This is Nolan Theme Week, where we’ll be breaking down Christopher Nolan’s five most popular writing-directing efforts in hopes of learning something about how he crafts a story.  Yesterday Roger reviewed The Dark Knight.  Today, I review its prequel, Batman Begins. 

Genre: Crime/Superhero
Premise: Tiring of the way his city has catered to crime, billionaire Bruce Wayne creates a super-hero-like persona to fight crime himself.
About: This is the first film in the rebooted Batman Franchise for Warner Brothers. Christopher Nolan was a trendy but unproven choice as writer-director. His dark and realistic approach to the material made the film a solid success, and changed the way the entire industry approached their superhero franchises.
Writers: David Goyer & Christopher Nolan

I’m not a huge Comic Book Guy. Blah blah blah and everything that goes with that. But I do enjoy the spectacle of Hollywood popping off on all cylinders, watching millions of dollars go into a single shot, seeing how directors handle the challenge of creating a film that the entire company’s fiscal year is depending on. Batman movies are Warner Brothers’ Super Bowl, just like Spider-Man is Sony’s Super Bowl and James Bond is MGM’s Super Bowl. Seeing how those pressures play into the finished product, particularly the writing, is fascinating to me, as usually you have so many people with so much on the line that everyone’s desperate to get “their thing” into the final film, regardless of whether it’s right for the screenplay or not.

Batman Begins was Nolan’s first foray into the comic book universe, and believe it or not, there were plenty of people who wondered if he could handle the load. His big achievement at the time was a film called Memento, a surprise hit on the indie circuit, but far from mainstream stuff. This was followed up by Insomnia, a misdirected mess of a film that had Al Pacino struggling through endless days searching for what I now realize was a story. He never found it.

Nolan learned his lesson after that, figuring that if he was going to fully realize his vision, he would need to direct AND write his films. Insomnia remains the only film Nolan’s directed that he didn’t write.

Enter Warner Brothers, who recognized that despite Insomnia’s ironic ability to have the exact opposite effect of its title on the audience, Nolan was doing something different, enough so to entrust him with their cherished franchise reboot. He wanted to be edgier, darker, and approach the superhero film in a way it had never been done before on this level – realistically. Nolan was given an invitation to the biggest ball in town. The question was, what would he do with it?

Because everyone’s seen Batman Begins already, I’ll keep the synopsis short. The film is an origin story that follows billionaire Bruce Wayne being exiled from America (hmm, sound familiar?) where he travels the world, learning the ways of criminals everywhere. Eventually he’s invited into and taught how to be a warrior by a man who works for a shadowy organization.

When he comes back to his crime-ridden town, Gotham, he decides to use his skills to create an alternate persona, known as Batman, to take down the criminals Gotham’s corrupt police force refuses to. Eventually a crazy psychiatrist known as The Scarecrow emerges onto the scene, threatening to poison the city’s water supply, turn everyone crazy, in hopes that they’ll all kill each other.

The first thing I was looking for when I started this week was a connection. All five of the films we’re reviewing were successful. Was there a story element or a device that could be found in all of them? Might that device be a key to why his movies were so successful? Or, on a slightly less ambitious note, help the rest of us become better writers?

It didn’t take long to find one.

Nolan likes to deliberately confuse his audiences at the beginning of his movies. Here, we’re actually following three separate storylines in completely random order. The first is the most confusing, with Bruce Wayne in some sort of foreign prison. What is he doing here? Why is Batman in a foreign prison? And who is this mysterious man who wants to recruit him?

This is juxtaposed against the most familiar element of Bruce Wayne’s life, watching his parents get shot and killed in an alley.

We’re juxtaposing those against a third storyline, which is located between the first two, with Bruce just out of college, confused about his future, and dealing with the possibility of his parents’ killer about to be set free.

For someone like me, who’s never read a Batman comic book, this is a ton of information to process, and the fact that it’s coming at me so haphazardly forces me to pay attention out of fear I’ll be left behind.

