Reaction & Review | JLA Adventures: Trapped In Time

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to "Tales of the Longbox" here on Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm gonna be covering an animated film from 2014. That movie is "JLA Adventures: Trapped In Time".

Now, I'm gonna be honest with you guys, I don't know a whole lot about this movie. In fact, I kinda came across it by accident late last year when I was browsing through my local mini-mall one day, and I saw it was only selling for about a buck or two. And I figured this thing would be perfect material to cover for my annual "Tales of the Longbox" marathon. So I put on it on the schedule, and here we are, me finally getting around to covering it.

Now like I said, I don't know very much about the film itself. I do know the movie's premise is centered around time travel, hence the title giveaway. Which admittedly, is kind of an overdone concept, at least for me anyway. However, I do happen to remember watching "Justice League: Flashpoint Paradox", which is definitely an amazing movie involving time travel, and is most certainly one of the best direct-to-video animated films that DC and Warner Bros. have ever made. So I do have hopes that this movie is still gonna be pretty good, even if the concept of time travel has been overdone a lot.

That being said, though, there is one thing that I do want to comment on in regards to this movie. Specifically, it has to do with it's runtime. This movie, and I could be totally mistaken here, is quite possibly one of the shortest animated films DC and Warner Bros. have ever produced since releasing these direct-to-video animated movies. How short is it? The answer...is 53 minutes long. Yeah, it's *that* short. And I honestly have no idea if that's gonna be a good thing or not. I mean, for the most part, DC has had a pretty good track record when it comes to these animated movies, even though they've been dealt with pretty short runtimes before. However, most of those usually last under 90 minutes. So when you have this movie running well under an hour, I don't know if that's gonna help enhance the movie or hurt it overall.

Really, guys, I don't know what to expect, especially given that this film is incredibly short. But hey, who knows? This movie could still be really good, and I'm hoping that it is good. Or at the very least watchable. So the only way I'm gonna find out as to whether or not this movie will be any good at all, is if I shut up, and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "JLA Adventures: Trapped In Time".

4 minutes later

You know, guys, out of all the incarnations I've seen of Toyman over the years, I think this may be one of the rare instances where he actually looks like a wooden toy. Like seriously, his chin there looked like it had been made out of literal wood. Admittedly, it is a rather creative touch to the character, but I wasn't expecting *that* much detail when it came to his chin. Just thought I'd share with you guys.

6 minutes later

Wait, so let me see if I understand this. Luthor's body was frozen in an ice cap thanks to Captain Cold overloading one of the satellites with ice. Years, possibly centuries later, the ice cap he's been trapped in still hasn't melted or thawed off. So...shouldn't he be long dead by this point? I mean, if he's been frozen for possibly a very long time, I don't think his body would be able to survive it for *that* long, especially considering he could've been dead from hypothermia. I totally understand that I'm probably putting too much thought into this, but considering it's Lex Luthor we're talking about here, I'm hoping there's some kind of explanation as to how his body has managed to survive this long, once he gets out of the ice.

9 minutes later

So in the future, at least according to this movie, there are no flying cars nor is there anything resembling money in the future, and our two heroes from the future keep referring to cars and vehicles from the past as "teleportation pods". I get that it was suppose to be funny, but all it really did was confirm, at least to me anyway, that their future kinda sucks.

8 minutes later

So, Cheetah and Grundy, now in the past, disguised themselves as regular people in normal clothing, as they managed to convince Martha and Johnathan Kent to hand over the baby Kal-El to them by saying that it was their child to begin that they were looking for. You know, I kinda thought the Kents were a little bit smarter than this, but apparently, I was fucking wrong. You learn something new every day, don't ya?

1 minute later

OK, you know what? There was just something completely satisfying about seeing baby Kal-El punching Bizarro so hard that he goes flying. That was actually kinda funny, I will grant the movie that.

5 minutes later

You know, guys, a thought just occurred to me. So, Luthor's plan was to make sure that baby Kal-El never landed on Earth and send it back into space, thus Superman and the Justice League would no longer exist. But if that's the case, then wouldn't that also mean that the Legion of Doom shouldn't be able to exist either? I mean, if there's no superheroes that exist, then that means Luthor and the rest of the super-villains shouldn't be together either, right? I'm hoping this movie won't leave something like that hanging, otherwise, that is a *huge* fucking plothole that I'm never gonna be able to overlook!

The Review

Well, guys, that was "JLA Adventures: Trapped In Time". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. Dear lord, where do I even start with this one? Well, I guess I should stress, first and foremost, that this movie isn't really that bad. However, it's gonna be potentially plagued by certain issues the more you start to think about them. I'll get to that in a second.

I should start this review proper, as usual, by talking about the writing. Now I'm going to assume that this movie was meant to target younger audiences, and there's honestly nothing with wrong that. Especially when you consider that most of these direct-to-video animated movies that DC and Warner Bros. release are usually aimed a slightly older audience. Now that's not to say that children wouldn't enjoy those movies either. However, considering the more complex stories that those movies tell, a lot of those aren't exactly family friendly. At least to me they're not. So to have this sort of movie existing, where it's clearly aiming for a slightly younger audience is actually sort of refreshing in a way. And I do appreciate the movie for that, because, after all, you can only be dark and complex for so long before it starts to get a little stale. So before I delve into the issues that I have with this movie, I am going to say that children will definitely adore this, especially if they're fans of, say, Batman, Superman, or even the Justice League in general. And they most likely will not notice the problems that I'm about to discuss. So I just want to get that out of the way first, because I feel like if I didn't, then some people will think that I'm just railing against a film meant for younger children for no reason, even though that was clearly not the intention.

So with that out of the way, let us finally talk about the problems I had with this movie's writing. I will say that the story here, even though it's not really original, is still decent in concept. Where Lex Luthor, during a battle between the Justice League and the Legion of Doom, gets frozen in an ice cap for about 800 years or so. And during that huge gap, his frozen state was found during some great thawing, and the ice cap that he was stuck in gets displayed at a museum, where our two heroes, Karate Kid and Dawnstar, end up discovering him. And Karate Kid, being stupid, ends up breaking him free, even though he says he held back at the last moment of breaking the ice's one weak point. Luthor then freezes both of them and discovers an hourglass, which releases the Time Trapper, a mysterious being that can send someone back in time by flipping the hourglass. Luthor does this by going back in time to reunite with the Legion of Doom and forming a new plan to stop the Justice League once and for all. Which then leads Karate Kid and Dawnstar following him back in time, to where they tell the Justice League about what he's going to do. I'll get more in depth about Luthor's plan in a second. Now I should mention that they never really brought up the issue involving his body theoretically dying from hypothermia, since he was frozen for a very long time. However, that is a minor issue in the long run, because everything else I discovered throughout the rest of the movie makes that issue look like a huge nothingburger.

Let me start with Luthor's plan here. I kinda already gave it away earlier, but basically, Luthor tells the Legion of Doom about his short time in the future to where he ends up accidentally discovering the identity of Superman. And his big plan is that he is going to send the Legion of Doom back in time to a point before Superman, as a baby, lands in the cornfield on Smallville to where he ultimately gets discovered by the Kents. And they're basically going to send baby Kal-El back into space in his ship that his real parents made for him so that Superman wouldn't exist in the current timeline, along with all of the other members of the Justice League. Now in concept, this plan sounds great. However, it starts to fall apart the moment you start to think about his plan. Now a bit of a spoiler here, Luthor does succeed in erasing Superman, along with the rest of the Justice League. Which the latter, in itself, leads into a-whole-nother issue all together, however, I'm just gonna stick with Supes here. So by erasing Superman from history, Luthor and the rest of the Legion of Doom end up changing the future. But if they erased Superman from their current timeline, then that *should* mean that the Legion of Doom shouldn't exist either, right? Well, in Luthor's case, that is indeed what happens to him. But with the rest of the Legion of Doom, we don't know what happens to them at all. The one who baffles me the most is Bizarro. Since he's just a clone of Superman, he should disappear right from the moment Superman gets erased from history. That way, we wouldn't be seeing Luthor changing the future in the Legion's favor. Granted, I understand Bizarro's backstory is rather complicated, but the very fact that nothing happened to him at *all* right from Superman's disappearance leaves even more of a plothole in regards to his appearance.

