“Battleship” box office bomb baffles Berg

In “No shizz, Sherlock” news today comes “Battleship” director Peter Berg‘s assertion that his film flopped so that “The Avengers” could soar at the box office, like Tony Stark carting Hawkeye up to a better vantage point.  Or something.

“The reviews! They burn!”

Citing the unprecedented success of the Marvel Studios superhero epic having a knock-on effect on other would-be summer blockbuster fare in the marketplace, Berg still holds out hope for a sequel based on decent international business – the film’s US performance makes for less hopeful reading to anybody but the terminally optimistic.

Well, you can’t argue against a US box office take of $600 million but to cite “The Avengers” as the sole reason for your film under-performing is to ignore the rather more accurate idea that “Battleship” is so asinine, noisy and dim-witted that it makes your average Joel Schumacher/Rob Cohen/Michael Bay popcorn flick look like a Ken Loach film and reduces the IQ of anybody unlucky enough to be exposed to it for more than two minutes.

I like stupid, undemanding, glitzy genre crap – see my “Resident Evil“/“Underworld” fandom for ample evidence of that – and even I couldn’t drag myself to a cineplex to behold the spectacle of Rihanna pretending to be a naval officer and various aliens mocking our Earth Physics in the name of entertainment.

Once it comes to DVD and Blu-Ray, I might give the film a go but I don’t expect it to be anything more than shrill and silly, uber-patriotic fluff.  Weirdly, Peter Berg seems to believe that he’s made an important film.  One of us is right, and I don’t think that it’s him…

Related articles

• ‘Avengers’ Sunk ‘Battleship,’ Director Peter Berg Says (mtv.com)
• Battleship Gets Blown Out of the Water at the Box Office (dreadcentral.com)

Benedict Otterbatch

These Otters Look Like Benedict Cumberbatch | Tor.com.

Admittedly, I am presently struggling with a cold and appropriately medicated, but I’m still forced to ask the question – is this, like, real life?

More at the link…

Sickboy is Sherlock. No, really.

Remember that American version of “Sherlock” that CBS  announced the other week?  The one which seemed wholly unnecessary and a blatant attempt to piggy-back on the success of the TV incarnation with Benedict Cumberbatch and the film iteration with Robert Downey Jnr?  Well, it’s found a leading man.

Good old Sickboy.

Jonny Lee Miller will play Holmes in this modern-day, New York-set telling of Arthur Conan Doyle’s classic detective and his casting allays my fears about this US version being a total wash.

In one of those weird, interesting casting quirks which happens from time to time, Miller recently worked with Cumberbatch in Danny Boyle’s British theatre production of “Frankenstein” in 2011 – small world, eh?

It’s due to air this autumn in the US and might yet fill the gap for a snarky British actor playing a hopelessly smart guy soon to be created by “House” finishing it’s long run.

 

 

How this blog exploded.

Mr Watson and friend solve problems via the medium of genius...

So, this is what it’s like to be popular.

You write one post on “Sherlock” season 2’s finale (and season 3’s green-light) and it goes – as they say – viral.

I thought that something was going on when I looked at my WordPress site statistics and noticed a bit more traffic than I usually get in the middle of the week.  This happens from time to time, but the visits that I was getting were skewing ever higher.

My fatalist brain suspected hacking or spam-bot infiltration of some kind but the truth was rather more benevolent – the BBC’s “Sherlock” mini-site had automatically selected my post and put it up in their blog buzz section, which caused views to go utterly hat stand for the best part of a day.

Fame! Sweet, small-time, nerd-o-riffic Internet Fame!

Things are now getting back to normal and the view count has chilled a bit – which is probably how I like it.  Imagine the pressure of having to entertain people day in, day out and not having the first clue about how you’re going to go about it!  It doesn’t bear thinking about…

 

Moffat confirms “Sherlock” season 3

Oh, that sneaky Steven Moffat.

After THAT ending to season two of “Sherlock” – which, if you haven’t seen it, I wouldn’t dream of spoiling – Steven Moffat put on his best showman’s hat and confirmed that there will be a third season of the BBC Arthur Conan Doyle update.  All that we have to do now is get two parts of “The Hobbit”, the next series of “Doctor Who”  and “Star Trek 2” out-of-the-way and all concerned in front of (and behind) the camera can give the further adventures of Holmes and Watson their fullest attentions.

And, exhale.

I think that this is a show which benefits from being revisited, so I don’t think that I can really properly review the last episode without seeing it again – so many twists, reversals, clever bits and devilish misdirection make it the kind of programme that you have to see again with the knowledge that you carry forward from an initial viewing.

It was tremendously exciting TV from the outset, with killer acting from Cumberbatch, who’s entirely prepared to be true to Holmes’ character and make him an insufferable ass, cruel to those to care for him but never so devoid of humanity that he becomes absolutely unsympathetic.  In an age where reality TV wants to smooth out imperfections and make our heroes and heroines ciphers who don’t offer complex contradictions or, well, recognizable human quirks lest they not be immediately telegraphed for instant understanding, this iteration of Holmes is incredibly refreshing and compulsively watchable.

Fantastic, too, was Martin Freeman as Watson – he shows us that he cares deeply for Holmes (which his brilliant friend appears to misinterpret as caring more about the public perception of the duo – public image and the way in which it is manipulated by the tabloid press was a theme running throughout the storyline) but does this with tremendous subtlety and grace.   He’s a far more accomplished dramatic actor than I gave him credit for, having really only seen him in “The Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy” film adaptation before he appeared in this film.

We only get three episodes of “Sherlock” every eighteen months or so, but when they are this consistently good it feels quite churlish to complain about perceived brevity – if the alternative is a generous abundance of mediocrity, I’ll take being (relatively) short-changed by the number of episodes in a series any day of the week.

“Star Trek” casts Sherlock, Mickey Smith.

That J. J. Abrams – he’s got an eye for talent.

Not content with casting Simon Pegg in the first film, the Bad Robot uber-geek has set my heart a flutter by casting Benedict Cumberbatch and Noel Clarke in the upcoming second instalment of the rebooted classic sci-fi franchise.

N.C. - Like a boss...

He's a dish, isn't he?

Early rumours/demented fan squeeing suggests Cumberbatch will be very definitely alien, with “Trek” having a strong tradition of casting Brits as Klingons.

As for renaissance dude Clarke, he’s playing a family man.  Thanks for that nugget, Paramount folks – really gives us bloggists something to write about.

Production starts next week for a summer 2013 release.  In related news, I will be slowly vibrating with excitement and nerdy anticipation from roughly the same time.

Wanting to see “Sherlock” season 2? Is January 1 2012 early enough for you?

Guess they survived that bomb blast, huh?

Per a story at Den of Geek today, you’ve got one good reason to be sober and upright on January 1st 2012 – season two of “Sherlock” will be investigating your mind grapes from 8:10pm on the first of the year.

Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss’ really bloody excellent modern update of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s detective icon will again be back for three episodes in this run, but let’s not be greedy about the skimpy episode numbers and instead relish the quality of the awesome, shall we?

Steven Moffat – is there nothing he can’t do?  Other than have fashionable hair, obviously.