The Official Black Owl Review of "Superman" (2025).

 

The last time I published a blog or wrote a movie review was six years ago. It was months before a pandemic, and was at the end of the first spate of Marvel films; “Avengers: Endgame.” That the subsequent six years have been a roller coaster, mostly at the plummet points, would be an understatement, but something has finally got me back at the keyboard to gush about a movie.

And that something is “Superman.”

I have written entire tomes about the first superhero, and I’ve spent a lot of my life—including situations where that life was in danger—wearing or waving the “S” like a priest with a cross. That symbol and all it represents has been a totem, a charm, a talisman to remind me what an ideal of truth and justice can look like, and though I would not SAY I am superstitious enough to believe that the presence of the symbol, or my faith in what the character represents has actually protected me from harm, I AM superstitious enough to believe that the presence of the symbol, or my faith in what the character represents has actually protected me from harm. 

So, in an age when it feels like Truth and Justice are losing to the cynical, the petty, and the heartless, I was perhaps looking for a reminder, and a reminder to everyone out there, what that character should or could mean. What inspiration should or could look like. 

The last decade or so there have been a few attempts at presenting this character mainstream; some more successful than others. Some closer to what the ideal means to me than others. But this is not a world that lets the potential for repackaging go by, and we can only hope that the person responsible for re-presenting the heroes and legends of our past can do those characters and stories justice. It can be an inherently good thing; every generation should have the chance to discover anew the best of the past. But when those efforts fall short, it makes me sad. I want my descendants in generations to come to experience the type of joy I did when I was six or seven and first saw Christopher Reeve put on a red cape and catch a helicopter. The recycling of ideas is inevitable; the recyclers’ understanding of the characters they portray may not be. 

So with that all out of the way, here is my review of James Gunn’s 2025 “Superman,” starring David Corenswet, Rachel Brosnahan, and Nicholas Hoult. I’ll give you a spoiler free version up front, and then warn you before I get in-depth.

Thinking of “Avengers: Endgame” and the MCU, they successfully came along to say, "What if the aspirational, earnest, fantastical characters of old comic books just were real people in our world?" It's worked really well for them. We commiserate with Tony Stark’s fear, and cheer when he overcomes that to build the Iron Man suit and begin to protect others. We see literal alien gods attack, but Black Widow and Hawkeye are still out there with the weapons they have to do their best to be heroes. It’s a grounded world, never straying too far from our own even when the most fantastic or horrific of things happen. 

Then, the DCEU starting with "Man of Steel" says "Let's examine how the real world would deconstruct the aspirational, earnest, fantastical characters of old comic books." Superman can't logically exist without causing the types of epic fights that would bring huge body counts. Wonder Woman becomes so jaded at "man's world" that she basically goes into hiding when she can't return to Themyscira. Batman's "no killing" policy falls by the wayside after more than a decade of fighting crime and the death of his sidekick. Zack Snyder himself said that it’s unrealistic to think that Batman wouldn’t start killing people...in a film that is literally about a billionaire genius resurrecting a dead alien to fight another alien and a Greek Goddess formed from clay. That works for some, mixed bag with me.

James Gunn just came along and said, "What if a movie just had the aspirational, earnest, fantastical characters of old comic books as they were?" He brought everything I love about print comic books to life, embracing what makes our American mythology great, and I'm not sure I could be happier. His Superman isn’t quite as confident as Christopher Reeve’s version, but the desire to take what is literally the greatest physical strength a character can have, and focus that into protecting people and things that can’t protect themselves is there in spades. The refusal to give up when the odds are against him, the honest belief that truth and justice ARE ideals worth living by; this in plain language IS Superman. The film embraces not only the deepest meaning of the character but also the amplified, aggrandized world of the comic book. This is a world where giant monsters and extra-dimensional invaders can show up in the skies over Metropolis, and people all but expect it. Because the biggest enemy? It’s the pride, envy, avarice, and wrath of Lex Luthor. 

So, non-spoiler summary: You’re looking for a completely modern, yet utterly traditional version of Superman that will make kids today tie a towel around their neck and run through the house, while giving their parents a good reminder of how good people act, and what we should all aspire to? Here it is. Is it a little goofy at times? Oh yes; but that is a feature, not a bug. These days incredible special effects are a given; a movie having the heart, moxie, and joy worthy of Superman can be harder to find. Yet, here it is. 

