That said the reviewer obviously shouldn’t have been reviewing this. He clearly has no interest in this genre and his writing and terrible captions make him out to be an irritating smartass.

Terrible movie, terrible review.

I think you nailed this pretty well. For everyone saying it reads like you’re biased… think about this people: maybe the movie’s just that bad. I know that’s basically how I felt. I read the story shortly after it came out, I liked it well enough though it had its flaws, and I moved on. When I heard they were making a movie, I was excited. I was hoping to see the source material lifted up (as in the case of Metallo’s presence). Instead, everything (else) managed to be as bad as or worse than the book. I agree that Power Girl was dumbed down to window dressing even moreso than in the book. I agree that the emphasis was almost completely shifted to punching and kicking.

The one thing I don’t understand is calling out the art style, since it’s a reasonable adaptation of the source material’s art. Sure, it doesn’t exactly capture McGuinness’s charm, but it tries, and does a pretty decent job of it. Now, I’m not a McGuinness fan in the first place and would have no problem with your critique, had it been of HIS style. But criticizing the movie for “getting it right” in so far as replicating the style of the art it was based on? That seems a bit odd, to me. It’d be far easier to just turn this into a back-handed compliment and say “The animators did a decent job of aping Ed McGuiness’ artistic style on the source material (though given his roided out bodies, two-times-too-thick necks, and eyebrows that look like two caterpillars fighting over a leaf, I’m not sure if that’s such a good thing or not),” but then, I suppose, you’d be plagiarizing my review XD

Basically, people… if you’re attacking Chris, I think you probably just think it’s fun to attack reviewers, whether it’s because you don’t like him personally, or you’re jealous of a reviewer’s ability to be heard, or whatever. I’ve seen the movie, I’ve written my review, and I’ve read Chris’s. The bottom line here is that he’s right – it’s a very flawed movie that does nothing to enhance the story it was based on and instead finds numerous ways to detract from it. It’s not to say there’s nothing in the film to like, just that there’s really not enough.

And I wasn’t being snarky. Well, OK, maybe I was a little, but I am generally glad when we get responses like this, good or bad.

a) I dont know if anyone said you were wrong (well actually I’m sure someone did at some point in the comments); most people seemed to just take issue with the tone of the review. I don’t know if you have a bias, but if all I knew about you was what I read in that review it certainly left that impression.

b) that comment better explained your opinion about the movie than anything you wrote in your actual review.

And assuming the “whee this is fun” comment is meant to be snark, I would think you would be thrilled to have 40 responses to something you wrote. At least you provoked a reaction.

A few quick points and then I’m done: a) It’s not a right/wrong thing. People are free to disagree with me. I’d just prefer to talk about the qualities (or lack thereof) of the movie than how much I supposedly hate superhero comics.

b) The reason I brought up the lack of blood, and Power Girl, etc. is that I feel Public Enemies is endemic of a problem of an adolescent, sophomoric attitude in all forms of media — not just comics — that attempts to pander to an older audience in the most obvious ways but doesn’t have the nerve to go the extra mile. Refusing to be either “kiddie” or “adult” it ends up being merely juvenile. Yes, some of the past DCU films had this problem too, but usually (except for the Wonder Woman movie) they were executed stylishly enough that I was willing to overlook it. Here, I simply couldn’t. And I thought that was worth addressing more than giving a shout-out to Jeph Loeb and Kevin Cannon.

But hey, if you want to get all huffy cause I didn’t like the film and make ridiculous assumptions about bias just because I like Acme Novelty, knock yourself out.

You call the movie “fanboy pandering” like it’s a bad thing. Guess what – Green Lantern First Flight was fanboy pandering as well.

I watched that last night, it’s awesome.

Is Public Enemies as awesome?

Because if it’s not – and everything points to it not being as good – then why should the review act like it is?

