Bryce Zabel's MOVIE SMACKDOWN!

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008) -vs- The Mummy (1999)

 Who's Your Mummy Dearest? 

The Smackdown.  For years, everyone knew the Big Three of Classic Horror: Dracula, The Wolf Man, and Frankenstein.  That other Undead Dude, The Mummy was second-tier, a guy with a few flicks but not the endorsements ('Count Chocula', anyone)?  It's like he was the forgotten step-child.  All that changed, of course, when Universal decided to dust off the title to remake (sorry, 're-imagine') and cast Brendan Fraser (Link from the classic  'Encino Man') in the 1999 version of "The Mummy."  The re-boot made a load of dough.  Money means more Mummy Mayhem, namely: "The Mummy Returns", a sequel of-sorts; "The Mummy: The Scorpion King;" and recently, "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor."  Four films in less than a decade.  Let's see how the original (well, the new original) holds up against the upstart, or our latest installment.  Let the mummification begin!

The Challenger.  The prologue to "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" starts in Ancient China where an Evil Emperor, Han (Jet Li) is conquering the known world.  He has a vast army and his priests have shown him how to shape shift and control the elements.  But that's not enough: he wants Immortality!  It just so happens there's a Witch (Michelle Yeoh) who knows the Secret. The Emperor wants her for himself but she's in love with his general.  She gets the point (literally) that Han's not a nice man and puts a curse on him and his army, turning them in Terra Cotta statues (because, apparently, in the Far East they didn't believe in wrapping their mummies in bandages).  The proverbial sands of time pass and Alex O'Connell, the grown Son of Rick (Fraser), finds the Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.  When bad guys awaken him, Alex is joined by his parents Rick and Evelyn (here played by Maria Bello) who are all too eager to quit their boring retirement and kick some mummy ass.   Rick goes three-for-three by putting down the Emperor with the requisite magic blade and saving the world (again).

Hellboy II (2008) -vs- Hancock (2008)

 Heroes with Bad Attitudes 

The Smackdown. In the summer popcorn movie derby don't bet against the superhero. The numbers say it all: "Iron Man" grossed $563.3 million in two months; "Hancock," more than $204 million since last week. We can only imagine how well the new Batman movie "The Dark Knight" will perform.

An earlier Smackdown! came down in favor of "Hancock" and why not: Will Smith's name above the title, an attractive crew and shrewd pre-release marketing. The critical verdict has been mixed, and I decided "Hancock" would enhance Will's commercial stature (a little) regardless of the film's merits. 

Now, let's give "Hancock" a tougher fight. Into the ring strides "Hellboy II: The Golden Army" with Ron Perlman reprising his devilish character from the Dark Horse comic. The original (like the sequel) directed and co-written by Guillermo Del Toro is a fish out of water story, and so is "Hellboy II."

It sets up an intriguing Smackdown!: Does "Hancock" have enough to handle the red short horn, or was that a prophesy uttered in "Hellboy II": "I won't kill him...I'll just kick his ass."

The Challenger. A superhero's work is never done and Hellboy feels unappreciated. Maybe that's why he a little touchy. He's readily spotted on the street and can't catch a break. Most folks openly question Hellboy's motives. The main story in "Hellboy II" comes into play because a prince of the underworld (Nuada, Luke Goss) wants to take over topside. He unleashes a hungry batch of tooth fairies while stealing a portion of a golden crown. The full crown will allow the wearer to activate an army of mechanical warriors. There are complications: Abe the Fishman has a thing for the villain's sister, Princess Nuala (Anna Walton); the irritating Tom Manning (Jeffery Tambor) has a new cohort in Johann Kraus at the Bureau for Paranormal Research and Defense; Hellboy is having relationship problems with his combustible girlfriend, Liz Sherman (Selma Blair). All these elements come together to prove several points: Saving the earth is messy; those creatures you saw in your dreams are real, and the road to love (the inter-species type) is never smooth.