In that sense, it’s a trick, a device. By forcing us, the viewer, to stay on our toes, to watch closely so we don’t miss anything, we’re actively engaged in the story. We’re participating in it instead of having it spoonfed to us. Because you eventually piece it all together yourself, you feel like you’ve earned the information. This form of accomplishment, feeling like you’ve solved a puzzle, feels good as a viewer, and because you feel good, you’re eager to keep participating.

Strangely, this flies in the face of conventional screenwriting practices. Usually, when you write a first act, you want to be clear. If you’re too confusing, readers with short attention spans (aka all of them) start to check out. That’s not to say you can’t be mysterious, but cutting between three separate storylines in random order is usually not an enjoyable reading experience.

Of course in this case, Nolan does benefit from the audience’s familiarity with the material. We’re not totally in the dark because everyone knows the basics of Batman. However, I found that Nolan does this regardless of the material he’s writing, which you can see in The Dark Knight, Memento, The Prestige, and Inception.

Despite this clever approach to opening a film, Batman Begins suffers from some story mechanics that I think we can all agree are lacking, particularly the “Origin Story Blues.”

The choice to spend the first half of the movie cutting between three different timelines, the cumination of which results in Bruce Wayne creating Batman, leaves little time to actually develop a plot when that sequence climaxes.

Indeed, The Scarecrow shows up almost incidentally and his inclusion in the story is as artificial as the original Batman’s set pieces. Remember, in most movies, we get about a page of backstory on our main character. Everything else we learn about him is shown through action (Indiana Jones runs into an ancient cave to steal a gold monkey – we know everything about that character from that 7 minute sequence).  So to take 60 full minutes of a movie to develop a backstory and motivation for a main character just isn’t done anywhere else in movies.

And because it isn’t, when The Scarecrow pops up and starts yammering on about making everyone crazy so they’ll all kill each other, we’re scratching our heads going, “Wait a minute, huh?”

When you think about it, Batman Begins is two completely independent movies. The first 1 hour movie is Bruce Wayne becoming Batman. The second 1 hour movie is Batman trying to take down Scarecrow and save the city. The script tries to tie these two movies together, with a late twist of Ra’s Al Ghul still being alive, but it’s a bit of a desperate move, as the script would’ve worked just fine if it was The Scarecrow driving the train into the Wayne Building and not Ra’s.

I’m not saying the second half of the script is bad. It’s just so rushed that it doesn’t have time to breathe, to be believable. Information’s being thrown at us machine-gun style and we’re having to buy it at face value. A secret weapon water ionizer floating off the coast? Uh, okay. It needs to be delivered into the Wayne Building cause then and only then can it spread to the whole city? Uh, okay. The Scarecrow wants the city to destroy itself because…why again?

These are the kind of subtle plot problems that need time to be massaged into the plot, and the origin story taking up a full half of the movie just doesn’t allow that. I think in its current form it barely works, but there’s no doubt it could’ve been smoother.

Another thing I noticed about Nolan’s films is Nolan’s love for putting two characters in a scene and just having them talk about the theme of the movie for 20 minutes (or what seems like 20 minutes). He’s even more guilty of this in The Dark Knight, which is a full half hour longer for possibly this reason, but even here Nolan seems to create scenes for no other story purpose than to have his characters discuss theme. Take the scene where, just out of college, Bruce heads to Falcone’s bar and talks to him about crime. Or any scene with him and Rachel. These Bruce-Rachel scenes are particularly bizarre as Nolan refuses to touch on any relationship-related or emotional issues whatsoever between them, preferring instead to have each ricochet thematic opinions off one another until your head gets dizzy.

I think using these scenes to attack the theme and not the interpersonal relationships is a big reason why Nolan is accused of creating such cold emotionless films. Either way, Nolan’s obsession with theme is one to note. If one of the Top 3 filmmakers in the world is obsessed with theme in his screenplays, chances are you should be too.