Spoilers from here on out!

What Works: 

Almost everything. From the earnestness of David Corenswet’s Superman, to the way the character feels frustration that stopping a war and saving children’s lives can somehow cause political controversy is just dead on. I know there have been choruses of “This movie made a woke Superman,” but the simple fact is the character laid out by two Jewish teenagers who were themselves the children of immigrants was meant to bring justice to those who could not do it for themselves has ALWAYS been this. In 1938 he stopped men from beating their wives and children (first issue even). In 1939 he went after a mining boss putting his workers in danger to get more money. In 1943 he punched Hitler. In 1947 he smashed the Klan. Now, he stops a shady US ally from invading a country and killing children. He deals with prejudice against immigrants. This isn’t new...if there happen to be real-world events that echo that, maybe we should be wondering which side of that we’re on. Be the person Superman would want you to be.

As soon as I heard Rachel Brosnahan had been cast as Lois Lane, I knew we were going to have a winner there. She has all the bravada the character has had since 1938 (remember, Lois too was in Action Comics #1), and is also a top notch journalist. We don’t know she’s a great journalist because she tells Perry she has a Pulitzer; we know it because we SEE her doing the work, asking ANYONE (including Superman) the tough questions, and calling on sources to get to the bottom of stories. We also have her dive in headlong to back up Mr. Terrific (a highlight of the film, that character) to save Superman when he has put himself in the hands of the enemy. Is this the best Lois we’ve seen on screen? Arguably, yes. (I will always have a soft spot for Erica Durance however.)

And Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor. Imagine if you took a genius intellect, and it lived in a person with Donald Trump’s fragile ego, Elon Musk’s utter cringiness, and Peter Thiel's unshakable conviction that he must be right. It’s a toss up whether they used that inspiration to make a despicable character, or if they made a despicable character and that happens to have those attributes, but that’s this Lex Luthor. How DARE this immigrant come from another place and get the adoration of people who should be bowing to Lex? Lex is ENTITLED to be the most famous man in the world, so why should people love Superman? This leads him to not only want to kill Superman, but he has to BEST him. He has to humiliate him, destroy not just the man but tarnish the image because his very existence is an affront to Lex. It’s motivation taken very directly from some of the best versions of comic book Luthor we’ve seen (and again, maybe real life). “All-Star Superman,” Azzarello's “Lex Luthor: Man of Steel,” “Superman For All Seasons;” that Lex is who we see here, and Hoult absolutely brings it.

The rest of the supporting cast is also wonderful, particularly Edi Gathegi as Mr. Terrific. For years I’ve wanted to see Nathan Fillion play the Hal Jordan Green Lantern; now I will only EVER see him as Guy Gardner. The whole Daily Planet crew is there, exactly as they should be, and initially, I was a little let down they didn’t get to do more, but they are exactly the atmosphere that makes the scenes they do appear in undeniably the Daily Planet. I am excited to find out more about Isabella Merced’s Hawkgirl. Is she the reincarnated Egyptian Shiera Hall? The Thanagarian Shayera Hol? The RE-reincarnated Kendra Saunders? I have no doubt James Gunn knows and is waiting to spring a doozy on us. 

(There are a lot of characters I haven’t mentioned here, but Jimmy Olsen, The Engineer, Metamorpho, Gary, our brief look ahead at Supergirl...all just dead on.)

And let’s talk about Krypto. The Silver Age staple of Superman comics comes to the screen, and he’s a menace. Anyone who has ever adopted a rescue, and knows how you can love a dog that just actively gives into their trauma at all times can feel exactly what it is to have Krypto. Indeed, my second favorite scene in the whole film is when Superman, in order to find Krypto who has been taken by Lex, is going to turn himself over to the Government in hopes of them taking him where Krypto is. Lois says, “He’s just a dog.” And Superman replies, “Yeah, and not even a very good one. But he’s alone and he’s probably scared.” A perfect look at just who Superman is in this movie.