While I'm on the subject of characters, let's discuss our two heroes from the future, Karate Kid and Dawnstar. First of all, their personalities are boring as shit and neither one of them have any depth to spare. Karate Kid is just kind of an annoying prick, while Dawnstar is just the nice girl that has the powers of light. But anyway, there's something else involving these two that kinda bugs me a bit. See, as I just mentioned a moment ago, if Superman and the Justice League are erased from history, then that should also mean that there shouldn't be any superheroes from the future existing either. So why exactly do Karate Kid and Dawnstar even exist at all? If the League doesn't exist, they should follow suit, right? Well, somehow, they end up getting an idea that since Luthor went to the future to recreate it in the Legion's vision, they think that his frozen body hasn't been found yet in the current timeline. Meaning that if they found Luthor's frozen state from before he gets found in the future, then they could unfreeze him and create a time paradox to where Luthor wouldn't be able to recreate the future thus stopping his plan all together. Whether or not that happens is something I won't try to spoil here, but I am gonna say that me even attempting to explain the whole time travel plothole business was almost a feat in of itself. That said, though, I do think that if Luthor had already recreated the future, then Dawnstar and Karate Kid shouldn't be able to exist, what with the League's disappearance and all.

But setting aside that, like I said, our characters are all shallow and weak, and that includes the villains. Most of them don't really get enough screen time. The ones who mostly stand out, not counting Luthor, are Solomon Grundy and Bizarro Superman. Both of those characters are what kinda saves this thing from being completely shallow, since they are literally the best ones in here. Luthor is pretty much the same character he's always has been. The Justice League themselves are also pretty damn shallow as well. None of them really stand out, aside from Robin acting like a bratty teenager who's been put in timeout by Batman. Oh and, for some reason, Cyborg's dialogue has some really forced in football puns. I know they were trying to be clever in the fact that he use to play football, but it just mostly sounded kinda like shit. On that note, there is also the ending, which I won't try to spoil either, but it leads me to believe that they were trying to tease a sequel. Which, I have no idea if that ever happened or not. And if it didn't, then that just raises more fucking questions that already makes this time travel plot more convoluted that what it already is.

So yeah, if this hasn't been made any clearer, the writing in this movie is honestly not that great. Now again, I understand that this movie was probably made for younger children, and, like I said, they're most likely not gonna notice the problems that I had with this movie. However, if you're over the age of, say...10 years old, then you're gonna start to pick this story apart really quickly, and you might end up hating it because of how clumsily utilized time travel is used in this movie. That said, I can't say the whole film isn't a bad experience, and I'm gonna start with the acting. For the most part, the acting here is pretty solid. Almost everyone here sounds great...except for one. That one exception is who they got to voice Batman, AKA Diedrich Bader. To put it simply, guys, he was just a *terrible* choice to voice Batman. Because the more I heard it throughout the movie, the more I just kept hearing his own voice rather than him trying to sound something like Batman. Now yes, I am one of those people who likes to see other actors have a voice for Batman other than Kevin Conroy, however, Bader was a *horrible* choice for this role. And because of that, he just phoned in what he thought was an impersonation of Batman, but instead, was just a shitty impersonation of himself. Mind you now, his shitty performance doesn't completely ruin the film since Batman is barely on screen anyways, but it is something worth nothing, since Bader phones in the worst showing of this entire movie. The rest of the cast, though, like I said, turn in a pretty good showing. And even though Karate Kid and Dawnstar definitely lacked personality and depth, their actors were still able to turn in decent showings. So I gotta give credit to them for trying to put on the best performance that they could, despite the somewhat lackluster script that they were given.

Animation here is really good. But then again, this is pretty much almost the same kind of quality animation you would find in most of DC's other direct-to-video films. Now do I think it's as good-looking as, say, "Justice League: Flashpoint Paradox" or "Suicide Squad: Hell To Pay"? Personally, no. However, being that this movie is only 53 minutes long, I'm surprised they were able to obtain a really good quality of animation for what they had to work with. The color pallets are utilized very well, and just about everything else in terms of how the characters move is also done really well, too. But again, I wouldn't expect nothing less when it comes to animation from Warner Bros. of all studios. And as for the technical stuff, the sound-mix here is mixed fine, and the music is also fine, even if the score is pretty bland and generic.

So ultimately, guys, when all said and done, can I recommend "JLA Adventures: Trapped In Time"? If you have kids, then yes. I would totally recommend it for children because of what I mentioned earlier. They won't notice the problems that I had with this film, so it's gonna be a non-factor for them. Especially if they're fans of the Justice League, then I would absolutely recommend it wholeheartedly. But for older audiences, um...well, if you're able to shut your brain off for about 53 minutes by not thinking about the time travel plotholes, and if you can find it dirt cheap like I did, then sure, go for it. The biggest positive I can give this thing, overall, is the fact that it's less than an hour long. So if you want to watch something that'll be a quick watch, then all by means, go right on ahead and check it out. But if you're looking for something interesting and different when it comes to these particular animated films, then you can probably just skip this. There's nothing ultimately special about this movie when it comes to it's plot and characters, and the movie itself is just really kind of bland overall. If you want a better movie that has the same kind of concept and is also more complex with it's story, then I obviously can recommend "Justice League: Flashpoint Paradox" more than this. But that's just my own personal opinion. That being all said, there is one other positive to this movie and it's a recurring theme that's tied into these direct-to-video releases by DC and Warner Bros. Most of these direct-to-video animated movies that are released on DVD and Blu-ray usually has some kind of bonus cartoons attached to it. And in the case of this movie I watched on DVD, this thing has 2 bonus episodes of the "Super Friends". You know, the show that lasted 12 years? Yeah, that one. And I have *never* seen a single episode of this show before. So, I'm gonna go and watch those 2 episodes right now because I have a feeling that they're gonna be better than the movie itself. So that's what I'm gonna go do next after I get done typing this review up.

Anyway, guys, with that, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | The Scribbler

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to "Tales of the Longbox" here on Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm be gonna covering a sci-fi movie from 2014. That movie is "The Scribbler".

And unfortunately, I really don't have a whole lot of information that I can give out to you guys as to what I know about this movie. The only thing I do know is that this movie based off a graphic novel written by Daniel Schaffer, and I also know that he wrote the screenplay for this movie. So there's a good chance that this thing is going to be mostly loyal to it's source material. At least, I'm going to assume that, since I've never heard anything about either the book or the movie until I stumbled across the latter one day and found out that it was based off a graphic novel. Now whether or not it's gonna be any good, regardless of whether or not it's loyal to it's source material, is something I'll find out momentarily.

And honestly, guys, that's *all* the information I know about this movie. Even the description that's written on the back of the DVD case doesn't really give away much for a plot. From what little I read, it's about our main character having a multiple personality disorder and that's she's trying to destroy her multiple personalities. Admittedly, it does sound somewhat interesting, though I have no idea if the movie's gonna make this somewhat interesting premise work. I haven't seen any trailers or clips from this movie, so I'm gonna go into this sucker completely blind here, and I'm hoping that it's gonna be good. And the only way I'm gonna find out if it is any good at all, is if I shut up, and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "The Scribbler".

14 minutes later

OK, I have a question here. Well, actually, it's a couple of questions, but I'm gonna ask them anyway. All right, I kinda like the concept of this hotel suite, which is for people who have strong mental disorders of some kind. And you stay there until you can get over whatever disorder you may have. But I have a couple of questions regarding the suicides that have taken place there. So my first question is if people have committed suicide from this hotel suite because of how supposedly horrible it is, then why has this place not been shut down because of the increase in suicides? Secondly, if nobody's actually watching the place, just like Hogan has said, then what's stopping the rest of the people living there from just leaving the place entirely rather than just commit suicide to solve all their problems? I understand it's still kinda early and the movie still has plenty of time to flesh itself out, but I am kinda hoping the movie will give out some kind of answers soon.

14 minutes later

So, of all the things that have been talking to Suki so far, we've had a dog, and now an elevator. And so far, even though they've barely had, like, a minute of screen time, they've both had more personality than our main character. That's kinda sad, really, when you think about it.

17 minutes later

I'm gonna say this right now, guys, I *really* hope that, when Dan Schaffer wrote the screenplay for this movie, he didn't lift the dialogue directly from his novel. Because if he did, then his novel is probably shit, and translating that into a movie is even worse. I swear to god, guys, this movie is starting to make less sense with each passing minute, and I don't believe the next 45 minutes are gonna get better. Calling it now.

