issue 28 // volume 42 How to killa hit >No Sony support for Ratchet & Clank movie Adam Tatelman Arts Editor A of ever-multiplying questions surrounds the shivering, microscopic nucleus that is the Ratchet & Clank movie. Can video game adaptations succeed as films? Will this one? Could it pave the way for more? Why has IP owner Sony kept mum on the whole thing? Or, most commonly, “how come I never saw any ads for this?” It’s a sad tale of squandered potential and corporate finagling, and all signs point to this movie being doomed from the start. R&C is one of the longest- running franchises in the PlayStation games library, boasting over a dozen (mostly good) entries, including the current movie tie-in. By the twin virtues of its celebrity culture satire and comically impractical space weaponry, the series has built a dedicated fan-base over the last 14 years. No production company could ask for a better setup to make a quick cash-in film franchise. For reasons unknown, Sony Pictures passed production of the film to Gramercy Studios, relinquishing any advertisement responsibility. What followed was a 730-day span of precisely jack and shit, followed by a couple YouTube trailers even less awe-inspiring than the film’s $20-million budget. After this brutal shafting by Sony in favor of the paste- swillingly uninspired Melissa McCarthy vehicle formerly known as Ghostbusters, the newly released R&C must now compete against Sony’s Angry Birds and Marvel’s highly anticipated Civil War—a horrendously ill- advised choice of release date that will likely evoke a box office slaughter rivaling Alvin and the Chipmunks’ shared opening weekend with The Force Awakens. The heartbreaking truth underlying this debacle is that Vancouver-based entertainment studio Rainmaker Entertainment’s long-awaited shot at the big time could be forever dashed if R&C flops. And it almost certainly will, forever dooming them to slave away ina swirling singularity of direct-to- DVD CGI Barbie films from which no entertainment can escape. At every turn, the film makes the best of a bad situation. An uneven script plagued with unfunny texting jokes is ironed out by brilliant delivery from the cast. The hackneyed plotting is kept afloat by a spirited pace. The gag train keeps on chugging, fueled by Seinfeldian snits and made-to-order spoofs of iconic sci-fi franchise moments, like Spock’s memorial in The Wrath of Kahn, or A New Hope’s entire plot. Although the action is lackluster, the vocal performances behind wannabe hero Ratchet (James Taylor), robot buddy Clank (David Kaye), and media hound Captain Quark (Jim Ward) a a capture everything that made these characters entertaining in the games. Despite their venerable attachment to the license, these voice actors could easily have been dumped for big-name screen talent. Their inclusion is a smile and wink from Gramercy and Rainmaker to the fans, indicating that, yes, they care about the source material. Despite everything, beloved actors like Paul Giamatti, Rosario Dawson, and John Goodman lent their voices to the film. Giamatti in particular delivers one of the silliest, most irreverent bad guy performances of his career. The cast had a blast, and it shows—their word-of-mouth promotion comprises most of the film’s ad campaign. All signs indicate that everyone involved with this project was passionate about it except the people who have the power to decide what will and will not be a hit. Here’s the bottom line. The only people who will see this movie are already fans of Ratchet & Clank. It didn’t have to be this way. If Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy is any indication, there’s still plenty of mileage to be had from the goofy Hero’s Journey space-fantasy. Even if RGC has been blasted with reviews that all but scream “we were not adequately compensated by Sony Pictures,” you can still vote with your dollar. Show your support to Rainmaker and help make R&C be the hit it wants to be. Image via www.thebitbag.com arts // no. 9 Cover art by Matt Wagner Comic Corner: A family affair > A ‘Grendel Omnibus, Vol. 1: Hunter Rose’ review Brittney MacDonald Life and Style Editor QOOOS [ee read Grendel upon recommendation from a friend, and I will admit I was skeptical. Upon first inspection, it appears to be the lovechild of Jeph Loeb a la Daredevil: Yellow, and Robert Kirkman, neither of which I have been particularly impressed by in the past. However, by the end of the volume I found my opinion had completely shifted. Grendel is surprisingly complex, rivaling Sin City in terms of its inter-connected yet cohesive narrative. Written by Matt Wagner, the story has every element that makes up a noir classic. This omnibus is actually made up of several different stories that all involve the Grendel persona. Wagner is quoted as saying that he developed the series as a “study in aggression,’ and that definitely fits with the over-all narrative and visual aesthetic of the book. The Grendel persona is generally limited to the first Grendel—an assassin/mob boss named Hunter Rose— and his descendants, or those connected to his descendants in some personal way. That is where the limitation ends. Those who take the mantle of Grendel are constructed in many ways throughout the series; good, bad, man, woman, and everything in between. This continual cycle of change keeps the narrative fresh, but does grow a little tedious at times. Where the genius of this series comes into play is that moment when you begin to recognize that all the stories are connected, not only through use of the Grendel persona, but through various narrative and thematic allusions that I'll leave you to discover on your own. Visually, Grendel jumps around a lot. Many different artists worked on this series, and normally that would bother me, but because the arcs are so segregated it actually works really well to emphasize the distinction between the various short stories. Overall, | ended up really enjoying this, and would definitely recommend it.