Iron Man (2008) -vs- Batman Begins (2005)

Self-Made Heroes

The Smackdown.  It's been a dark time for comic book movies since Christopher Nolan's "Batman Begins" and Bryan Singer's "Superman Returns."  Over the past two years, "Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer," "X-Men: The Last Stand," and "Spider-Man 3" raised red flags with audiences and critics alike: is the comic book movie Golden Age finally imploding upon itself?  If Marvel Studios, Marvel Comics newly-launched production company, has an answer, it's "NO!"  Jon Favreau's "Iron Man" marks Marvel Studios first independently-owned production (distributed by Paramount).  It follows the high-tech adventures of billionaire Tony Stark, as he soars into the world as the red and gold avenger, Iron Man.  Amongst us comic book nerds, when we're not debating if Wolverine could take Superman, a frequent discussions is how Iron Man is Marvel's Batman.  So in honor of us comic nerds' long-standing debates, we'll see how Christopher Nolan's "Batman Begins" stands against the high-flying, repulsor-blasting "Iron Man."

The Challenger.  Meet Tony Stark: womanizer, billionaire, alcoholic, genius.  A child prodigy, Tony Stark is responsible for the world's most deadly military weapons, developing and funding his inventions via Stark Industries.  Robert Downey Jr. plays our hero, a self-absorbed braggart who suffers a mid-life crisis after being abducted by Middle East terrorists and barely escaping with his life.  Determined to make a difference in this dangerous world he's help create, Downey's Stark takes to building a suit capable of mitigating the disasters in the world.  Surprisingly funny and well-acted, but also with its serious moments, "Iron Man" is a testament to movie audiences that comic book movies are not dying.  Jon Favreau's sharp direction and Downey's well-thought acting clearly form the backbone of this avenger's journey, an adventure that sometimes suffers from clunky pacing and unsure character moments.

The Defending Champion.  As a movie icon, Batman was all but dead following Joel Schumacher's nipple-clad, hyper-colored "Batman & Robin."  Somehow, Christopher Nolan relaunched this franchise by tossing aside the previous films and starting from scratch.  And when we say scratch, we mean scratch -- a young, vengeful Bruce Wayne wandering the world, lost in his own misery.  There is no Batman.  Nolan's psychological action-thriller traces Wayne's journey in becoming the legendary Dark Knight, and his first attempt to defeat a overzealous terrorist mastermind who shares Batman's hate of corruption but wishes to eradicate it using genocide.  Complex and a tad heavy-handed, "Batman Begins" captivates audiences with great casting, amazing action set pieces, and a darker tone that encourages a contemplative movie-going experience.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) -vs- Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005)

The Smackdown. So fellow critic Mark Sanchez has already put Tim Burton’s 2007 adaptation of “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street” up against its theatrical predecessor, and declared Burton’s version victorious. But how does the new Burton-Depp vehicle stack up against the Burton-Depp vehicle that came before it – 2005’s “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory”? Clearly, Tim Burton and Johnny Depp make a great team; together, they create delightfully dark and twisted fare. Burton has proved himself a maestro of adaptation, taking the classics and making them slightly sinister (watch out for 2010’s “Alice in Wonderland.”) Both films were hailed by critics, and word on the street (by which I mean Ebert & Roeper) is that “Todd” might even earn Depp his third Oscar nod. Both feature gloomy London settings and Helena Bonham Carter in ragamuffin costumes, but which creepy collaboration wins out?

"I can also make a great chopped salad - without even looking!"

The Challenger. As we have come to expect from a Tim Burton film, “Sweeney Todd” is visually pleasing above all else – even from the opening credits. The day-glo red spurts of blood against the dingy gray background of Todd’s barbershop are as brilliant as the ridiculous get-up worn by Sacha Baron Cohen as Todd’s first unlucky customer. Johnny Depp reprises his “Edward Scissorhands” makeup and “Pirates of the Carribean” swagger, albeit with a darker glint in his eye this time. He eats up the role, playing moodily depressed and murderously mischievous equally well. He also sings surprisingly well – however, the same cannot be said for Bonham Carter, who cannot seem to navigate singing in a cockney accent. Nonetheless, she makes a perfectly lovely Mrs. Lovett, cheerfully making her “special” pies and pining away for a man whose only passion is revenge. The dependable Alan Rickman turns out another reliably despicable performance as the lecherous Judge Turpin, the villain upon whom Todd has set his sights. The whole affair is delightfully over the top, as any good musical (especially one helmed by Burton) should be.