12 minutes later

So Suki's costume is basically just a black spandex suit with skeleton bones designed all over it. I gotta say...that's probably one of the lamest fucking costumes I've ever seen for any superhero in a long time. It *really* looks lame as shit.

18 minutes later

So not only does Suki, now taking on her identity as the "Scribbler", supposedly have psycho-kinesis and super strength, but she also can climb up walls like Spider-Man. Sure...why not? Makes about as much sense as anything else going on in this fucking movie.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "The Scribbler". Thank god it's fucking over. I'm gonna shut this garbage off...OK. Christ almighty, that was fucking torturous to get through. Now I have to actually talk about this fucking thing somehow.

Well, I may as well just get into it now and try to make sense of what this movie was trying to be. And I'm gonna start with the biggest sin this movie commits, which is the writing. I have a theory about something. And mind you, this is all just a theory, so you have to take it for what it's worth. I don't believe this was the script that Dan Schaffer wanted to write when he was trying to adapt his novel into a film. I believe that, somewhere along the way, there was a *mountain* of executive meddling going on from the people at XLrator Media, the studio that distributed this movie. I believe that they got involved too much within the creative process of this movie that it ruined the vision of what Dan Schaffer wanted to actually write for this adaptation. Now again, I should stress that this is *only* a theory. Maybe I'm just bullshitting myself and what I just said probably didn't actually happen. Maybe Schaffer actually did try to adapt his novel into a movie beat for beat, possibly word for word from his novel. Now again, I've never read the novel, so I could also be wrong there. But if that *is* the case, then this movie is another case of what happens when you try to stay too close to it's source material. As I made mentioned before, when you're adapting something, be it a comic book, video game, or whatever into a movie, you do have to kinda take certain liberties with what you're adapting. Otherwise, you get movies like this, which ends up becoming a stale mess because someone tried too hard to stay as true to the source material as you possibly could.

But setting aside whether or not how close this movie was loyal to it's source material, does it make for an entertaining movie? No, it doesn't! I was bored out of my fucking mind the longer this movie went by. Granted, I did sorta like the concept of this hotel that's only fit for mental patients as they try to get over whatever mental disorder that they may have. My problem with it, though, is that it really doesn't delve into this concept far enough. We only see about a few people in this hotel as a whole. Not counting our main character, of course, we have this snake lady who's also known to be a bi-polar sex addict. We have another female who's pathologically afraid of clothing, so she's always nude all the time. There's another woman who keeps asking around looking for her dog while also casually pushing our main character down a flight of stairs, twice, mind you. And then there's Hogan, the only male character, apparently, who's also seen as a friend and, I guess, "love interest" of our main character, Suki. I'm putting the quotations for love interest there because it's kind of an oddity for this movie, and it sorta ties into spoilers, which I'll try not to go into, even though this movie makes very little sense with it's writing. And a couple of the characters I just mentioned are basically just throwaway victims for our plot, so don't expect them to stick around for the entire movie.

Our plot, on paper, sounded kinda simple at first. Our framing device for this movie centers around our main character, Suki, who's being interrogated by a police detective and a psychologist, about the suicides that went on throughout the entire movie. Our police detective believes that Suki killed them by pushing them out of windows, however, the psychologist is more open-minded, what with her being some kind of special psychologist and all, and wants to hear the whole truth from Suki. Now I say this sounds like a simple premise at first, because I thought this was just gonna be some kind of murder mystery about how exactly the people died from coming out of their windows. But then the movie tries to delve deeper into the personality disorder of our main character, Suki. And you'd probably think that the movie was trying to take it's time in trying to develop her character, right? Well...kind of. However, in terms of her personality, she's very one note, and because of it, she comes off as very flat and lifeless. Now that would make sense, given that she has these multiple personalities that she's trying to get rid of, however, excluding those personalities aside, her base character is, as I just stated, very flat and not very likable at all. And her character depth isn't really all that interesting either. Because we're told in the movie that she had no kind of family or anybody to look after her, and, I guess, because of that, she developed these multiple personalities, thus is the reason why she ended up at a lab before Dr. Sinclair picked her up to use her for his experiments. And I'm sorry, but this sort of backstory is just not very interesting to me. And because we have a character that barely has any kind of background to begin with, I can't find a reason to care about her character at all.

Which also brings me to another point as to why this movie could have possibly been ruined by studio interference. As I mentioned at the start of this thing, this movie came out in 2014. And at that time, superhero movies were still very popular. I bring this up, because this movie claims to be a superhero film. At least, according to a blurb by Phil Wheat at Nerdly, who also claims that this film is one of the best superhero origin stories ever committed to Celluloid, whatever the hell that last part means. Now, setting aside on what kind of medication Wheat was taking when he made that statement, I wonder if the reason why this movie had studio interference was because they wanted to capitalize on the growing popularity of superhero movies by shoehorning in the superhero stuff towards the end of the movie? Now again, I could totally be wrong on this, and it's very well possible that it may have happened in Schaffer's novel. But, to be honest with you, guys, it just felt really forced and didn't need to be added into the overall movie. If this movie was just a straight-up murder mystery, as I described earlier, it might've been better. I'm not saying the film would've been great, but it could've been better than what we actually got. But for me, personally, the whole superhero bit added to the story just didn't fucking work, and, again, felt forced and unnecessary.

So yeah, guys, the writing here is just a jumbled mess of garbage that tries to act smarter than what it's suppose to be, but it really just falls flat on it's face with weak characters and a story that probably would've been written better if Schaffer was actually given free creative reign on what he wanted to write. Again, I know it's all just a theory, but I'm sticking by it, at least until I actually get a chance to read the novel this movie's suppose to be based on. So with that said, let's delve into the acting. The acting here is...OK, at best. None of it is great, mind you, but I could see most of these actors trying their best with the messed up script that they were given. Our main lead, played by Katie Cassidy, definitely turns in the best showing of the cast. While her character is definitely not written well, she still turned in a really decent showing, so I gotta give her major props for making her character somewhat tolerable. The one who turns in, probably, the worst showing would have to be Michelle Trachtenberg. She's the only cast member I know by name, and she easily phones in the weakest showing of the bunch. Aside from her character also feeling flat and lifeless, she really just did not sound like she gave that much of a shit when asked to act for this movie. And considering her career hasn't really been all that great since her days as a child star, perhaps it was best for her to retire until this movie came out, because, like I said, she just did not give a shit here. Now yes, I could honestly just blame the bad script here, since you can only do so much with a badly written script, but honestly, she should've just stopped while she was ahead. But hey, what the hell do I know? Anyway, the acting here is OK, minus Trachtenberg's performance.

I want to touch upon the costuming for a second, because as I watching the movie, something came to my mind when I saw that costume. Now as I said earlier, it's basically just a black spandex with skeletal bones added to it. And as I watching it, it reminded me of another movie that had this same kind of costuming that our main lead was wearing. The movie I'm referring to is "The Karate Kid". If you remember in that movie, Daniel-san was being chased by Johnny and his friends while wearing the same kind of black spandex with skeletal bones added to it. And that's what it reminded me of when I saw Suki's costume in this movie. Where basically, she looks like that one rejected girlfriend of Johnny's that wanted to be part of the group, but ultimately never made the cut. At least, that's what it looked like to me. But yeah, that was the only thing I wanted to comment on when it came to the costuming, AKA a rejected extra from "The Karate Kid". Special effects in this movie are kinda average. I have no idea what the budget was for this movie, but I'm going to assume it was made on a low budget, because this thing definitely feels like a low budget effort to me. Not that it's always a bad thing, mind you. I mean, I enjoy a lot of B movies, but I feel that this one didn't really take much of an advantage with it's low budget. So overall, the best thing I can say about the special effects is that it's just...kinda there, really.

Camerawork here is OK. The lighting here, for about 85 to 90% of the movie, is filled with blueish lighting, especially towards the final act, where I could barely see what was going on in it when it got darker. And for some people, it's gonna be a huge turnoff, especially if you're not a fan of this particular lighting. It's not the worst bit of lighting I've come across in a movie, but it's definitely not good, either. Sound-mix here is mixed fine. The score here is just kinda average, as well. I could not remember a single piece of music in this movie, so I could mostly just chalk it up to being forgetful. Not terrible, just forgetfully average.

