{"id":612,"date":"2009-02-28T17:28:52","date_gmt":"2009-02-28T23:28:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/?p=612"},"modified":"2014-09-06T14:58:00","modified_gmt":"2014-09-06T20:58:00","slug":"article-du-c-u-ebertfest-x-pt5","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/?p=612","title":{"rendered":"Article du C-U: Ebertfest X, pt.5"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cThe Big Ten\u201d
\n<\/strong>Roger Ebert\u2019s Film Festival reaches the end of a decade \u2013 but without its founder and host<\/p>\n

by Anthony Zoubek<\/em><\/p>\n

~~~~~<\/p>\n

Dateline \u2013 Champaign, Illinois
\nSaturday, April 26, 2008<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cI am proud to be a Fighting Illini \u2026 I\u2019m also glad to finally be back in the theater where I first saw RAMBO II.<\/em>\u201d \u2013 Academy Award-winning filmmaker and University of Illinois alumnus Ang Lee, introducing his maligned comic book adaptation HULK.<\/p>\n

~~~~~<\/p>\n

THE IMPLIED TENET OF<\/strong> all 10\u00a0Roger Ebert’s Film Festivals<\/strong>\u00a0so far \u2013 that overlooked cinema deserves a second chance \u2013 suggests a stigma of limiting festival screenings solely to art movies. Each festival features an onslaught of notably ignored indies \u2013 screenings of THE CASTLE<\/strong> and ME ANE YOU AND EVERYONE WE KNOW<\/strong> being the best, SONGS FROM THE SECOND FLOOR<\/strong> and TARNATION<\/strong> being the worst \u2013 in addition to at least one example of something so apparent on Roger Ebert<\/strong>\u2019s end-of-year 10 Best lists that it\u2019s become a clich\u00e9 \u2013 the large-budgeted special-effects extravaganza that everyone but Ebert negates for having big, bold images overmatched by bigger, bolder intellectual ideas.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

In some cases, Ebert\u2019s appreciation for movies that equally define Hollywood<\/strong> excess as much as they characterize the visual glory of going to any movies, regardless of budget or star power, are right on the money. In 2000, the screening of New Line Cinema<\/strong>\u2019s box-office dud DARK CITY<\/strong> beat the Virginia Theatre<\/strong>\u2019s previous attendance record set in 1977 during the initial theatrical run of STAR WARS<\/strong>. Ebert did not merely laud the film for its intelligent thematic undercurrents, regarding the battle of acting on instinct versus acting on soul; he placed the film in the \u201cnumber one\u201d spot on his best-of-1998 compilation. DARK CITY<\/strong> has its place among other controversial titles on those lists \u2013 STRANGE DAYS<\/strong> (1995) comes to mind \u2013 nestled amidst \u201ctraditional\u201d selections agreed upon by the film critic establishment as the year\u2019s cr\u00e8me de la cr\u00e8me<\/em>.<\/p>\n

This is not to pompously insinuate that “Ebertfest<\/strong>” or Ebert\u2019s lists should be limited to specific \u201ckinds\u201d or \u201ctypes\u201d of good and surprising films, or that either are in fact that limited. But every year, like clockwork, there is the minor controversy made by some Ebert fans regarding the one Hollywood special-effects film to which Ebert raises his thumbs that even the most savvy cinema savant will shake or scratch their heads over.<\/p>\n

The 10th Ebertfest aimed to re-evaluate two such films, THE CELL<\/strong> (2000) and HULK<\/strong> (2003), one proving Ebert\u2019s once-debatable praise was warranted, accurate, and ahead of its time, the other remaining as litigious and questionably acclaimed as it was the day Ebert (and few others) dared to give it four stars.<\/p>\n

~~~~~<\/p>\n

ALLEGORICALLY, IT WAS<\/strong> appropriate that HULK<\/strong> director Ang Lee<\/strong> made the joke about RAMBO II<\/strong> in his pre-show remarks to the festival\u2019s Saturday matinee sellout crowd. RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD PART II <\/strong>(1985), a follow-up to the surprisingly potent FIRST BLOOD<\/strong> (1982), tried to use the iconic John Rambo\u2019s bloody exploits in Vietnam<\/strong> as a foreground and fa\u00e7ade to thinly veil political themes regarding hot-button interest in reconnaissance missions to rescue POWs during the 1980s. Viewed nearly 25 years later, RAMBO II<\/strong> is aesthetically bleak, boorish, bloated, and morally misguided, a fast-food-for-thought Happy Meal look at anti-Communism via Cold War sentiment in Reagan<\/strong>\u2019s America. Its makers, including star Sylvester Stallone<\/strong>, the late director George Cosmatos<\/strong>, and co-screenwriter James Cameron<\/strong>, thought that peppering gore and gunfire with gourmet political commentary made their film a \u201csmart\u201d Hollywood blockbuster.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Now to the Virginia Theatre comes HULK<\/strong>, praised in the Ebertfest movie program as a Marvel Comics<\/strong> adaptation with \u201cdramatic ambition,\u201d a movie \u201cfor people who wouldn\u2019t be caught dead at a comic book movie.\u201d<\/p>\n

He is wrong.<\/p>\n

In trying to turn a jolly green giant with anger management issues into an Oedipal examination of wounded, emotionally-distant children with deep psychological bruises brought on by conflicted parents, HULK<\/strong> morphs into an overly-deep hodgepodge of bruised Hollywood egos, awful computer-generated effects, and laughable psychoanalytical scenarios that emotionally distance and ultimately conflict with the movie\u2019s overall ambitions.<\/p>\n