Overall, watching this was a bit of revelation. I hadn’t seen it in a long time and to be honest, I never really gave it much credit. Part of that was due to me checking out once things got too complicated. While it’s safe to say Nolan packs more story into his stories than he probably should, if you commit to the full ride, it’s a pretty rich experience.

Batman Begins is a flawed but fun film.

Script link: Batman Begins (Older Goyer draft)

[ ] What the hell did I just read?
[ ] wasn’t for me
[x] worth the read
[ ] impressive
[ ] genius

What I learned: I’m still nervous about endorsing this confusing cross-cutting setup to open a script. It works for Nolan, so it can’t be discounted, but remember, Nolan’s boss when he’s writing is himself. There aren’t too many scenarios where you know your boss is going to understand exactly what you’re doing 100% of time. With Nolan being the director, this is one of those scenarios. So when you think about it, Nolan is able to get away with his confusing cross-cutting openings in part because there’s no one there to challenge him on them. I’d say it’s okay to use Nolan’s method of challenging the reader early on, but don’t go overboard with it. There’s a fine line between complex and complicated.
*

It’s Nolan Theme Week here at Scriptshadow and while I know some of you will bicker about the interruption of our stream of unproduced screenplay reviews, if you’re a Nolan fan, you should enjoy the change of pace.  You see, I’ve been wanting to break down Christopher Nolan’s films for awhile now.  The man is the only director working who can consistently offer Hollywood thrills in a cerebral package.  His unique brand of high-brow/high-concept entertainment has resulted in an unheard of 1.8 billion dollar haul for his last two films.  Clearly, this man is doing something right.  So I wanted to take a deeper look into his movies, specifically the story-structure, cast of characters, and narrative choices, and see if we can’t discover what Nolan is doing on the writing end that makes these films so popular, and in turn use that knowledge to improve our own writing.

Now these are script-as-film reviews.  That means we’ll be addressing only the story/screenplay elements that can be seen onscreen, not the words on the page.  If you have a fundamental problem with this, feel free to e-mail me and we can discuss it.  But there will be no debate about it in the comments section. 

I have to say I’m happy Roger chose to review The Dark Knight.  I have watched this movie three times now and I’m still not entirely sure what happens.  I’d probably need 5000 words to bring all my thoughts together, and even then they’d be an in-cohesive mess.  But watching five Nolan films back to back last week, I realized that that’s probably exactly what Nolan wants, and one of the keys to his success.  Shit, I’m getting ahead of myself.  It’s not my turn yet.  Here’s Roger with his review of The Dark Knight!  

About: Sequel to Warner Bros. and Nolan’s Batman Begins. Starred Christian Bale, Aaron Eckhart, Gary Oldman, and Heath Ledger and set numerous box office records and received 8 Academy Award Nominations, including Best Supporting Actor for Ledger’s performance.

So, in that spirit, when Carson told me that we would be reviewing Christopher Nolan movies, I thought, on my end at least, the only thing that wouldn’t make you readers groan would be to deconstruct The Dark Knight to the best of my abilities (without getting too long-winded, because, trust me, I could go on forever about this script as Pure Plot Monstrosity). 

Genre: Crime/Drama/Superhero Movie

Premise: Batman, Gordon and Harvey Dent are forced to deal with the chaos unleashed by an anarchist mastermind known only as the Joker, as it drives each of them to their limits.

About: Sequel to Warner Bros. and Nolan’s Batman Begins. Starred Christian Bale, Aaron Eckhart, Gary Oldman, and Heath Ledger and set numerous box office records and received 8 Academy Award Nominations, including Best Supporting Actor for Ledger’s performance.

Writer: Screenplay by Jonathan Nolan & Christopher Nolan; Story by Christopher Nolan & David S. Goyer

I really don’t know what you want me to say, here, because I’ll be the first to admit I’m not a film reviewer. I’m a story admirer, and I suppose, analyst, but all that’s more of a second nature to my first inclination, which is to create.

I like putting stories together; I like taking other people’s stories apart.