What Doesn’t Work: Very little. I initially had a little trouble with how hard they lean into the Kents being very stereotypical hick farmers, but the scene with Jonathan and Clark on the porch discussing who Clark chooses to be (which also I think completes the circle with the character of “The Iron Giant” using Superman to come to the same conclusion that HE chooses what he is, not whatever his background is) is pure gold. And, I’m still wrestling with the idea that Jor-El sent Kal-El to Earth as a conqueror. It’s been done in a few comics, usually in “Elseworlds” style stories, but it’s not my preference. Not a deal-breaker, but not what I would have done. It does let us get a good look at the end of Clark reminiscing over the Kents, and them showing how to take joy in simple things. Perhaps by contrast they make this version of the Kents better. 

My last gripe, I wish we’d gotten more of Superman being Clark Kent. When we see him out of costume for the majority of this film, he’s with Lois or his parents who know. There’s really only one scene where we get to see Clark having to play the persona that separates him from Superman, and I like it, but would like to have seen more. One of my favorite scenes in the original Donner film is when Superman has just flown Lois around Metropolis, and Clark then shows up as her date, and considers revealing himself. Christopher Reeve pulls off this change in physicality and demeanor that absolutely shows why no one recognizes him outside the cape. I think Corenswet is capable of that, but we only get a hint of it in Lois’ apartment when he sits up to respond to her calling him Superman with a bold, “Ms. Lane.” Good, very good; but I wanted more.

So, I leave you with my favorite lines in this film, delivered with an earnest truthfulness and integrity that only Superman can be capable of, and encapsulating the character entirely. Confronting Lex whose nefarious plans to disassemble the persona of Superman before killing him has led to great destruction, Superman responds to Lex’s contemptuous dismissal of Superman as a “piece of shit alien,” with this:

“I’m as human as anyone. I love, I get scared. I wake up every morning and despite not knowing what to do, I put one foot in front of the other and I try to make the best choices I can. I screw up all the time, but that is being human and that’s my greatest strength. And some day, I hope you realize it’s your greatest strength too.”

That understanding of humanity; that hope that even this enemy will one day come around to understand how—as the great “All-Star Superman” says—“We’re all in this together, and we’re all we’ve got.” THAT is Superman. That is a character who will endanger himself to help a dog he doesn’t even like that much, or pull a cat out of a tree, or save a squirrel from a kaiju, or...stop a war he has no political right to be in because people were going to die. A character that shows us strength lies not in what a yellow sun can do to an infant from Krypton, but in our own convictions and desire to help everyone, to believe in Truth and Justice. That is what Superman shows us, and makes us want to aspire to be. This movie understands that and gives it to us for two hours in which I don’t think the smile ever left my face. 

This is a movie that makes you want to look up.

(All images are property of Warner’s Pictures, and no infringement is intended.)

On Your Left: The Official Black Owl Review of "Avengers: Endgame"

I was about a week late seeing Endgame, but the good news is, I somehow managed not to be spoiled. Thank you internet.  So, obviously, there will be spoilers discussed below, but I want to offer a spoiler free look up front. 

Endgame has to serve not only as the second half of the story started in "Infinity War" but as something of a capstone project for 11 years and 20 movies from Marvel Studios.  In that, it is pretty successful.  With only a couple of exceptions, it manages to give everyone (and wow are there a lot of characters involved in "everyone") some time to shine, and provides some narrative arc closeouts to characters who are due for such. It runs a bit long in places, definitely can't be appreciated in a vacuum (it NEEDS your nearly encyclopedic knowledge of the 20 predecessors), and manages to carry out the continued misuse of a great character in the worst possible way.  It is worth your time, has some genuine greatness if not being life-changing, but has its flaws too.  Definitely provides plenty of closure while keeping you interested for where the MCU will go from here.

Spoilers commence!

So, I have to admit I sometimes have a tough time judging the Avengers films. They don't really exist to be their own narrative, they exist to be pivot points in the larger MCU.  That's fine, but it also means I am loath to compare one of them to the MCU Gold Standard "Captain America: Winter Soldier" because the goal is different. These films do not exist in a vacuum and can't be judged as such. So, for that reason I don't really want to compare it to others in a universe that spans 21 other movies; compared to the other Avengers movies, Endgame is solidly in the middle. I probably enjoyed it as much as the first, and more than Age of Ultron (which I don't hate), but I don't think it was as good as Infinity War.  