~~~~~<\/p>\n

TO A LIMITED EXTENT<\/strong>, Lee willingly discussed these ambitions, and honestly addressed the film\u2019s faulty approach in bringing these aspirations to fruition, in his pre-screening remarks and post-screening question-and-answer session.<\/p>\n

\u201cAfter indulging in the hidden dragon of Chinese<\/strong> culture \u2013 sexual repression \u2013 I chose to do a comic book,\u201d Lee explained after a rousing introduction that included a participatory sing-a-long of the Fighting Illini<\/strong> fight song. \u201cI thought, instead of sexual repression, let\u2019s deal with violence.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is a misconception,\u201d he continued, \u201cthat when you do a small film, it is passionate filmmaking and that a Hollywood film means you\u2019ve sold out. Not so. This film dug very deeply into my subconscious.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Made shortly after September 11, 2001, HULK<\/strong> tries to \u201ctake our post-9\/11 psychology and imbed it in the context of a comic book,\u201d Lee said. Giving credit where credit is due, the intended<\/em> subtext of HULK<\/strong> helped it fit in nicely with the successfully employed thematic subtext of just about every other film screened at this Ebertfest: psychology, parent-child quandaries, coming to terms with plights of the Id, et cetera.<\/p>\n

Where HULK<\/strong> fails, apart from its brilliant opening titles \u2013 the best \u201cmeaningful\u201d credits sequence since the killer\u2019s mad journal entries seen up front in SE7EN<\/strong> (1995) \u2013 is its inconsistent exploration of psychosomatic motifs, not helped by the emotional framework of the script. Eric Bana<\/strong>\u2019s Bruce Banner, green with a bit more than just envy for Jennifer Connelly<\/strong>\u2019s Betty Ross, is \u201can emotionally distant man\u201d not by demonstration but rather Betty\u2019s oral declarations. For as much \u201cshowing\u201d of characterization demonstrated in the visually explosive CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON<\/strong> (2000) and, to a lesser end, THE ICE STORM<\/strong> (1997), Lee\u2019s HULK<\/strong> is all about telling us how its characters think and feel. Outside of saying to Betty, \u201cI get angry \u2013 and I like it,\u201d there is no<\/em> proof that the Hyde side of Bruce\u2019s persona is perhaps his true nature.<\/p>\n

Hence, we have no sympathy for Bruce in his love for Betty or his participation in overtly CGI enhanced action sequences, including his battle with genetically mutated killer poodles in perhaps the most ridiculous scene in any comic book adaptation since the late Richard Pryor<\/strong> fought a killer robot in SUPERMAN III<\/strong> (1983).<\/p>\n

Lee wants the comic book drama to intelligently cloak his psychodrama. Thanks to psychobabble strewn from the lips of characters featured in overused split-screen frames to make the movie \u201cfeel\u201d like a comic book, there isn\u2019t much of a cloak here. The multiple textures in HULK<\/strong> never meld. The promise and potential of Lee\u2019s vision is admirable and we want<\/em> it to work; its failure is saddening when the underwhelming special effects finally overtake any yearning for meaning and perspective.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

For a long time after HULK<\/strong> bombed in theaters, \u201cI tried to put this movie out of my psychology,\u201d Lee said later during his post-screening commentary. \u201cI did the movie and it was uncomfortable. The negative reception toward it went a little too deep. I felt hostility. Critics saw it and were angry. Audiences were like that too. CROUCHING TIGER<\/strong> was such a success. SPIDER-MAN<\/strong> came out and suddenly HULK<\/strong> was released in the wake of that blockbuster. I thought I had a good chance at taking something pulpy and making it serious and thoughtful, that I could give it psychology.<\/p>\n

\u201cI especially thought I could do that here, in the [United] States,\u201d continued Lee. \u201cIn [this country] it is only through pretending that we can touch the truth. I thought this comic book would be a good way to do it. The problem with this film is that it spells out its psychology.\u201d<\/p>\n

