how we are together.” After we were done with that, he received the Academy Award nomination, and I was very proud of him. He had no problem with the burden of being the central character in the movie. I completely trusted him.

Jon: Is that because of his theater background?

Herzog: I didn’t even know he had a theater background until we did this film.

Jon: How and when did David Lynch come to you for this collaboration, and if any, how was it working with a film maker like Lynch?

Herzog: Eric Bassett was the producer and he had worked with David for ten years and David Lynch was present at a discussion talking about making films with a contained budget but with the best of the best actors and he caught fire wanting to help or to push the film along. He is a dream. He has a credit as an executive producer. He wasn’t on-set or had a hand in the screenplay, but in spirit we were close and his enthusiasm some how pushed it over the brink and got it into production.

Jon: How close were the productions of Bad Lieutenant and My Son, My Son?

Herzog: They were partially overlapping and initially I planned on doing My Son, My Son first. Bad Lieutenant somehow stumbled into me and there was a very narrow opportunity to do it, due to Nicholas Cage’s schedule. I jumped into it and decided to do My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done afterward.

Jon: Besides your connection to the Urubamba River, what was it about the story and Michael Shannon’s character that made you want to go back there for some scenes, when the production was all the way in San Diego?

Herzog: In fact, the real story, Mark Yavorsky was in Pakistan and he came back changed. He was in some real bad places which are causing major issues in Pakistan now. I wanted to go there for those scenes to film, but it was becoming clear it wouldn’t be wise to pack up and take an American movie star into Northwestern Pakistan in such a volatile area. We would have been prime time targets. So what would have the next best raging river? I said “Oh yes, I know the Urubamba in Peru. I’ve been there a couple of times, so let’s go there.”

Jon: You shot the film with the RED ONE camera, yet you were displeased working with the camera. Can you explain how the camera was chosen, the frustration using it, and the final product it produced?

Herzog: I wouldn’t say frustration, but there was a couple of things. Number one, I’m a man of celluloid and it still has superior qualities. The RED camera was at that time still an immature camera, it was basically a huge computer and you couldn’t just shoot, it always had to boot. Also, the camera doesn’t have the mechanical precision as say the Panavision cameras, and there was the system of the lens’ and how to hold the lens’. But it’s okay, I saw a point in saving money and shot it with the RED. I’m sure the Red camera has improved meanwhile.

Jon: Another key collaboration on the film was with Peter Zeitlinger. Can you explain working with Peter for the eleventh time and what he brought to this film?

Herzog: He managed, even thoug I don’t think he had ever worked with the RED camera either. The bigger problem was with the sound since we were not very far from the San Diego Airport, and we had like 60 second intervals to shoot before 10-15 minutes of roaring airplanes over our head.

Jon: My Son, My Son and Bad Lieutenant share some thematic links, but I noticed the position animals play in the films. From the iguanas and alligators in Bad Lieutenant to the flamingos and ostriches in My Son, what do you think are animals relationship to their environment in an urban setting, as compared and opposed to some of your films exploring man’s relationship with nature out in the wild?

Herzog: Well, your question is coming too heavily. [laughs] But in my films I always loved working with animals and directing animals. I can’t really explain if there’s any big systematic thinking behind it or the big master plan behind it. I love animals and take Bad Lieutenant, they’re the weirdest of the weird. In my new film about the caves [The Cave of Forgotten Dreams] you even seen a radioactive alligator! It’s as wild as it can get.

Jon: You narrated a Ramin Bahrani short film called the Plastic Bag that will be on the DVD. When I talked to him (here) a long while ago, he was very eager for the film, and the final product was a touching film. Can you explain working with Bahrani and on the film?

Herzog: He is such a talented young man. When it comes to these younger guys like Bahrani, who admire my work and if I can help them, I’ll be there anyway I can working for them.

Jon: Finally, your next is a documentary called The Cave of Forgotten Dreams which is about the Chauvet Cave. You had some unique working conditions for the film, yet even with those restrictions you chose to also film it in 3D.

Herzog: It was very difficult because we could only move on a two-foot walk way and could never step off. So, the strange thing is we are shooting it in 3D, but the cool thing is we all had to line-up in a straight line, one-dimension like. There was no way around it for the crew, we’re all lined up in one-dimension, so they’re in it a lot.

Jon: As a director who has been working in the field for decades, what was the appeal of 3D for this film and what do you think are the pros and cons of the format?

Herzog: You have to see the film and in less than three weeks at Toronto at the festival you can. It was a wonderful choice to shot it in 3D. You’ll know it when you see it, let me not explain all of the details. Some 3D is good, otherwise I wouldn’t have bothered. I will not do a romantic-comedy in 3D! I think you know what I mean.

First Look Studios is releasing My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done on DVD September 14th and look for a wider release for The Cave of Forgotten Dreams in 2011.

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance

At this point your excitement for Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance either skyrocketed or just completely went down the toilet. Regardless, it looks like Columbia Pictures wants this Marvel property to jump into principal photography this fall. No word on what exactly the story will be about, but David Goyer did pen the script if that makes you feel any better about this production.