Ultimately, guys, when all is said and done, am I able to recommend "The Scribbler"? No. There is no way in hell I can ever recommend this movie to anyone, unless if you're one of the few people who ended up reading the graphic novel this thing was based on, and you're curious to see how a movie adaptation of it could possibly work. Myself, personally, it ended up becoming too stupid, even for me. The characters all suck, and the story barely made any fucking sense for me to work with and enjoy. The only other possible way I could recommend it is if you could somehow shut your brain off and just view it as some mindless sci-fi junk you could riff with friends on a bad movie night. Myself, though, that's never gonna happen. This movie sucked balls, and I have no interest in giving this thing a second viewing. I may still end up checking out the graphic novel itself, because I am somewhat curious to see if it's any better than it's crappy movie adaptation. But as for this movie, I'm never gonna watch it again, and it's probably for the best, as well. Now...seeing as how I mentioned I enjoy watching B movies, I'm gonna go and watch one of those right now, and I have plenty of options to choose from my DVD collection. I think I'll go and watch my copy of "Chopping Mall". That one's always a fun one to get through. So I'm gonna do that next after I get done typing this review up.

Anyway, guys, with that, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | Spider-Man

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to "Tales of the Longbox" here on Reaction and Review. Tonight, guys, I'm gonna be checking out a television pilot film from 1977. That movie is "Spider-Man".

Now this movie has a bit of an interesting history. You see, back in the late 70's, CBS wanted to have a live action television series for Spider-Man. Which I believe may be the first time Spidey's ever gotten a live action series of it's own. Unless, of course, you wanted to count that Japanese Spider-Man series that came out a year later. But anyway, as for the version that came out in the U.S., this series, which would later be called "The Amazing Spider-Man" got a television pilot film that was meant to catch viewers interest. And interest they showed, because the movie did very well when it aired on CBS. And the show itself would get at least 2 seasons, along with a couple of film sequels.

However, CBS would later cancel the show and I honestly have no idea as to why. I can't say it was because of poor ratings, because, like I just mentioned, the show was doing pretty well when it was airing on TV. I don't know if it was because of a rights issue between CBS and Marvel, or if the show itself was too expensive to make. But regardless of the reasons, the show was pretty much canned, so we only got these 13 episodes that were actually produced.

Now personally, I'm really looking forward to watching this movie. Mostly because I'm rather curious to see what someone could do with the web-slinger long before he became massively popular. And if it does turn out to be any good, then I'm probably gonna have to track down the series at some point, assuming if it was ever re-released on DVD. But anyway, I'm just gonna see if this pilot is any good on it's own merits. And the only way I'm gonna find out, is if I shut up, and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "Spider-Man".

3 minutes later

OK, so we just had a bank robbery happened with two guys, both of whom I'm assuming are mind-controlled, if the close-up shots of these pins are anything to go by. One of them was wearing gas mask as he came out while the gas itself was coming out of the bank. And mind you, this is all happening in broad daylight! And somehow, *nobody* that was walking across the street, or even other people in their cars happened to notice the man walking out of the bank carrying a suitcase, probably filled with stacks of money. OK...and now the two guys just crashed unwillingly into the wall with their getaway car while these two other guys came out of hiding to steal the suitcase that, apparently, *is* indeed filled with money. I have a *bunch* of questions that'll hopefully get explained later on, so I'll try and see if the movie will explain any of it before I start to ask them myself.

12 minutes later

All right, while it's cool to see that Parker realizes what has happened to him without even saying anything, I'm still wondering about the other thing involving the people being mind-controlled against their will to steal money. How exactly did these mind control devices get onto these random people? Were they chosen at will to just wear them without even realizing what they are? Or were they just given to them at random by whoever's been handing them out to them? That's what I'm really curious about right now, and I'm hoping that gets some kind of explanation soon.

9 minutes later

OK, I have a really dumb question here, and I know it's probably not gonna get answered, but I'm curious about this. So, Peter has been telling J.J. that he saw this Spider-Man that's been making the headlines. Mind you, this is all before Peter even makes the costume, and he's explaining everything to J.J. about what he's seen that this Spider-Man can do in great detail. And my question out of all this is *why* would you even tell all this to J.J.?! I understand that someone like J.J., or even some other normal person wouldn't believe any of it, but don't you think that if someone else had that kind of interest in Spider-Man like Peter does, and he told them about all this, that one of them could suspect that Peter was indeed Spider-Man? Again, I understand that it's probably just a trivial point in the long run, but telling your boss all this just seems pretty fucking stupid, even if J.J. wouldn't even believe it to begin with.

7 minutes later

Wait, why is Peter removing the steering wheel from this person's car? What sense does that even make?! I don't know if he wanted to make the accident look more serious than it already is, but all it's doing is making Peter look like a fucking criminal now that he's tampered with the crime scene. It's bold, I'll grant him that much, but still, I thought Peter was a little bit smarter than this.

18 minutes later

OK, so...I guess the way our villain uses his mind-control powers is to make people look at brightly-colored lights that are just flashing in front of their eyes. I'm gonna be honest, guys...this isn't really making a whole lot of sense. It would probably make more sense if I knew what the hell they are even *looking* at. But no, instead, we'll just have colored lights blinking in front of these people because...I don't know. Perhaps maybe the psychedelic phase of the 70's were still a thing back then, so I guess maybe that's what they're actually looking at. Again, I don't know if that's the case or not, but it *kind of* makes sense in a somewhat stupid way.

5 minutes later

Wow...so, even as Spider-Man, Peter is still having allergy issues to a point where he actually dropped his tracker device after sneezing, thus breaking it. I'm now wondering how long Peter's been having these allergies if he's *still* sneezing? Perhaps maybe the medication he's been taking is just shit, who knows?

The Review

Well, guys, that was "Spider-Man". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. So, um...gosh, I'm trying to figure out where to even start with this movie, but even I'm kinda lost here.

I guess I can start by saying this. You might've noticed that I've been kinda harsh on this movie. I've been asking questions and pointing out things that don't really make a whole lot of sense when you start to think about it. For instance, how exactly did the people wearing these mind-controlled pins actually acquire them to begin with? Well, that part actually does get explained, in which our main villain, Byron, is controlling these people through these lectures that they attend in which they later get mind-controlled through colored lights and along with Byron's voice telling them what they must do and so on. And what they end up doing is robbing banks in which our villain wants 50 million dollars by the end of the week. Otherwise, the 10 people that he has mind-controlled will be told to kill themselves by committing suicide in someway. I'm gonna get more into that in a second. I also wondered why Peter even bothered ripping off a steering wheel to begin with, despite the fact that he's tampering with a crime scene. I thought maybe he was gonna go for the mind-controlled pin that is usually attached to the victim's clothing, but instead, he just ripped off a steering wheel, and I still don't know why. I guess maybe he wanted to make the car crash look more like an accident, but it still doesn't really make much sense at all as to why he would even do such a thing in the first place?

I suppose since I'm already talking about the writing, I want to talk about something that's gonna be deemed as rather strange to a lot of people. If you know anything about Spider-Man, the one thing that comes to most people's minds would have to be his origin story. Whether it's through comic books, the animated series, or even some of the movies, most people know about his origin story. And you would think, this being a pilot for a Spider-Man TV series that they would capitalize on that origin, right? Well...not really. Now yes, we do get to see the basics of his origin story, like the radioactive spider biting his hand, thus leading him to realize he can climb walls, and then later developing the famous costume and the web strings. But in terms of a characterization arc centered around Peter Parker becoming Spider-Man does not exist in this movie. So if you're expecting, say, Uncle Ben to give Peter the pep talk about great power comes great responsibility shtick, don't bother looking for that. Because, for one thing, Uncle Ben's existence in this movie is *never* acknowledged or brought up at all by anybody. Not Peter, not Aunt May, nobody. In fact, Aunt May is also seen as an afterthought in this movie, since she's in this for about 2 minutes tops and...that's it. Anything involving a personality for her is pretty much nonexistent here.

Now you might think that because we're not getting the usual origin story for Spider-Man that this might be seen as a downgrade, right? Well, if you're looking for a more in-depth origin story for the character, then yes, it could be seen that way. However...I actually think this is a very refreshing take on the character. I say this, because if you really think about it, how often is it that you have seen origin stories for other comic book characters such as Batman, the Ninja Turtles, or even Superman? Characters whose origins have been overplayed in entertainment so often that most people are comfortable with the fact that they have seen it over and over again. And while I don't mind the origin stories myself, I'm kind of getting tired of it because I've often seen those origin stories being played out so much that I want to see a somewhat more refreshing take on it. And this movie actually does do that. Now granted, since this movie came out in 1977, I'm sure it probably could've benefited for more of a characterized backstory for Peter Parker, but I also have to remember that this thing is essentially a pilot for a TV show, so it's possible that they may have explored more of the backstory in the show. I'll have to find out eventually if I ever find a copy of this series somewhere on DVD.