So, in that spirit, when Carson told me that we would be reviewing Christopher Nolan movies, I thought, on my end at least, the only thing that wouldn’t make you readers groan would be to deconstruct The Dark Knight to the best of my abilities (without getting too long-winded, because, trust me, I could go on forever about this script as Pure Plot Monstrosity).

What are some facts about The Dark Knight that I may not know about, Rog?

It’s the 7^th Highest-Grossing Film of All Time.

It’s one of only three films to have earned more than $500 million at the North American box office. (The other two being James Cameron flicks, and I’ll let you guess which ones.)

It’s probably the first Superhero Movie that successfully utilizes a two-villain storyline. (Can you think of another that is so well-balanced?)

Christopher Nolan and his brother, Jonathan, supposedly received no notes from Warner Brothers after they wrote the screenplay.

I need a grasp of your cinema palette, Rog. What do you think of Christopher Nolan?

To use a friend’s phrase, he’s a Story Engineer that creates narratives where nothing happens because of accident. When it comes to making choices, you get the sense that everything has been turned over and over in the man’s mind like a rock in a lapidary and that he’s considered all the alternatives. One suspects that everything is unfolding exactly as planned and that the emotions the audience is feeling at a particular moment were foreseen in the creator’s mind when he was planning the blueprints. Ironically, I think a by-product of this calculated nature is a sense of emotional detachment that skews cold, and I wonder if that’s also a case of plot machinations overpowering character sentiment.

Someone says ‘Nolan’, you say —

Plot Virtuoso.

I suppose, that for someone in order to admire such a title, they first have to know, that when it comes to creation, plot is a real motherfucker.

Plot is that frame you’re hanging your story from, and even if you’re creating a self-described tone poem with so-called zero plot, you’re still trying to create a series of events (A and a B and a C) that an audience can follow without totally violating their suspension of disbelief. From quests to whodunits to sprawling crime sagas inhabited by multiple characters, all with different goals and the complex plans to achieve those goals (which The Dark Knight is), creating a plot that works is a true achievement.

And, Christopher Nolan is a master with plot, and he never seems satisfied with just utilizing one that simply unfolds linearly. He uses multiple threads and weaves a complex plot tapestry with a texture that is known for having plenty of twists. From creating a puzzle box mystery narrative with The Prestige to sustaining five separate suspense and action sequences simultaneously for over an hour in Inception, it’s hard to deny that the cerebral quality of Nolan’s work can be traced to the diabolically designed plots.

And, man, The Dark Knight is no exception.

It’s a Plot Beast.

What’s the plot, Rog?

I’m going to assume you guys have seen the movie. But, quickly, to refresh your memory, the story follows three protagonists, Batman, D.A. Harvey Dent, and Police Lt. Gordon (a hero who falls, a hero transformed into a villain, and a hero that is promoted) as they try to destroy all organized crime in Gotham City, only to create an environment for a new breed of criminal, The Joker, to waltz in and assume control of the city through fear and anarchy, which manifests through acts of terrorism against the citizens and public officials, creating complicated moral dilemmas for the heroes.

What’s interesting about the film is that it’s a Superhero Movie that’s played straight and as realistically as possible while at the same time retaining the element of fantasy, action and spectacle that the comic book genre is known for. In fact, it’s a Superhero Movie that is not only visionary (which is expected these days), but it’s about the fall of a hero rather than his victory. It’s a bleak, noir-esque crime saga that is both cerebrally challenging and morally sophisticated. Gotham City seems to be a character unto itself, with a palpable social strata whose soul is also represented by two symbols (The Dark Knight, The White Knight). Not only is it the best conceived and executed of the genre, it’s the most financially successful.

It’s also notable for the late Heath Ledger’s performance as The Joker.

The Joker is so unhinged, a loose cannon firing loudly on a stage where everything is so tightly controlled by the director. Heath Ledger’s Mephistophelean performance burns in the foreground of the cold color palette like he’s the only stringless wild card in a marionette troupe whose every move and mannerism is only a reflection of the volition of the puppet master. This backdrop is the perfect home for the agent of chaos to thrive.