WHAT WORKS: 

Honestly, a whole lot.  First of all, they are very smart about how they introduce the element of time travel, which could easily have been the cliche that cleans up everything.  Their description works well, and the fact they point out which movies DON'T share their time travel philosophy is very good.  

The despair left in place after IW is played very well, and since they don't use time travel cliches, I was surprised which this film actually left consequences in place. Future MCU movies will have to deal with (I hope) the fact that the world went through five years of hell, and suddenly half the world's population just popped out and popped back in on either side of that. A little more on this later when I talk about my concerns.

Perhaps my favorite thing was giving us Smart Hulk, very much in line with the Peter David comics from the 90s (or perhaps you better know the "Credible Hulk" meme), a Banner who is brilliant and green plays to great effect here. I have high hopes for Bruce in the future of the MCU.

We knew at least two characters were bowing out, and the exits of both Tony Stark and Steve Rogers are well handled. Tony's daughter is a character I hope we see more of as she grows, and the respect Cap gives Sam (Falcon) as he passes the shield was a high point for me. (No, I don't think this Bucky has earned the shield, and I believe Steve would know that; Sam is perfect.)  I was expecting we'd lose Thor too, given the end of Hemsworth's contract, but the God of Thunder may appear again, and I admit I really love beer drinking, pot bellied, needs to find new purpose Thor.  I'd like to see where that goes.

The initial death of Thanos was unexpected, and that's where the movie works well. There are formulas they could have followed here with their tropes and comic histories that they didn't; some surprises that really work. I just hope we don't lose the importance of the consequences left in their wake.

WHAT DOESN'T QUITE WORK:

One, I think this movie could be about 20-30 minutes shorter.  There is no particular scene I think I need cut, but a few--particular time traveling flashbacks--go a little long and could be tightened up.  I think the pacing is one way IW was definitely superior. Did I really need to see Peter Quill doing his GotG opening dance for as long as we did? Not really. Did I need to see as much of the first Avengers New York Battle again? Probably not.  I NEED those scenes, but they could have been tighter.

I am also a little let down by how little presence Carol Danvers has in this film.  Perhaps that's my own expectations, but given how much I enjoyed "Captain Marvel" and how well they set her up as a foil for Thanos (dear lord she's fighting TWO of his biggest minions in her movie!) her 10 minutes on screen felt lacking.  Yeah, it's Tony, Steve, and Thor's movie, but just a little more setting up for the future would have been nice. There is a very forced gathering of women heroes at one point, but as much as I didn't think it felt organic, it was also an image I want my granddaughters to have on their wall, so I'll allow it. 

WHAT MAKES YOU REALLY MAD, DAN?

Black.

Widow.

Now, yeah, it all makes sense in context of this story. Don't care- remember, I don't judge these films in a vacuum, they have to be taken in consideration with what they mean for the larger MCU. When Natasha was introduced in IM2, she was perfect, and she has some GREAT moments in Avengers.  Then, Avengers: Age of Ultron gave us the rather weird Bruce thing, though she is great in Winter Soldier. Civil War gives us Clint's family, which makes their intimacy in Avengers kind of creepy (she wears an arrow necklace for Hulk's sake). 

With Hawkeye's family gone, we're in a good position to move on from that and set up the two of them for some neat spin offs. Hell, make Clint sacrifice himself and give me a teary family returning with him gone at the end.  Or, have them cheat. Clint walks up to Red Skull and says, "A soul? This stone already took my wife, my daughter, and my sons.  I think it owes me."  Bam- badassery AND Natasha comes home. 

But no.  We kill Black Widow before she gets to be part of the final showdown.  We kill her before she gets to find peace out there. We kill her BEFORE SHE GETS HER OWN MOVIE WHEN SHE TOTALLY DESERVES TO HAVE ONE AND HAS FOR 10 YEARS. I guess they are still making one; feels late to me. Natasha, you were not treated fairly by this franchise.