Enchanted (2007) -vs- Ever After (1998)

Fractured Fairy Tales
Review by Bryce Zabel 

The Smackdown. I was sorely tempted to smackdown the fish-out-of-water in NYC "Enchanted" with the similarly set-up "Kate and Leopold." They share structure, yes, but what "Ever After" brings to this particular party is a desire by filmmakers to breathe new life into the fairy tale concept. It's a pretty commercial plan, witness the success of the "Shrek" series. "Enchanted" brings a Disney cartoon princess to the Big Apple and lets her become a bit more human while "Ever After" stays put in the time of fairy tales but manages to make its Cinderella story feel, well, a bit more human. Which one does the best job, though, of giving the audience a fairy tale experience worth the price of admission?

The Challenger. After "Enchanted" blew everybody away over Thanksgiving weekend, my wife and I thought we'd check out what made this story of a fairy tale princess in New York City so sucessful. It starts with an air-headed wanna-be princesss named Giselle who actually first appears as an old-style Disney animated cartoon character. In animation, everybody gets introduced: the vain Prince Edward; his queen-bitch mom, Queen Narissa, the fat comic relief, Nathaniel and, for good measure, a high-spirited chipmunk. Then we get introduced to the magic well and one-by-one these characters end up popping up from a manhole cover into modern New York where they become flesh-and-blood (except for the chipmunk who goes CGI). The show belongs to Amy Adams and a great loopy performance.  Less successful is her love interest, shark divorce lawyer Robert, played by Patrick Dempsey. The animation is a compressed Disney film in a few minutes, and the first appearances in New York give up a lot of fun, but the film does sputter about on the way through its story. And let's put it this way, even if you're watching with a kid, they'll know how it ends as soon as you do and maybe before. 

"I don't mean any offense, but honestly, that step-mother of yours is a real bitch. Let's get out of here."

The Defending Champion. This is the story of Cinderella told from a highly imaginative point-of-view; namely, Cinderella was a real girl. In this world, then, the fairy tale grew out of the real event, magnified through each telling, kind of like Paul Bunyan. This means, however, that if you watch expecting pumpkin-coaches that you will be sadly disappointed. Drew Barrymore plays Danielle, a young woman who's not likely to get the chance to make much out of her life through all kinds of repressions, not the least of which is a truly frightening stepmother played by Anjelica Huston. The reason she's truly scary is not that she is written in that over-the-top way that you might expect but because she is not trying to be cruel, but her actions turn out that way. You've probably had a few bosses like this insecure tormentor. There's a romance, to be sure, between Danielle and Prince Henry (Dougray Scott) who gets to play him smart and cool. What's fascinating about this version is that Danielle and her prince get to meet and talk and the tension is that they may not be able to get together when they clearly should.

The Scorecard. Many viewing experiences are relative. When my kids were younger, we saw all manner of kids films. The attraction for me was never what was on the screen but watching my children enjoy themselves. I sat through the "Power Rangers" movies, what can I say? So, had a four-year-old been seated next to me, I think I could probably have looked at "Enchanted" as a pretty fair time of it. As a movie that has to stand on its own, though, it is one rocky experience. There are portions of it that almost make you smile, but never quite get there. There are other parts that are so convenient and so predictable, the whole affair seems forced and by the numbers. I wanted more.

"Ever After," on the other hand, was a movie I knew very little about but my daughter wanted to see it. Its level of sophistication and re-invention was a wonder. Charming, thoughtful... even, yes, surprising!  It's the best Cinderella movie ever.