But getting back to the movie itself, the characters in this movie are mostly forgettable. I'm talking everyone from Aunt May, the rough-and-tough police detective, J.J. (AKA Jonah Jameson), and even Judy. Judy, I think, is suppose to serve as the love interest for Peter Parker, but there's really no chemistry at *all* between the two characters. They try to force it near the end of the film by having the two holding hands, but like I said, there's no chemistry between these two characters. They act more like acquaintances rather than friends. Now who knows, *maybe* it's explored more in the show, but this movie really didn't leave a good first impression of their supposed relationship. But as for Peter Parker himself, he's actually the one character who sorta stands out here. While he may lack the personal depth, he's kinda the same as he's portrayed in the comics, but he also sounds very positive about a lot of things. However, he's also kind of an asshole at the same time. Mostly because I would never imagine him doing shit like tampering with a crime scene, which I've already went into great detail over. But for the most part, Peter in this movie is still very likable. Most of that can be attributed to the acting, however, I'll get into that in a second.

The only other thing I want to mention about characters is our villain, Byron AKA "The Extortionist". He's pretty much a discount dollar store version of a Bond villain. I say this, because usually Bond villains have some sort of ulterior motives such as conquering the world or destroying it. Here though, Byron just wants money. Why? I don't know, blackmail money against the mayor or something. Maybe he wanted to use that money to keep his company afloat so that he could keep his lectures going to control people into robbing money from banks. What I find strange is that the movie keeps reminding you that the Extortionist wants the money by the weekend, otherwise, the 10 subjects he's mind-controlled will be asked to kill themselves in some way. And what's strange about it is that when Peter and Judy first attend these lectures, the people that's also there attending is actually *more* than 10 people. If I counted correctly, there were about 13 people involved in the lecture. Two of them, of course, counting Peter and Judy. So it leads me to believe that Byron has more than 10 followers involved in his scheme. So does that mean then that if the 10 people who are bound to commit suicide if the ransom is not made in time die that there will be other replacements involving Byron's new followers? It just seems kind of weird to me and it didn't really make a whole lot of sense the more I thought about it.

Now with all that said, the writing here isn't really all that great. It honestly feels like, to me anyway, that the story felt more like a discarded script from a 007 movie rather than a story about Spider-Man. Now that doesn't automatically make this story *bad*, it's just nothing spectacular. But I will say that if you can go into this movie with your brain shut off, then the writing here is OK, just as long as you're not expecting anything big here when it comes to this movie. So with that in mind, what about the acting? Well, I am gonna say that the acting here is actually pretty good. The best actor, by far, would have to be Nicholas Hammond as Peter Parker. He brings something very charismatic to the character, and, like I said, it makes it stand out in a very positive way. The rest of the acting here is also pretty good, too. Even though the characters lack any sort of depth, they actually were able to make due with what they had to work with. So, I have to give major props to all the cast members in this movie. They did the best job that they could with their given roles.

Special effects...oh boy, um...where to start? Now I should mention, first and foremost, that aren't really a whole lot of special effects in this movie. The spider string that comes out of Peter's web shooter is kinda standard-looking for a spider web, so it's fine. But then we come to the wall-crawling sequences, and this where the film's special effects start to take a nosedive in it's quality. You see, for about half the shots in this movie, the wall-climbing you see Spider-Man do is done in green/blue screen. And these scenes look *awful*. Most of these scenes is when Peter is suppose to be climbing around his house and you can clearly see his hands are touching the ground, despite the fact that there's clearly a blue sky in the background of the house and his hands are seen nearly touching the sky. Now I totally understand that this movie was originally made for TV, and, maybe for the time, these effects looked amazing. But as for myself, no. These effects, if I were to view them by 1977 standards, I would say that they looked cheap, corny, and just terrible all around. That being said, though, I *will* say that the Spider-Man costume looks really good. I mean, for it's first time in live action, this is a really fucking impressive Spider-Man costume. Granted, I am somewhat more partial to the Tobey Maguire costume since that was my first live action experience with Spidey, but I will say that this one definitely comes at a close second. So yeah, the costuming here is great. Special effects, though, leave a *lot* to be desired.

Camerawork here is decent for television movies standards. There is one other thing about the wall-climbing sequences I wanted to bring up, and that ties into the camerawork. While the green screen shots of the wall-climbing sequences are terrible, there are a couple of other scenes where they look decent. Most of it consists of a wide open shot where you see Spider-Man climbing up a building, and those shots look decent, mostly because they weren't filmed in front of a green screen. The other bit is when you get to see Spider-Man's point of view as he's climbing, and I will say that these shots look pretty impressive, too, as you if feel like you're Spider-Man trying to climb up a building. Or at one point he falls, though the authenticity of the fall was sorta questionable. But regardless, the camerawork here is fine by made for TV standards. The lighting is also decent for television movie standards. The sound-mix is also decent, though admittedly, I find it kinda strange that whenever Spider-Man is in a fight sequence, be it all of two fight scenes in the movie, mind you, anytime that he hits one of these guys wielding wooden swords, there's a metal-like sound that goes off with each punch and kick he gives out. I don't know if that was just a mess up on the Foley artists or what have you, but it is sort of noticeable, especially if you were looking for it. Aside from that one hiccup though, the sound-mix is still decent for television movie standards. The score here is honestly nothing special. The theme that plays almost anytime Spider-Man is involved plays about 4 or 5 times in the entire movie, and while it can get tiresome after a while, it's not the worst thing I've heard. So you can take that for what it's worth. The score here is decent, but it's not great by any stretch.

So overall, guys, when all is said and done, am I able to recommend "Spider-Man"? Kind of, yes. Like I said earlier, if you're able to shut your brain off and not think about the possible logic issues that this movie has, or how it doesn't feel like a traditional Spider-Man story, then you might honestly really enjoy this movie. If you're a die-hard fan of Spider-Man, then it's possible you might find some enjoyment out of this movie. However, like I said, you just have to be aware of what you're getting yourself into when it comes to this movie. And as for me, while I do think the movie isn't great, it is still interesting enough for me to try and track down the series somewhere, assuming, again, if it was ever released on a home video format. I know this movie was released on VHS, but I don't know if that alone would be worth the purchase on VHS. Maybe if it's at a cheap price, I would consider it then, but that's just me, personally. But if it is out on DVD or Blu-ray, again, as long as it's for a cheap price, then I would say go ahead and buy a copy of it somewhere. Now, as for myself...I think I'm gonna go and re-watch my copy of the first Tobey Maguire "Spider-Man" movie from 2002. That, to me, still holds up as a classic and I kinda want to re-watch it again now after seeing this. So that's what I'm gonna do next after I get done typing this review up.

And with that, guys, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | The Toxic Avenger

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to "Tales of the Longbox" here on Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm gonna be covering a comedy from 1984. That movie is "The Toxic Avenger".

Now I know that, being that I've covered a lot of Troma flicks for this series, I *should've* gotten to this one sooner, right? So why exactly did I never get around to covering this thing until now? Well, the answer is real simple: I couldn't find a copy of it anywhere. And yes, I could've gotten it online, however, I kinda like to surprise myself by trying to find it in store. And thankfully, I found a copy of it out of state while I was on vacation last year. And since this had a comic book of it's own, I can count it for this series, and thus, here we are.

Now for those of you who know nothing about this movie, this film made Troma into what it is today. It's one of the most popular movies that was directed by Lloyd Kaufman and Michael Herz. It spawned several sequels, the main character's face is featured on the Troma logo, it got a short lived animated series, hell, it even got a remake that came out last year. This movie is pretty much *the* mascot of Troma itself. That's how popular this movie has gotten over the years, and it still remains a cult classic to this day.

Now I kinda already know what to expect from this movie. I know the main character's name is Melvin, and that he ends up getting turned into an ugly monster thanks to a barrel of toxic waste, in which he ends up calling himself Toxie, who ends up becoming a superhero AKA the titled character. And I know this much thanks to my viewing of "Toxic Crusaders", an animated series that, like I said, was very short lived. How short lived was it? Well, it ran for only about 13 episodes before it got cancelled. It was meant to cash in on the success of the "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" cartoon from the late 80's. Unfortunately, like I just said, it was cancelled, most likely because of low ratings. However, it did get a video game adaptation, probably around last year or so. I've never played it, so I can't really comment on it.