Me too, Natasha. I am crying too.

WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF IN THE FUTURE?

Since I love the fact they don't just clean the events of IW off the board, and we have a world changed, and literally 50% of your population with a 5-year hole in their lives, I am worried this won't be given due consideration in the future. I was perfectly good with Peter Parker, five years later walking into a High School with people he doesn't know- and then seeing Ned was a snap victim too.  OK, makes sense.  But the trailer for "Spider-Man: Far From Home" also shows MJ, Flash Thompson, and Betty Brandt, all still the same age as Peter.  Are they going to tell me ALL of his friends got snapped?  I hope that is considered.

Now, here's my real hope for the future of the MCU based on this movie: We have time travel. We have smart Hulk. We need a new Big Bad with Thanos snapped away.  

Folks, I want Peter David's "Future Imperfect" adapted into the MCU. I won't spoil it here, but imagine a villain from a century in the future; a former hero who goes mad after a nuclear war, kills the other superheroes and takes over the planet.  The Maestro....he looks like this:

Read it if you can find it- all the elements are there, Marvel Studios: GIVE ME THE MAESTRO.

So to sum up, we've got a real accomplishment here closing off this 21 film story line, while still leaving enough in place to continue in the future with other heroes, and giving a satisfying end to (most of) our heroes' arcs. With only a couple of missteps in 21 movies, and a very satisfying conclusion in Endgame, Marvel Studios should be very proud, but I hope they aren't quite done.  Looking forward to the legacies of Captain America and Iron Man living on. And a round of applause to the solidly entertaining Endgame for wrapping it up.

  

PS- Holy Mackerel am I looking forward to THIS in future films!

It’s about character: the two-for-one official Black Owl review of “Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse” and “Aquaman.”

December has been an uncharacteristically busy month for superhero films and I as I have seen three in the last three weeks! I am not going to get into a review of ‘Once Upon a Deadpool’ here, but to be fair many of the things I have to say about ‘Aquaman’ and ‘Into the Spiderverse’ actually do apply. 

Sorry Wade; next time.

These movies all work because of two things: One, they absolutely present the character as the character was intended; Two, they are in no way ashamed of their comic book roots, understanding exactly what makes such story telling great in the first place. Potential spoilers from here on out.

‘Spiderverse’ leans so far into it’s comic roots, the production actually created new methods of animation to present the visuals on screen like they might appear in four-color newsprint. I was occasionally distracted by this when color wouldn’t always line up with the line work, something that rarely detracts on a printed page, but seems to be more like a blur when it motion.

Is that Kirby Crackle? Yes, yes it is.

That is however my sole complaint about what may be one of the best written superhero movies our current Golden-Age of superhero movies have given us. We meet Miles Morales, a teenager whose cop dad and medical-professional mom kind of set him up to be a person who has to help. The awkwardness of teenage years though often get in his way, and there is that cool Uncle (who may be up to no good…very up to no good) he’d rather hang out with. Add to this the bite from a genetically altered spider, and you have a prime, modern reimagining of the 1960s version of the Peter Parker story. A good movie would just give us that; this GREAT film however is still leaning into that source material.

We see the Kingpin (and the stylized version of the character is both simple and dramatically sinister) wants to reach into another universe to recover love and family lost. In the process, he manages to kill the Spider-Man Miles knows, (voiced with aplomb by Chris Pine; stick around to the end of the credits to hear a sample of his Christmas album, “Spidey-Bells”) and bring several flavors of Spider-Hero into this world.  Miles collides with all of them on his hero’s journey, while discovering his own family in a way he had not thought possible. 

Pictured Center: Guy I can understand.

All of the character work here is great, as each Spidey has to deal with their own tragedy that led them to the suit. Spider-Woman (popularly called Spider-Gwen in fandom) is given a great role here, but perhaps I most commiserate with the middle-aged Peter Parker from Earth 616. A few too many pizzas, a little too much letting ‘work’ get in the way of his relationship with Mary Jane. He’s the smart-ass Spidey we all knew, but with 25 years of baggage, and as all of the Spider-folk here, he is a perfect distillation of his character, filtered into our modern world.