Ghost Rider centered on theis stunt motorcyclist Johnny Blaze (Cage), who, in order to save the life of his mentor, agreed to give his soul to Satan. Instead, his soul bonded with the entity called Zarathos. When utilizing Zarathos’ powers Blaze’s flesh is consumed by hellfire, causing his head to become a flaming skull. He rides a fiery motorcycle and wields trademark blasts of hellfire from his skeletal hands. The 2007 movie starred Cage and Eva Mendes, directed by Mark Steven Johnson and ended up accumulating a hefty $228 Million overall.

At least we’ll get Nicolas Cage in all of his wig-wearing like glory. The roles the actor has been choosing as of late have been a lot more entertaining/intriguing, mainly noting Kick-Ass and Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans. The question is whether or not this combination will prove to be good once the final cut is made.

Cage will be sharing the screen with Jay Baruchel in the latest Walt Disney Pictures film The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, poised to appear in theaters everywhere on July 14th.

The Film:

Sadly, it took Hurricane Katrina to fully expose the crime and corruption within New Orleans, but keen listeners of gangster rap from the area were fully aware of the problems before the levees broke. On Fiend’s underground, but Gold selling album There’s One in Every Family from 1998, in an intro to his song “The Streets Ain’t Safe”, he forewarns us about the N.O.:

Welcome to New Orleans. Where police are corrupt and n*ggas with no money die at the ages between 15 and 21. But see me? I made up my mind a long time ago that I’d never fall into that system. I’m a hustle till I get enough, then I’m a get out. But you know what? I got caught up. Started fiending for that shit. So now anything you sell, any corner you work for, remember that’s my shit. I could take it from you any time I want to as long as you know that, I won’t have to make an example outta you.

Hearing those words in the back of my mind, as Herzog film opens with a slimy snake slithering in the muddy waters filling up the cell where an inmate occupied, served as a thematic prequel to plenty of the ideas Herzog’s Bad Lieutenant remake would explore. But for most people, the N.O. was revealed during that devastation, like somehow we all were oblivious to the real Sin City. This film, which offers us nothing new within the cop genre, utilizes the disaster to explore police corruption and the city’s underbelly of crime in an interesting expose. If one isn’t careful, the film’s knack of sweeping satire will go over their heads, making the events and actions of characters and situations seem conventional. As if Herzog looked at the script and saw the ordinary cop elements, his boredom created a snickering look at the much abused genre.

Due to his name and his filmography, one has expectations from a Herzog film. Here, Herzog really doesn’t offer us the deep insights where Abel Ferrara’s original explored through duty and morality in the urban jungle. He instead satirically explores the characters within this new, post-Katrina world where it’s still man vs. man’s self. Nature’s elements of man’s existence and that existence as pawns in a greater understanding than our own, is the core of the film, if not the standard issue theme Herzog has been exploring all of his life. As if we didn’t know Herzog was having fun with a wore-out genre, look at some of the casting and just watch until the climax, as every subplot and event wraps up into a nice, neat bow for Cage’s character.

Even within this structure, Herzog needed a grounded performance from a lead actor, which allowed Nic Cage to rare opportunity to chew scenery without the fallout he usually experience from fans and critics. Cage owns as McDonagh, who gleefully descends into this world of corruption and drugs, only to some how come out on top. His scenes steal the show, even if Iguanas are on his coffee table. For Cage, the film offers up some rare brilliant acting from the actor so wildly mistreated by other directors. For Herzog, it’s a mild return to narrative film making with his ever so odd smirk and wit. Most importantly, for us, it’s a good time.

The DVD:

Audio/Video: First Look Studios offers up a nicely done DVD presentation. The video is a mix of source, yet we always get a sharp, well-defined transfer. Yes, the Blu-ray’s HD transfer is better, no doubt, for most film fans won’t complain with this option. While not a typical sound design, with lots of dialogue and weird ambient noises, the DD 5.1 track handles it well. I was pretty impressed here.

Making Bad Lieutenant: This candid, solid little look (actually 30 minutes in length) at the film is decent, even if at times, it goes into EPK areas. But with discussions on the film’s themes, most will want to check it out.

A Photo Gallery and a series of Trailers round out the slim extras.

Conclusion: Cage’s performance is bonkers and instantly memorable. The film is a fun, quirky look at an old genre, and the DVD is solid as well.

The Film: Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

The DVD: Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars

Nicolas Cage is basically the best thing about this film. Cage normally is not everybody’s favorite actor. While his character jumps around from one bad situation to another, Cage shows an intensity that I never really thought possible by the normally some what comedic actor. Eva Mendes is completely one note throughout the film, easily replaceable and some what forgettable. The rest of the cast was decent at best, a lot of them practically being overshadowed by Cage’s hilarious and disturbing killer performance.

The director Werner Herzog displays the viewpoint of McDonagh as he stumbles through the ins and outs of his turbulent times wonderfully. One of the things that does not work at all is the cinematography’s seemingly grainy and sloppy look. There is nothing special at all with the cinematography and the design is nothing spectacular to look at either.

The story is one of the most intriguing things about this movie. Many have argued that it hinges on the edge of the 1992 film Bad Lieutenant and in some ways it is similar. The obvious good versus evil subtext is very loud so-to-speak and it takes a little too long to get to that point in the movie.

By the time the movie is over your regaining consciousness wondering what the hell did you just watch. If there is one really great thing about this film, it’s Nicolas Cage while the rest of it hinges on mediocrity.

Rating: 1 out of 5 stars