Structurally, we want to know what makes the screenplay work. Watching the movie unspool on screen, it’s a bit exhausting. It’s way over two hours long and the screenplay clocks in around 140 pages. Let’s take a closer look at the dense blueprints…

…The Dark Knight expands the traditional four-act dramatic structure (if you look at Act 2 as two different Acts) and crams it with heist sequences, action sequences, caper sequences, detective sequences, suspense sequences, chase sequences and even a Bridge (which feels like a mini-act unto itself) between Act 3 and Act 4. The logic in most of the sequences is pretty sturdy, and while they all certainly entertain, there are only a few instances where the devices (cell phone technology, the retrieving of fingerprints off a bullet in a brick) are stretched and call for a willful and aware suspension of disbelief. The marvel is that these complex plot sequences work in tandem to not only entertain, but to put the spotlight on the pretty serious human drama that’s unfolding between all of our players. Hell, in an ordinary spec script, the events from one of these set-pieces would be the climax to the entire movie.

What happens in the 1^st Act?

Before we get a primer on the current state of Gotham City, we are introduced to the villain that’s going to attempt to burn the city to the ground and destroy the souls of its triumvirate of guardians. It starts out with a six minute heist sequence that introduces us to The Joker, a man who not only kills all the other crooks he hired for the job, but who is also crazy enough to rob from the mob. We’re unclear of his origin and motivation, but as the film progresses, we learn that he doesn’t want to kill Batman, he would rather make the vigilante unmask himself and create a fiasco. Further in, we also learn that he doesn’t really have a goal in mind, other than to create an environment of ever-burning chaos. He wants to play a game that never ends.

Batman’s vigilantism has upset the criminal ecosystem, and all the crime lords are not only afraid to peddle their wares on the streets, they’re also paranoid that the law is going to break up their operations. Which is true, as Lt. Gordon wants to lead a dragnet to search all the banks that may be affiliated with the syndicates. Gordon and Batman are helping each other out on this front, and it appears they also have an ally in Harvey Dent, the heroic D.A. who punches out a mob guy while on the witness stand when he tries to shoot him.

Batman’s alter ego, Wayne, has been keeping tabs on Dent, who is dating the love of his life, Rachel. Although Wayne still has feelings for Rachel, he knows that as long as Gotham needs Batman, he can’t be with her. Interestingly, he sees an opportunity to retire the cowl when he learns more about Dent. While Batman is The Dark Knight, a symbol that does right while working outside of the system, he realizes that Dent can accomplish everything he’s dedicated his life to, but he can do so while operating inside of the system.

Dent can be The White Knight.

And, as such, Wayne will be able to put Batman aside and finally marry Rachel. So, accordingly, he decides to throw a fundraiser for Dent.

Meanwhile, The Joker tries to convince the crime lords of Gotham to pay him to kill Batman. They scoff at him, and decide to store their money with a Hong Kong banker named Lau. It’s even more complicated because Lau has been trying to negotiate a merger with Wayne Enterprises, but Wayne has only been humoring Lau to get a look at his books.

As soon as Wayne finds out he’s dirty, and with the help of his weapons guy, Lucius Fox, plans a caper to retrieve Lau from the refuge of his Hong Kong skyscraper and comes out triumphant in pretty dramatic fashion.

So, what’s Act 2 about?

With Lau in custody, Dent comes up with this scheme to arrest every criminal in town because of the evidence Lau can supply him with, implicating them with the mob and their money. It’s a stunt that gets Dent a lot of press, but it’s only the beginning.

As the criminal underworld has the rug swept out from underneath them, The Joker makes news headlines when he starts murdering Batman wannabes, claiming that he’ll only stop when Batman shows Gotham his true identity. The shit hits the fan when he kills the judge presiding over this monumental court case and the police commissioner, with Dent next on the list.

The Joker shows up at Wayne’s fundraising party for Dent, and he manhandles Rachel then throws her out a window to see how Batman is going to react. The Joker gets all the information he needs when Batman dives out of a skyscraper window after her.