And I haven’t even talked about Peter Porker, the Spectacular Spider-Ham yet.

We never do really know why his hand is wet.

We walk out with an incredibly human story where we sympathize and empathize and can see ourselves up on that screen with a Spidey-flavor for all viewers.  The live-action Spider-Man films have been all up and down the quality spectrum, with some pretty good ones out there, but I think I have to say ‘Spiderverse’ is the best foray into the Spider-world we have gotten yet.

‘Aquaman’ does the exact opposite and takes a man, making him more than human. And that’s exactly how it should be. The difference in these movies perfectly illustrates to me what the difference was between classic Marvel comics and classic DC comics. Marvel gives you characters who are YOU in extraordinary circumstances.  I identify with Peter trying to do the right thing and stay out of trouble with Aunt May.  I identify with Bruce Banner unable to control his anger and suffering the terrible consequences thereof. I identify with Tony Stark, his arrogance, and his flaws, as he still has to get it together and do the right thing. DC on the other hand gives us gods, archetypes to which we aspire. Superman as the archetype of hope. Batman as the archetype of justice.  Flash as the archetype of kindness. Wonder Woman as the archetype of peace. Aquaman as the archetype of a king.

Marvel heroes to identify with, DC heroes to aspire to; that’s what drives the readers’ preference. Marvel movies figured this out early and have ten years of success. I have felt for years the DCEU mistook those human factors for why the Marvel movies worked and tried to emulate that. Hence, we get a depressed Superman, troubled by his place as a hero. A Batman who has given in to human foible and left behind justice for vengeance, killing indiscriminately.  Wonder Woman in BvS, who no longer works for peace, but just roams the world mourning Steve Trevor and WWI.

Thankfully, the movie ‘Wonder Woman’ broke this pattern, and gave us Diana as the archetype again. Luckily, ‘Aquaman’ does the same thing, calling on its source material, and recognizing those old DC comics were the mythology of the modern world.

As I understand, this picture will quench anyone's thirst.

Not everyone will appreciate that about ‘Aquaman.’ The film’s story follows the old Joseph Campbell “hero’s journey” almost slavishly, taking Arthur Curry from the call, to the ordeal, to the black moment, to the descent and resurrection, etc. Anyone who has studied mythology through this lens will find no surprises in this story. For me however, that is exactly how an archetype should be built, and the strength of the movie lies in getting this pattern right.

Along the way, we get some very corny dialogue, and some of the most over-the-top production design you are likely to see. From weaponized sharks to Lovecraftian horrors of the Trenches below the sea, everything is cranked up to eleven.

And that’s EXACTLY the bold, outrageous, mythology-level storytelling I want from DC. Arthur is a boorish man-child who goes through all the trials to become a God-King; the fulfillment of prophecy and destiny; precisely the origin story a King of Atlantis deserves.

I would not mind a spin-off.

Along the way we do get some good updates. Mera is a delight, and the agent of Arthur’s salvation more than once. The villains, Ocean Master and Black Manta, do have a point, allowing us to sympathize a bit with their motivations if not their actions. The re-imagining of the undersea kingdom is stunning, and would have been impossible to render on screen just a few years ago.  Each scene that takes place underwater actually feels like you are underwater.

I would not mind a spin-off.

Though I do have to admit there was a moment I hoped a certain character would sing “Shiny” from the ‘Moana’ soundtrack; Tamatoa, is that you?

Aquaman Spoiler out of context.

So in the end we get two movies that are completely different in tone, but each work for this long time comic fan because they both completely understand, accept, and rejoice in their source material.  I hope it’s a lesson that Warner Brothers takes to heart, and in the future they continue to give us Deities in capes to whom we can aspire, while Marvel (and apparently now Sony too) shows us how we normal folks can find ways to be super too. ‘Aquaman’ and “Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse” hitting all together like this has made up for my lack of a Star Wars movie this holiday season.

And you, Wade. And you.