But I'm getting way off topic here. Point is, I got my scant bit of information about this movie thanks to watching an episode or two of "Toxic Crusaders". Beyond that, I don't know what else to expect from this movie. I'm pretty sure it's gonna feature the usual style of humor that I've often encountered from several Troma movies I've covered in the past. How well that plays out here is something I'm just gonna have to discover for myself. So the only way I'm gonna find out if this thing is any good at all, is if I shut up, and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "The Toxic Avenger".

10 minutes later

So, guys, um...we barely started the movie, and already I just saw a kid getting his head squashed by a running vehicle from these dipshit teenagers. This movie got dark real quick! The effect for it looked really cool, but I wasn't really expecting something like that this early on.

9 minutes later

Well, guys, I just learned something new today. Apparently, if you are covered in toxic waste, you will eventually be set on fire shortly afterwards. I would've never known that, personally, but now that I know that, I'm kinda thankful I've never been anywhere near toxic waste, because the way it's affecting Melvin right now looks fucking painful as shit! Damn.

20 minutes later

OK, that is probably one of the more creative ways I've seen to torture somebody by just turning his face into a chocolate sundae! I never would've expected something like that, but, god damn it, it really is impressive.

8 minutes later

O...K, well, that certainly was unexpected. I wasn't expecting this guy to have his face caved in by...weights, I think? Or something related to it. I'm not an exercise expert, so I wouldn't know what kind of equipment that is. But still, that looked fucking nasty as shit! Probably more nasty then when that kid got his face ran over by a car from earlier. But perhaps that's just me.

10 minutes later

All right, I have a question, and it's kind of a serious one. Now is this the same Toxie that I've been seeing having a cheesy romantic relationship with the blind woman and being a hero to Tromaville? Or is it a different version that I wasn't made aware of? I'm asking this, because it's not really been made clear as to whether or not this is the same Toxie that's going after the asshole bullies that made him the way he is. I'm not trying dock this movie at all, because, so far, it's been really fun, but I would like to know whether or not this is the same guy. A little clarity wouldn't hurt.

11 minutes later

OK, so they have just confirmed that it's the same solo Toxie, and that his uncontrollable rage is what's causing him to kill innocent people. And I gotta say...that honestly is a really weak excuse. I mean, granted, it *kinda* makes sense in a way, but I was kinda hoping for a better reason. I don't know, maybe a doppelganger was out there trying to frame Toxie or something. But the uncontrollable rage answer just seems like a lame answer to me, you know what I mean?

The Review

Well, guys, that was "The Toxic Avenger". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. Well, I think I can start by saying that this movie is *really* fun. I enjoyed the hell out of watching this thing now that I've finally gotten to see how Troma got it's recognition. Now I'm definitely gonna have to check out the sequels at some point.

But enough dabbling out of me, let's just get into this review by first discussing the writing. Now as I mentioned earlier, upon the first couple of episodes of watching "Toxic Crusaders", I kinda knew what to expect going in. And for the most part, it kinda lived up to what I was expecting. However, there are some noticeable differences between this movie and the animated series, at least with the first episode. For starters, the way Melvin gets turned into Toxie is a little more drawn out in this movie. In "Toxic Crusaders", Melvin gets tricked into meeting a chick by the pool area before he gets laughed at for wearing a pink tutu. Then he got pushed into a pool before running out and slipping into a barrel of toxic waste, before automatically becoming the Toxic Avenger. Yeah, he just gets turned into it right then and there and not a slow transformation into it like this movie does. Speaking of which, instead of just pushing Melvin into a pool before he runs out of the gym, he gets tricked by meeting this lady in the pool area in the dark before the lights come on and it's him kissing a live goat that had lipstick applied to it along with wearing a bra before he gets laughed at and humiliated. And no, I'm not kidding about that goat either, they *actually* got it to wear a shade of lipstick and a bra.

Another difference I noticed between this movie and the animated series involves Melvin's girlfriend. In the animated series, she was played up as a ditzy airhead that played an accordion. In this movie, she's kind of more like a blind bimbo who also had a dog helper who ended up getting shot thanks to a bunch of terrorists. Now I should mention that Melvin's girlfriend in "Toxic Crusaders" was also blind, but they also admitted that she wore contacts that didn't exactly work anymore. This movie doesn't really go that route, and she just stays blind throughout the entire movie. Also, in this movie, her name is Sara, while in "Toxic Crusaders" she goes by the name of Yvonne. I'm not sure why the name change from between this movie and the show, but it's not really a huge issue for me. And also, considering that we're only focusing on just Melvin throughout the entire movie, there are no other crusaders that join him in his fight against evil. Perhaps maybe that happens in one of the sequels, I wouldn't know for sure.

Now you may be wondering why I keep doing comparisons between this movie and "Toxic Crusaders"? Well, one of the big reasons is because "Toxic Crusaders" was mostly aimed at a younger audience, and considering the short runtime each episode had, they definitely had to take some liberties with that show. "The Toxic Avenger", on the other hand, is *far* from that. This movie is essentially a dark comedy where it features stuff like blood, gore, extreme violence, tons of nudity, racial humor, sexual humor, body horror, all of that in spades. This movie is going all out by being as insane and offensive as possible, and it makes the movie all the more fun to watch! And my god, do they ever pull all that off! Now I know that some of things I just mentioned is not going to appeal to everyone, obviously, and if you're easily offended by the things I just mentioned, then you're not gonna want to watch this. I should stress that this movie doesn't really taking itself very seriously, and it knows this. If this thing tried to take itself seriously, then it probably would've killed the tone that this movie was trying to aim for. However, being that it is mostly a comedy, and a very unapologetic comedy as well, it makes it a much better viewing experience, especially if you're someone who's not as easily offended as I am.

Now with that said, there is one bit of the writing that I feel is a bit weak. At least for me, it's something that I noticed. Now I talked earlier about whether or not there were two Melvin's in this movie, because the movie didn't really make it clear on that part, at least until Melvin admitted to Sara that his uncontrollable anger is what is causing him to kill innocent people. Now I kinda get what the movie was trying to aim for, in which you have the Jekyll and Hyde aspect of Melvin wanting to control his monstrous anger by not letting it take over him. But to me, it still seems like kind of a weak answer, because the movie never really explored that aspect of his character. I always thought, again, that maybe there was someone, say one of the bullies, who dumped themselves into toxic waste and ended up turning into a clone of Melvin, and was also trying to frame Melvin into becoming an actual monster by killing innocent people rather than be a monster hero, thus getting the citizens of Tromaville to turn against him. Now perhaps maybe I just had slightly higher expectations when I first saw Melvin kill someone at the gym for no reason, but it was something that kinda stuck out at me, regardless.

Aside from that, though, guys, the writing is still insanely fun on a cheesy, yet awesome level at the same time. Like I said, it's not trying to take itself too seriously, and I kinda expected that anyways, given that it's a Troma film and all. So yeah, the writing here is really good, at least by B-Movie standards anyways. The acting here is also filled to the brim with campy over-the-top acting that's not going to win any awards. If anything, I'd say this is some of the best acting I've seen from a Troma film in a while. Mind you, Troma's movies never had great acting. And while this movie is certainly no exception, I can't fault any of the actors here, because everyone in this cast looked to be having a blast in this movie. And that, to me, is all I could ask for. I guess the one thing I could see as a nitpick would have to be the actor voicing Melvin after becoming the Toxic Avenger. Perhaps it's just me, but I wasn't exactly expecting a somewhat deep voice for the character. I could remember in "Toxic Crusaders" where after Melvin turned into Toxie, he just had a regular voice that didn't really stand out. I guess maybe I was just expecting something similar like that when it came to Melvin turning into Toxie in this movie. By the way, I should mention real quick that Melvin never actually gets called Toxie in this movie. I just called him that because I had seen a bit of "Toxic Crusaders". Perhaps in the sequel he gets called Toxie then, who knows? But anyway, I'm just rambling on at this point. The acting here is the kind of campy fun I was expecting from a Troma flick, and this one definitely delivered on that aspect.