Outside of the movie\u2019s plotting issues, Lee said the psychology of American audiences at the time of the film\u2019s release might have also played a role in HULK<\/strong>\u2019s dismal box office. \u201cReleased during a war \u2013 with Middle Eastern music over desert scenes, its look at repressive memory and personal failure \u2013 American audiences may have purposefully chosen to ignore all of these factors,\u201d Lee said. \u201cThey wanted to keep their [post-9\/11 feelings] repressed.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lee recounted the film\u2019s marketing campaign, which included former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld<\/strong>\u2019s yearning to show the film to American soldiers in Iraq<\/strong>. (The U.S. military played a key role in the battle footage of HULK<\/strong>.) Lee decided it wouldn\u2019t be prudent. \u201cI said [at the time that] it probably wouldn\u2019t build morale,\u201d he reasoned, with a laugh.<\/p>\n

~~~~~<\/p>\n

LEE STUDIED DRAMA<\/strong> at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign<\/strong> after flunking a college entrance exam in Taiwan<\/strong>. He decided to study something artistic in the United States<\/strong>. Until the making of HULK<\/strong>, Lee\u2019s own father was discouraging.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt took me eight films to get my father out of my system,\u201d Lee said, jokingly.<\/p>\n

Lee was \u201cinterested in both movie-making and stage work,\u201d he explained, \u201cand I actually wanted to become an actor. When my father suggested I come to America, it was because he thought at least with a degree [from] here, I would be able to fall back on teaching something.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lee said he \u201cdevoured movies in the United States. I saw so many of them. I don\u2019t know how I ever found time to do my homework.\u201d<\/p>\n

Acting never panned out. Neither did stage directing. \u201cFilm became my medium,\u201d Lee concluded.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Contemplating his expansive and eclectic filmography, Lee said he chooses to direct a variety of films across genres because he \u201cmakes a concerted effort to be true to what my heart tells me to make.\u201d Shifts between genres \u2013 or, in the case of HULK<\/strong>, attempting to bend and bind genres \u2013 make his career \u201clike one long film school.<\/p>\n

\u201c[Producers] are really paying me to learn,\u201d Lee continued. \u201cTo make a new film is to learn a new genre and explore another part of yourself. To touch each and every genre is to actually learn a little more about that genre\u2019s intended audience, their art, their lives.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lee said his favorite director is the late\u00a0Ingmar Bergman<\/strong>. \u201cWhen I saw his film, THE VIRGIN SPRING<\/strong>, I was a teenager in Taiwan,\u201d Lee explained. \u201cIt was like someone took my virginity.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lee got to meet Bergman. \u201cHis last favorite film, he said, was THE ICE STORM<\/strong>,\u201d Lee revealed, \u201cmy \u2018fuck you\u2019 movie.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lee concluded that time may make future generations perceive HULK<\/strong> differently. Lee also said the movie\u2019s limitation to DVD and television broadcasts restrains HULK<\/strong>\u2019s scale and scope. A revival at the Virginia Theatre, however, is \u201ccertainly a good start.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cTelevision is Bruce Banner,\u201d Lee said. \u201cThe screen here is the Hulk.\u201d<\/p>\n

~~~~~<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Return to \u201cThe Big Ten\u201d pt.4<\/a><\/p>\n

Continue to \u201cThe Big Ten\u201d pt.6<\/a><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0\"\"<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

HULK<\/strong> is a production of Valhalla Motion Pictures<\/strong>\/Good Machine<\/strong> in association with Marvel Enterprises<\/strong> distributed theatrically by Universal Studios<\/strong> and on DVD by Universal Studios Home Entertainment<\/strong>. It was directed by Ang Lee, produced by Gale Anne Hurd, Avi Arad, James Schamus<\/strong>, and Larry Franco<\/strong>, and written by Schamus, and stars Eric Bana, Jennifer Connelly, Sam Elliot, Josh Lucas<\/strong>, and Nick Nolte<\/strong>. 2003, 35mm, Color, 138 minutes.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

~~~~~<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Big Ten\u201d pt.\u00a05 \u00a9 2009 Anthony Zoubek. Used with permission.<\/p>\n

CUBlog edit \u00a9 2009 Jason Pankoke<\/p>\n

All\u00a0graphics \u00a9 2003 Universal Studios<\/a>,
\ncourtesy of Roger Ebert’s Film Festival<\/a><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Back to the fore, MacDuff\u2026<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Visit the Article Index<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Return to Home Page<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Anthony Zoubek finally explains it all for the C-U Blogfidential readership. In this fifth entry, he acknowledges the good intentions of HULK but smashes its execution.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,137,13,30],"tags":[180,72],"class_list":["post-612","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-area-festivals","category-article-du-c-u","category-public-events","category-roger-ebert","tag-hulk","tag-roger-eberts-film-festival"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/612","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=612"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/612\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=612"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=612"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.micro-film-magazine.com\/cublog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=612"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}