Batman gets his detective on to locate The Joker, and we’re thrust into a suspense sequence that revolves around the police commissioner’s funeral and The Joker’s assassination attempt on the Mayor. It’s another complicated set-piece, because, hey, The Joker’s a complicated guy and he’s planned all this shit out down to a T. It ends in the Joker getting away and Gordon presumably dead.

The act ends when the public cries for Batman to turn himself in to stop the Joker’s terrorism, but Dent steals his thunder and says he’s the Batman. Which plunges us not only into Dent’s plan, but Gordon’s plan (who we think is dead), and Batman’s plan (all operating separately) to lure The Joker into a trap and capture him.

What happens in Act 3?

This is where we discover that all the protagonists have some type of complicated plan to stop The Joker, only to discover that his plan trumps all of their plans. If you think about it, it’s pretty fucking ridiculous. But, hey, it’s a labyrinthine plot.

Dent’s plan: When he says he’s Batman, he’ll be arrested and transferred to county. Along the way, he expects to be attacked by The Joker. But, Batman will be there to save the day.

Gordon’s plan: Because everyone thinks he bit the bullet, no one will suspect him going undercover as a SWAT team member on the convoy. When The Joker attacks, he’ll be there to stop him.

Batman’s plan: Blow shit up in his car and batcycle and capture The Joker.

What the hell is The Joker’s plan?

Why, to let himself get captured while the dirty cops on his side capture Harvey and Rachel and take them to two separate locations. He’ll fuck with Gordon and Batman’s heads in the interrogation room, then reveal that he knows where Harvey and Rachel are but they have to choose to only save one of them.

It’s a heartbreaking moral dilemma.

Ultimately, Rachel is killed and Harvey is grotesquely scarred.

What’s this Bridge you’re talking about, Rog?

This is like a ten-minute long mini-act that is about Dent’s transformation into Two Face. It sort of plays like the set-up to the finale.

Dent tells Gordon that he’s blaming him for the death of Rachel, and that he’s going to get his revenge. Meanwhile, the mob gives all of their money to The Joker, but the joke’s on them, he sets it all on fire. Why? Because he’s fucking crazy.

The Joker then puts out a bounty on a Wayne Enterprises turncoat who is going to out Batman’s identity on television, and then he arrives at the hospital to usher Dent into his new identity as a villain. He blows up the hospital.

And the Final Act?

The Joker owns Gotham now. He’s singlehandedly closed all bridges and tunnels while Two Face goes on a killing spree against all the dirty cops that contributed to the scenario that got his fiancé killed.

The huge moral dilemma set-piece is the two ferry sequence, where The Joker orchestrates a situation for the normal citizens of Gotham to blow up a ferry containing the lawbreakers of Gotham, and vice-versa. It’s an interesting comment on vigilantism, and of course it all culminates into a battle royale where Batman has to find The Joker and fight a SWAT team and dogs. Of course, he’s able to stop The Joker, but not before realizing that The White Knight has been compromised.

Batman finds Two Face threatening to kill Gordon’s son, and after he defuses the situation, killing Dent, he realizes that they can’t reveal to the populace that their White Knight has gone to the Dark Side.

So, although he does the heroic thing and has Batman take the blame, he does it knowing that he was the one that pushed Dent into the spotlight and started the chain-reaction of his fall from grace.

I remember coming out of the theater feeling exhausted, drained, unsettled and awed…and, satisfied.

I experienced the same emotional state when I saw The Prestige for the first time, and while I felt exhausted after watching Inception, I wasn’t really satisfied. While I had the notion that it was cool cerebral spectacle, I thought the complexity of the mind heist plot and its various set-pieces and sequences lacked the planning in his other, more satisfying movies. Sure, a lot of thought surely went into it, but it all felt like a misfire to me. Inception had too much fucking exposition in it, and it was obvious that the characters existed to service the plot, not the other way around.