Special effects in this movie are fucking amazing! Now I should mention that this movie has a budget of about $500,000. And they used it to the best of their abilities, because everything involving the makeup and gore effects are spectacular to see. The makeup effects mostly consist of Melvin turning into the Toxic Avenger. The makeup effects on him look really fucking good for a creature that looked like it came from a barrel of toxic waste. The blood and gore effects are also just as great as well. Almost every kill in this movie is very creative, and they're not afraid to show any of it off either. Such as the kid that I mentioned where he got his head flattened from the bullies car. I believe the camera actually zoomed in on it at one point and, my god, is it ever brutal. But it also gets more brutal when you see someone's face getting caved in by weights(?) or someone's hands getting burned into a fryer. It looks gruesome, but the effects look awesome at the same time. This is some top-notch special effects for a movie that had a half a million dollar budget. And it kinda makes me yearn to see more mainstream companies try to work with lesser budgets rather than go for over a hundred million dollar budget that they've been shooting for recently. But that's just wishful thinking on my part. Point is, the special effects here are great and it proves, to me, that you don't need a massive budget in order to make a really fun movie.

Camerawork here is pretty good. The lighting here is fine for what it is. The sound-mix is mixed really well. The music here consists of 80's rock tracks that mostly fall into the cheesy, campyness of the film. I personally don't really care for the cheesy romance music, however, I will say that it's not entirely grating to listen to. It's just not something I would listen to multiple times over. Though for this movie, I probably will end up hearing it multiple times, considering how much I really enjoyed this thing.

So, I guess that kinda sums up my thoughts as a whole. So with that said, can I recommend "The Toxic Avenger"? Most definitely, yes! I can definitely say that this movie is a certified Troma classic, considering it made Troma into the studio as to what it is today. And if you, yourself, are a fan of B-Movies or even Troma, then this movie will definitely live up to your standards. Again, as long as you're not easily offended by the things I talked about earlier, then this will definitely be up your alley. And also, you have to be a fan of B-movies in order to appreciate something like this. If you're looking higher standard movie with good writing and acting, then this is *not* going to be that movie for you. For myself, though, I loved it. I'm definitely going to be holding onto this movie, and I'm definitely going to check out the sequels if I ever come across them at some point. For now, though, I'm gonna go and marathon some more episodes of "Toxic Crusaders" on YouTube. Like I said, I only managed to watch a couple of episodes, and I kinda want to watch the rest of it after I just got done watching this thing. So yeah, that's what I'm gonna do after I get done putting this review together, and this movie will definitely have the honor of having a spot on my DVD shelf.

And with that, guys, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | Batman Returns

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to "Tales of the Longbox" here on Reaction & Review. Yes, guys, it is the start of a brand new year, and as it has been tradition for this series at the start of every year, I'm gonna be dedicating the next two months to comic book related films. And we're gonna kick things off with a movie that I, surprisingly, have never gotten around to fully watching before. The movie came out in 1992. That movie is "Batman Returns".

So, a little bit of an interesting story with this one. Of the four live action Batman films that came out from between the 1989 "Batman" movie and "Batman and Robin", this is the one movie that I never actually got to watch in it's entirety. I tried watching it back some years ago on Freeform, AKA formerly known as ABC Family, during the holidays. However, I never really finished watching it, and I honestly don't remember why. I guess, maybe, at the time, I was interested in watching something else then. So, I never really paid any attention to it since.

Then one day, about a couple of months ago, I was at one of my local video stores and I happened to notice that there was a 2 DVD combo-pack that featured the first two Tim Burton "Batman" movies. I really enjoyed the 1989 "Batman" film for what it was, yet I didn't really have any memories of it's sequel, "Batman Returns". And I figured that this would be a perfect opportunity to give this thing a fresh new chance, what with me doing this series and all. And thus, here we are.

Now I do know a few things about this movie. For starters, as I've mentioned before, this is the second and last Batman film directed by Tim Burton. And the reason why it was his last was because, apparently, the film he had made leaned on being a bit too dark with it's style and tone, thus leading into complaints from parents that the film wasn't being targeted to children, since the younger audience loved the character of Batman. Which then later lead to Warner Bros. basically getting rid of Burton, and the latter two Batman films would later be directed by Joel Schumacher. I would like to state that the Schumacher movies, at least to me, are decent for what they are. But they're not exactly something I would watch multiple times over unless if I was really bored.

I also know the film has Michael Keaton reprising his role as Batman/Bruce Wayne, along with Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman, and Danny DeVito as the Penguin making their debuts in this movie. I also know the film is technically considered to be a Christmas movie, since this film takes place during Christmas time, so...I may be a bit late with this one. But hey, who knows? If it does end up being any good, I'll eventually add it to my catalog of Christmas movies that I'll watch every year around that time. So I guess the best thing to do right now is to quit stalling myself and see if the movie is as any good as I'm hoping for it to be. And the only way I'm gonna find out if it is any good, is if I shut up, and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "Batman Returns".

3 minutes later

You know, guys, I've seen different variations of Cobblepot's origin story being played out before. I think this may be the first time I'm seeing it where he's just a baby. And considering what his parents just did with him by throwing the carriage into that stream of water while he's still in it, kinda makes this origin story more fucked up than I could have ever imagined. Damn...

10 minutes later

OK, I have a really stupid question here, and I know it's very trivial as well, but I want to ask it anyway. So, Penguin's thugs have just started attacking Gotham City. Commissioner Gordon, at least I'm going to assume it's Gordon here, issues for the Bat Signal, and it gets Bruce Wayne's attention at the mansion. Now, prior to all of that happening, Bruce was just sitting in a dark room all by himself. And my question out of all this is why? Why was he sitting in a dark room all by himself? Was he just doing his usual brooding for no actual reason? I understand it's been a while since I saw the 1989 "Batman" film, but I don't really think he would be brooding over what happened in the events of the first movie, since he just defeated Joker and everything. Again, I understand it's a very trivial thing to be commenting on, but it is something that I am a little curious about.

15 minutes later

You know, guys, I've seen plenty of people fall to their death before in movies. That time looked even more painful, especially considering Selina hit her head on something a couple of times on her way down. And yet, no matter how many times I've seen this kind of thing happen, it always looks painful when viewed it up close by the victim themselves. Oh, and one of the cats seems to be kissing Selina's lips. That was a...little bit nasty there. But anyway, yeah, that fall was pretty painful to watch.

16 minutes later

You know what, guys? I'm *really* digging the Catwoman outfit, mostly because of the stitches that are present around the cowl area. It looks really cool on her, and it is a nice attention to detail, especially considering her new persona and all. It just looks awesome.

14 minutes later

Did I just see Batman kill one of the Penguin's thugs by sticking a pair of dynamite into that guy's pants before dropping him in the sewer? I mean, granted, it was kinda funny. And yet, it also broke Batman's code of honor by never killing anyone. Then again, perhaps maybe there *are* a few exceptions, so who the hell am I to judge?

20 minutes later

Sorry, guys, if I'm not saying very much right now, I'm kinda getting sucked into the story as is. It *really* is that good.

9 minutes later

I am gonna say this, guys, the thimble-looking Batmobile I just saw looks absolutely hilarious in action. I'm kinda surprised Bruce even had that installed in his car. But hey, I guess you *do* really plan ahead for situations like that, so...good on him, I suppose.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "Batman Returns". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. By the way, I love the ending score here. But then again, it is from Danny Elfman. However, I'll get into all that later when I cover the technical stuff. So, now that I've gotten a chance to finally see this movie for myself after many years of skipping out on it, what did I think of it as a whole? Honestly...it's fucking great. But then again, I am kinda partial to a lot of things involving Batman, so make of that what you will.

So, I guess there's no better way to get into this review by talking about the writing. And I want to start with the film's tone, because it sorta ties back into what I talked about earlier. So, I mentioned that this movie was Tim Burton's second outing for Batman, and was also his last film, too, involving the caped crusader. And the reason why, again, was because he took the film in his own style and went in a slightly darker direction with where he wanted to take Batman. And because of that, the complaints from soccer moms came in saying that the film was too dark for children, thus leading into Warner Bros. canning Burton from future Batman projects in favor of a more light-hearted Batman flick, which would later be the two former films under Schumacher. Now in a way, I can kinda see why they would complain about the film's darker nature. Because there are things in this movie that would definitely *not* be suitable for children, such as the amount of blood that gets poured from this movie, Penguin's sexual remarks towards women, and the stuff involving Catwoman where she licks Batman's face at one point. Stuff like that could definitely be viewed as not being suitable for children. So, I can kinda see it from the parents viewpoint to a degree.