Judging just by the tone of your review, I would guess that you are not buying much of the Big Two’s current output and are more of an indy comics guy, and maybe this is not the type of film you should be reviewing. I would imagine there are others at CBR who could view the film in its proper context and write up a review, positive or negative, that readers of the site would find more useful.

First up, I don’t think this is the greatest review ever written.

But:

“Honestly, what were you expecting? Up? Coraline? The Incredibles? It’s a direct to dvd adaptation of a Jeph Loeb comic book, it was only going to be solid at its best.”

This is the part where I pull out my new magic lense and point you to a quote I read several times recently, because it happens to be part of a very insightful interview available at THE COMICS JOURNAL’s Web site:

“Very few people in this industry really believe that their work has any artistic merit, or that it’s salable elsewhere. [...] People in the industry find it disturbing that one of their number might actually take his seriously, take pride not only in being fast and dependable, but in the work. They’re so completely brainwashed into thinking they’re creating throwaway culture…!”

Steve Gerber said that, in 1978: http://www.tcj.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=754&Itemid=48&limit=1&limitstart=3

Obviously, this goes — still! today! in 2009! — to the very core of the North American comics industry’s issues. In many ways, publishers, creators, retailers and readers were able to get over that inferiority complex in the last thirty years. And, in many ways, they weren’t.

So: evaluating a toonsy film with supermen in underpantses kicking da beejeezus otta each odder as a bona fide, legitimate piece of entertainment? What were you expecting? OMEGA THE UNKNOWN?

You are in a world of trouble, Mautner.

Keep it up.

may i remind everyone that this is not based on reality!

“Personally i hear batman, i hear superman, i will be watching. Congrats DC you’ve done it again.”

“Honestly, what were you expecting? Up? Coraline? The Incredibles? It’s a direct to dvd adaptation of a Jeph Loeb comic book, it was only going to be solid at its best.”

Alright, Internet. I tap out.

In case my first comment didn’t make it clear enough, Chris: great review, the fact that it applies pretty much just as well to the source arc as it does to the movie is very telling. Now excuse me, I’m going to go read some pretentious high-art indie comics like Thunderbolts, Secret Warriors and Green Lantern.

Best,
Hunter (Pedro Bouça)

I gotta say that this review is exaggeratedly one-side.

Yeah, it’s like he spent his entire review only talking about how he didn’t like it, as opposed to giving fifty percent over to why he did like it – what gives with that reviewer guy?
You think we’re reading this to get your personal opinion or something?

http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2009/01/send-us-your-shelf-porn/

I think Chris qualifies as a “fan of comics.” That’s a pretty stupid set-up if he doesn’t.

Man, you’re high.

Not till later.

He didn’t mention the book that it’s based on,

Do people mention ‘Three Doctors’ when reviewing MASH the movie?
(Heck, they don’t even mention the movie when reviewing the show).

Do you need to name drop ‘Red Alert’ to review Dr. Strangelove?

Am I supposed to have read the Orchid Thief before commenting on Adaptation?

He’s reviewing the film, not the book!

and he didn’t mention that the star voice actors came back for it.

So?
They are TV voice actors.
Who the heck knows any of their names, and who the heck cares?
These aren’t names known by everyone – only hardcore fans of the previous animations would know it.
And face facts, if you know their names, and it’s a ‘sell’ to you, you’re probably going to get it anyway, or be on a DC Animations message board already, and thus not need this review at all.

Then, he goes on to say that he didn’t cover it because other reviews did. That’s lazy. If you’re going to let people read other reviews for obvious details, why bother writing one at all?

It’s not lazy, he just didn’t really give a hoot.
He was saying ‘if that matters to you, go read one of the reviews that covers that sort of stuff’.

And he mentioned Levar Burton. Not the fact that the three voice actors most associated with the three main characters came back specifically for this movie. That seems like a big fact to leave out, especially since Mautner made time in his GL DVD review to discuss those voice actors, the DVD extras, and other points. That read like a review. This one reads like a bone to pick.