SCRIPT

[x] impressive

FILM

[x] impressive

What I learned: The Dark Knight has some sort of high-concept set-piece every ten or fifteen minutes. Interestingly enough, most movies can be broken down into eight, twelve to fifteen minute sequences. These sequences have a beginning, middle and end. Now, constructing such a sequence is a true challenge, but even in sprawling sagas like The Dark Knight, it’s still operating in a traditional structure (no matter how modern it may seem). Where does this come from? Why, the old days, when movies were divided into reels containing about ten minutes of film. The projectionist had to change each reel, and history’s screenwriters had to learn to write one sequence per reel. The narrative rhythm was defined by the physical media. Even today, we still see this pattern in modern films. But, of course, a movie like The Dark Knight would probably have twice as many reels as those older flicks.

MODERN FAMILY
Modern Family somehow took a premise that was getting tired fast – the mockumentary sitcom – and made it fresh again, by having the cameras document a family. To be honest, I thought this season’s premiere episode kinda sucked.  It felt like the cast was trying too hard to live up to last season’s buzz. The second episode (The Kiss) was much better, as the actors seemed to find their characters again. This week’s episode, The Earthquake, had Phil locking his wife in the bathroom after an earthquake dislodged a book cabinet that came inches from killing their son. This particular cabinet is a cabinet Phil promised his wife he had fastened to the wall months ago in the off chance that an earthquake should dislodge it and it nearly kill one of their children.  So Phil goes to work securing the cabinet, hopefully before Claire finds her way out of the bathroom.  I would argue that Ty Burrell is the funniest character on TV right now.  I love this show.

THE EVENT
Okay, yes, The Event IS a Lost ripoff.  Impossible to argue that.  But let me say something if I may. This is the best Lost ripoff to hit television since Lost debuted six years ago. There are many reasons why I should hate this show, the biggest being the unoriginal random time bouncing that keeps happening. But here’s the thing that always saves it.  Once we get into the actual scene we’ve time-jumped to, it’s always good.  Every scene in The Event is packed with suspense, mystery, and action, and it’s all non-stop.  Jason Ritter, who should have been an indication to avoid the show, is pretty freaking amazing as the lead character. There hasn’t been a second in the first three episodes where I didn’t believe him.  And that just doesn’t happen to me anymore.  I have to admit also that I’m genuinely interested in who these mysterious visitors are and what their purpose is. I don’t know if this is going to crash and burn a la Heroes or has some Lost-level mythological depth, but I am officially a fan of the show.

OPEN WATER 2
Okay, you’re not allowed to ask me under what circumstances I found myself watching this sequel to the 2003 surprise hit, Open Water. Just know that as soon as I realized the watching was on, I was committed to trashing it for the entirety of its running time.  Indeed, the way this thing starts, with a bunch of douchebag friends going out for a nostalgic booze cruise, I wanted to claw my eyeballs out.  But to my complete surprise, the unique and shockingly simple premise made me reevaluate everything.  Basically these guys head out to the middle of the ocean, jump out to go swimming, and then realize they forgot to place a ladder on the side of the boat!  So they can’t – get – back – up. And the best part? There’s a baby on the boat! I mean come on. You gotta love it. This is cheesy as hell. Silly as hell. Stupid as hell.  The ending is so melodramatic even the titles are rolling their eyes.  But hell if it’s not a fun ride. A great backup plan flick.   

PRESSURE COOKER
If you know me, you know one of my pet peeves is critics’ infatuation with documenteries. You could make a documentary about upholstery and it would get at least an 85% on Rotten Tomatoes. Documentaries are fine.  I have no problem with them.  But putting the word “documentary” on your poster shouldn’t ensure a four-star rating.  Unless that documentary is Pressure Cooker.  This totally surprising doc is about a group of inner city kids who take a culinary arts class in hopes of getting a college cooking scholarship. Although the focus is on the tough-as-nails guidance of teacher Wilma Stephensen (who, behind the scenes, terminated the documentary several times for being too intrusive on her class), the breakout star for me was the socially awkward Fatoumata, a recent immigrant from Africa who used to walk 30 miles to and from school every day, and who takes advantage of every oppotuntiy America gives her, foregoing activites such as hanging out with friends and her senior prom so she can perfect her culinary skills, all in hopes of landing that 100 thousand dollar scholarship.  If you’re feeling down and just want to smile, watch this documentary now.  It’s really good.