Which then leads into a question that I have. Since this movie is from Tim Burton, and knowing the guy has a slightly gothic artistic style, I have to ask...what were they expecting? To be more with the same like the first movie? Maybe because of the success of how well that film turned out, maybe Warner Bros. gave Burton more creative freedom on where he wanted to go for the sequel? Mind you, I haven't seen the ads for this thing back on TV during the early 90's. But then again, I was barely a year old, so that would kinda answer as to why. So I can't really say if those commercials ever showed stuff like Catwoman licking Batman's face or something like that. I imagine they wouldn't have, since, like I said earlier, Batman is very popular towards kids, so they probably wanted to show him facing off against Penguin or Catwoman in action in order to keep the ads as family friendly as possible. What I find pretty hilarious in hindsight is the aftermath shortly after Burton was let go from making anymore Batman films. Apparently, some sort of anonymous executives over at Warner Bros. pretty much agreed with the soccer moms and said that the film was "too dark" and "didn't feel fun". Now what I find hilarious about those statements is that you could apply those to Christopher's Nolan's "Dark Knight" trilogy, where those movies end up taking themselves so seriously that some people might not even view those movies as "fun" either. At least with this thing, there are some moments where something comedic may happen, or there might be some over-the-top moments that feel slightly goofy, but doesn't entirely darken the mood, unlike the Nolan trilogy. Now of course, you have to take what I said about the anonymous executives as a gain of salt, because I couldn't find any information on whether or not those statements were completely accurate.

So, now that I've gotten that part out of the way, let's finally talk about the actual writing itself, shall we? Writing here is really solid for the most part. And in a way, it almost feels like a standalone Batman movie. While there may be a reference here and there where Bruce Wayne mentions Vicki Vale from the first movie, she really doesn't make an appearance in this one. Character wise, I can't really comment much about Bruce Wayne/Batman, because, like I said, it has been a while since I last watched the 1989 movie. I *can*, however, definitely comment on the chemistry he has with Selina Kyle, AKA Catwoman. The chemistry these two share together is amazing. Part of the reason why is the acting, which I'll get into later. But the other part is because, in a way, you feel like these characters have known each other for a long time and that they can naturally bounce off of each other's personalities like it's nothing. Now again, while I can't comment on Bruce Wayne's development in this movie, I can say that this movie definitely gives more than enough time for Selina Kyle's development, mostly considering the fact that this movie serves as an origin story for her. From starting off as a socially awkward assistant, then delving into the almost insane transformation of Catwoman. It's great, and it makes her one of the big reasons why she is one of the starring attractions for this movie.

But what about the Penguin? I kinda left him out of the picture and that's not done on purpose, obviously. As the main villain for this movie, he's really great, as well. Now I could question how exactly, after his parents dropped the carriage into the sewers, penguins raised him? But honestly, that's not really important. That being said, there are couple of issues that I had with this movie that sorta tie into him. First off, Max Shreck, who's Christopher Walken's character in this movie, kinda disappears for a while in the middle of the film after Max introduces him as the mayoral candidate for Gotham City. And you don't see him again for a while until sometime after Penguin, his thugs, and Catwoman initiated a scheme in which they would frame Batman for some crime. It seemed like the writers sorta forgot that Shreck was even a character in this movie for a time, since they were more focused on writing for the other three poster characters. Speaking of this crime, it was set-up to make Batman look like the villain, what with him supposedly killing someone, the remote-controlled jammer device that was placed under the Batmobile which ran over some people thanks to Penguin controlling the driving, along with bats flying out of a giant Christmas tree to scare the Gotham citizens stiff. I bring this up, because I'm not entirely certain if Batman was ever fully cleared of any of these supposed crimes. I mean, yeah, sure, he was able to record audio of Penguin basically duping Gotham citizens, thus tarnishing his image. But I don't know how exactly Batman proved himself innocent from the bats coming out of the tree, to the jammer device under his car, and the woman falling to her death? Now I may be reading too much into this, and it's very well possible that Penguin's treachery was proof enough, but still, the little things can kinda pop up if you read into it too much.

But aside from that, guys, the writing here is great. And regardless of the minor complaints I just had, it's not really going to harm your experience of watching this movie, especially if you're a fan of Batman and you've seen it many times over. So with that said, what about the acting? The acting here is mostly fantastic. Like I said earlier, the chemistry between Michael Keaton and Michelle Pfeiffer is amazing. And on the subject of Pfeiffer, her acting in this movie, in general, is phenomenal. She was *born* to play the role of Catwoman, and you can feel it in the performance that she gives out. It is nothing short of amazing. And as for Danny DeVito's performance as the Penguin, it is a really solid performance, as well. I feel like, at times, though, he seemed to be overacting a bit to try and make himself sound menacing, especially anytime when he has to shout his lines. Now it's possible that this may have been intentional, because some of the overacting sounds a bit hammy at times. And in most cases, whenever I see someone try to over-ham their performances, that would normally spell doom for their performances, however, for the most, DeVito was able to keep that in check. And overtime, I found his overacting to be a little bit endearing. Now as for the rest of the cast, everyone else did a really awesome job here, too. I didn't notice anybody phoning it in or sounding a little bored, which is always a plus in my book. So yeah, the acting here is really amazing for the most part.

Our sets here look awesome. And being that this was set around Christmas time, the filmmakers went the extra mile to make this movie look like Gotham City was taking place during the holidays. We have Christmas decorations going around, the underground base involving Penguin's lair looks really cool, the batcave also looks really good, but then again, that last one was probably the same batcave that was in the first movie. I could be wrong there, but I digress. Our costuming here is also great. The Batsuit is definitely the same as the first one. Which is funny, considering they show a scene where Keaton's Batman *literally* has a number of costumes with the exact same yellow and black Batman symbol in the chest area. I find that sorta cute. Catwoman's costume, like I mentioned earlier, also looks fantastic, and I still love the stitches that are visible on her costume. It makes the detail on it look that much more appealing. At least, to me, it does. The makeup effects on Penguin look really awesome, and very well detailed, too. Oh yeah, and this version of the Batmobile looks awesome. It has been a long time since I last saw an image of this version of the Batmobile, and to see it in action after all this time made me very happy. So yeah, the special effects in this film look amazing, and I think they hold up rather well by today's standards, as well.

Camerawork here is really solid. The lighting here is great. The sound-mix is also mixed well. The score here, like I mentioned earlier, is great. And that is mostly attributed to Danny Elfman, who also did the music for the 1989 "Batman" film as well. Elfman, in my opinion, is one of the more underrated people when it comes to film music. Most people, when they think of famous composers would normally think of people like John Williams, Hans Zimmer, Jerry Goldsmith, and Alan Menkin to a certain extent. For me, though, Elfman usually seems to come from under the radar with hits from "The Nightmare Before Christmas", "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory", and also composing the theme song to "The Simpsons", as several examples. So his music is definitely under-looked, at least when compared to most of the other composers that I already listed. And this movie's score is no different. Now I imagine it's mostly the same thing you would hear from the 1989 film, but don't quote me on that. And regardless if that's the case or not, it's still fantastic to listen to.

Ultimately, guys, when everything is said and done, am I able to recommend "Batman Returns"? Oh, absolutely, guys. This movie is amazing! Granted, I don't know if it's any better or not when compared to the 1989 film, but as it's own film, it's great. The story here is really solid, the characters here all memorable and fun, the music is great, and the acting is also really solid. Guys, what else do you want me to add to it that most haven't already said about this movie? As a Batman film, it's awesome. And as a Christmas movie, it's definitely worth watching around the holidays. In fact, I'm definitely gonna be adding this to my yearly tradition of Christmas movies that I'm gonna watch every year. That's how great this movie is. And even if you haven't seen the 1989 movie yet, like I said, it's a really solid Batman movie by it's own standards that you aren't really required to watch the 1989 movie first in order to get into this one. In fact, it'll probably make you more interested in checking out the 1989 movie as well, especially knowing that both of those movies were directed by Tim Burton. In fact, since I keep mentioning the 1989 movie, like I said, I do have both movies together as a combo pack, so I'm gonna go and watch that next as soon as I get done typing this review up. I really want to see if that movie still holds up after all these years later. So yeah, I'm gonna go and do that next after this review gets uploaded.

And with that, guys, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.