Harlan

It’s 1982; I am 10, and my brother is going on a trip and my folks are going to watch his daughters for him. To help keep them occupied, he loans us this magical new device called a “Video Cassette Recorder.” We knew VCRs existed, but here was this magical device that allowed you to watch and rewatch movies.  We didn’t even have cable at the time. The only problem was the movies he lent us for that week were kids’ movies. Luckily, my dad knew an unsavory character.The neighbor down the street was not just the type of bastard who raised Pitt Bulls as fighting dogs, he was also a movie bootlegger.  My dad, risking reputation, went down to “Rick’s” house and came back having borrowed about a dozen little brown rectangles, all of which contained an actual movie. My parents set out to watch as many as they could. We were poor.  And by “poor” I mean we lived in a one bedroom trailer in Southern Arizona and I slept on the couch.  So, one morning my dad gets up to watch a movie early while my nieces were still asleep in sleeping bags on the floor, and I wake up and lay there on the couch while he sits in his self-built plywood, throne-like leisure chair to watch “A Boy and His Dog,” starring Don Johnson (Miami Vice had not happened yet) and Suzanne Benton. It is a twisted little story about a young man and his intelligent psychic dog wandering the post-World War IV wasteland looking for women.  It is the first R-Rated movie I ever saw, and it left an indelible impression.

It’s 1983 and I have discovered I love Star Trek more than Star Wars. My source of Star Trek is the local video store from which we rent video discs (we’ve ALMOST moved into modern home entertainment at that point) and they have the entire classic Trek series, two episodes per disc.  I see “City on the Edge of Forever” for the first time.  While reading fan materials, I find out the original story was very different, and there was controversy around a man named Harlan Ellison. I begin to look up his other work, only to find he wrote the original novel for “A Boy and His Dog.”  He hated the movie’s ending.  I read the novel, and begin to understand the real differences creative vision can bring to things. 

It’s 1989, and I am dating the girl of my dreams.  She’s cute, she’s smart, and puts up with the fact I am not only a huge nerd, but trying to learn how to write myself.  Best of all, her dad like me too. He likes the fact I can quote Clarke and Asimov and the greatest of them all, Bradbury. From an extensive collection hands me a copy of Harlan Ellison’s “Deathbird Stories.” I read it all in one night.

It’s 2013 and I am about to publish my own collection of short stories. I have to pay tribute to the two writers who have influenced me the most in that medium, Ray Bradbury and Harlan Ellison. One is a muse of light and possibility who gave me the gift of rockets and the joys of the everyday miracle.  The other is a master of pragmatism and darkness who gave me the gift of indicting tyranny, of calling out cruelty, of using the dark to shed light. I portray them as gods on my shoulder whispering in each ear as I desperately try to claim even a spark of their fires as my own.

It’s 2018 and I am sitting at work and I get a text from a friend that Harlan Ellison has died. The Master has passed in his sleep in an age when his direst warnings have come true, and we need his voice to censure the rancorous. But he’s gone, and we have to carry on in his place.  I am still trying to nurture the fire he sparked in my head and heart, but I have not come close.

We will never do what he did as well as he did, but the best memorial we can give him is to try. My condolences to his family, and to the rest of us who now have to live in a world post-Harlan Ellison.

“The trick is not becoming a writer; the trick is staying a writer.” –Harlan Ellison

A Cup of Star Wars: The Official Black Owl Review of "Solo: A Star Wars Story"

I will give you a quick spoiler free bit here before I dig into the weeds.  Solo is a delightfully entertaining film full of nostalgia, fan service, some deep dives into the old Expanded Universe, and a pastiche of genres including heist, film noir, western, and even a little cyberpunk. The supporting characters are mostly a delight, and it manages to both give some surprises and pretty much be exactly what you hoped for. It is not flawless, but it is well worth your time if you are even a casual Star Wars fan, and I would imagine stands on its own pretty well as a space romp.  Assuming anyone out there who likes space romps could be unfamiliar with Star Wars.

SPOILERS BEGIN!

The thing that most worried me about Solo was something that it turns out was the least problematic: the recasting of Han Solo. I was not familiar with Alden Ehrenreich’s previous work, but he manages to capture all the cocksure swagger we need to see in a young Han (who is given his last name by an Imperial recruiter when Han tells him he has no family) with enough of an echo of Harrison Ford to be convincing, but no so much as to come off like parody. The interaction between Han and Chewbacca (particularly an early conversation in Shyiiwook) is a delight throughout.  Ehrenreich and Joonas Suotamo (who steps into Peter Mayew’s enormous shoes) bring their characters to life wonderfully, and I never doubted this was Han and Chewie, right down to the replicated scar on Alden's chin. 