THE GIRL WHO PLAYED WITH FIRE
I’m about 150 pages into this right now and let’s just say I’m f’ing disappointed. (spoilers) The second Lisbeth Salander is introduced as having a boob job, a little piece of my dragon tattoo died. There are no circumstnaces under which this character would ever or should ever get a boob job, yet these kind of strange choices are commonplace in this Dragon Tattoo sequel.  Mix in a hurricane (?) a few pointless Salander relationships that go nowhere, and a story that pretends like Salander and Blomqvist never even met each other, and I’m borderline pissed. The only reason I’m still reading is because Dragon Tattoo took 200 pages to start getting good. So I ask you dragon tattoo experts. Is it worth it to keep reading? Or should I move on to another book? The first book is so amazing, I don’t want to spoil it with all this random stupidness.

 Hey guys. I hope you’ve enjoyed this week’s “News From Around The Web” posts, because after a week of doing them, I realize there’s no way I can keep them up. They’re waaaay more time consuming than you’d think. But fear not, I’m not eliminating them altogether. I’m going back to the old format and posting one all-encompassing Friday version. This should help weed out a lot of the less important news and still give you guys your fix.

MORE BABEL FOR ARONOFSKY?
Screenwriter Guillermo Arriaga, who’s hit us with such non-conformist fare as Babel and one of my favorite foreign films, Amores Perros, has written an adaptation of John Valiant’s The Tiger: A True Story of Vengeance and Survival. The story sounds a little like one of this year’s favorite Scriptshadow discoveries, The Grey, as it follows a tiger fed up by the recent human advancement on its territory, and so starts killing at will. A game warden is brought in to hunt down and kill the tiger. The project is making headlines as Darren Aronofsky is considering making it his next project. Brad Pitt may also be starring. More can be found at Slash-Film.

THE TRADE
I’ve been keeping my eye on this script ever since it appeared on last year’s Black List. The Trade is based on the real life story of two Yankees pitchers in the 70s who swapped their wives. Hey man, it was the 70s. Be free and share.  Like, totally.  The project is being sheparded by Matt Damon and Ben Affleck.  One important note I find interesting that no one seems to be talking about, is that Damon and Affleck are die hard Red Sox fans. Which leads me to believe that their approach won’t be exactly…objective.   David Mandel, one of the writers on Seinfeld, wrote the first draft. Now Ben and his brother Casey are doing a draft. If all the stars align, the plan is for Matt Damon to direct, which I believe would make it his first directing job.

GIMME SOME FRIEDKIN LOVE
Whenever you’re stuck in Hollywood, go back to the well. Friedkin hasn’t had the easiest time getting scripts to the screen these days, and I’m still a little disappointed that he left Scriptshadow fave Sunflower in the dust. But he’s been using the publicity of his next film, Killer Joe, to mention the possibility of working with writer William Peter Blatty again, who of course wrote The Exorcist. Blatty’s new book is titled “Dimiter,” and unfortunately doesn’t have that logline-friendly of a premise. The title refers to the lead character’s name, who’s a notorious American agent in the 60s and 70s. The story follows his exploits as he jumps from country to country running into a wide array of strange characters. It’s said to be a supernatural thriller. I think it needs a supernatural hook. More at Slash Film.

JUNO FUNO
Whenever Diablo Cody does her dishes it’s news in the writing world so I’m happy to report that her next project, “Young Adult,” with Jason Reitman again directing, has found a home at Paramount. If you remember my review, I liked it quite a bit, and think that whoever plays the lead role (right now it’s Charlize Theron I guess), will have a shot at some Oscar buzz. It really is a unique role for a female lead. Will this news bring out the Cody haters? I’ll be checking the comments to find out.