Donald Glover also does a very credible job giving us a legacy role, and he’s just one Colt 45 away from being a young Billy Dee Williams; suave, shifty, and notorious, Lando is also a pleasure.

New characters also get their best feet forward, particularly with Woody Harrelson’s Tobias Beckett and Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s L3-37. Both help us expand the Star Wars universe a little further.  There’s nothing wrong with Emilia Clarke’s performance; Qi’ra was just hard to connect with for me, though that is entirely in line with the character (and the eventual reveal of her true loyalties), and in no way Ms. Clarke’s fault. 

The big surprise character moment for me was actually Enfys Nest. Initially presented as a marauding pirate with her “Cloud Riders,” the Mad Max influence is evident (which in my mind called me back to the “Phasma” novel and her home world of Parnassas…will there be a connection?), when the warrior removes her mask to reveal a woman who can’t be more than 20 I gasped audibly. When it turns out she is actually intending to fund a nascent Rebellion against the Imperial system (further evidenced by the appearance of one of the Two-Tubes brothers who will later work with Saw Gerrera in Rogue One) I cheered. Sure, a Glover as Lando sequel would be great: but I will take Enfys Nest: A Star Wars Storyany day of the week. The unmasked Erin Kellyman completely holds her own on screen, and given her character’s surprise connection to the early Rebels, I would be quite curious to see how Enfys relates to Bail Organa, Mon Mothma, or even later Saw Gerrera. She is now on top of my spin off wishlists.

The plot moves at a good clip with plenty of action, and the type of theme resonance we should get in a Star Wars film. It’s a good look at the underbelly of the Empire that has been the purview of the cartoon and ancillary materials until now, and it was nice to see on the big screen. As much as I lamented not treating Star Wars like the big winter event it has been the last three years, this is a summer movie, and came out right when I needed it.

So, what’s wrong with it? Some of the cuts for me felt odd from a technical standpoint, almost like Ron Howard had to work with footage from the previous directors and try to make it fit. There are a couple of scenes that jarred me when the camera switched angles and forced me to reorient to see what I was looking at. A less minor quibble I have though is the waste of three great characters.

Early on we meet Thandie Newton’s Val, and John Favreau’s Rio who are part of Beckett’s crew, and Val is romantically involved with Tobias. More importantly, she’s a fantastically competent character both charming and dangerous who we get comfortable with rather quickly…and then has to blow herself up. Rio is very well written, providing some good comedic timing while every line reveals a trait about his character…so he can be shot in the back after about 10 minutes of screen time. 

It doesn’t stop there, the delightfully liberated L3-37, who is a champion of droid rights and quirky as well dies sadly in Lando’s arms after about 20 minutes of screen time. She has this great scene with Qi’ra where the droid says life with Lando is awkward because he’s in love with her, and we chalk that up to her odd personality, but when she’s in danger, it really does seem Lando has romantic feelings toward her. That’s something I want to see explored, I wanted to see all of these characters explored some more, but alas they are gone. I am not saying we need a deathless movie, but it was jarring to lose them before they were fully explored, and it left me with the wrong kind of “wanting more.”

Beyond all of that however, this is a really entertaining piece of Star Wars that I would like to think will not be subject to the “Not What I Wanted” gripes of those who disliked The Last Jedi. This one is ripped right out of the lore, steeped in Lucas EU, and by the Force even features a reference to Lando Calrissian and the Mindharp of Sharu. I felt like we were about to be treated to Jaxxon from Marvel Comics any minute.

You say his name, he appears.

So, a really fun addition, though by no means a melodramatic blockbuster. Very interested though to see where some ideas brought to the fore here (Maul and Qi’ra???) are going. I’ll definitely hit the theater at least once more to take this in and look forward to seeing it at home on blu-ray.

Hopefully right around the time they announce Enfys Nest: A Star Wars Story.

(all images property of Disney and Lucasfilm)