free counter with statistics Hellboy II The Golden Army | Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

Film_Hellboy6_Pistole.jpg

All Geek, No Love


Hellboy II: The Golden Army / Dustin Rowles

Film Reviews | July 12, 2008 | Comments (109)


Lookit: I understand the why so many people throw up their blinders when it comes to Hellboy and why so many more will do the same when watching Hellboy II. Guillermo del Toro throws a ton of eye candy at you, and it’s difficult to digest the true mediocrity of a film when the director keeps plinking you in the forehead with shiny pennies. But more than that, del Toro makes the shiniest pennies in Hollywood —golden pennies that reflect sunlight like a funhouse mirror in Alice’s Wonderland. When it comes to visual effects and fairy-land creatures, no one does it better than del Toro, and there is not a director past, present, or future who is more appropriate to helm the Hobbit movies. Hell, had he been given the LOTR trilogy, it actually would’ve deserved the scores of Oscars it won. Del Toro is not only a better special effects director than Peter Jackson, but more importantly, he’s a better story teller — he has a better sense of pace and an actual sense of humor, something that Peter Jackson seemed to have lost in the five-year interim between The Frighteners and The Fellowship of the Ring. Del Toro also has a keen sense of character, as well as an actual ability to self-edit, something Peter Jackson’s ego simply wouldn’t allow.

All of which makes you wonder why del Toro keeps wasting his time on a franchise so far beneath his talents. It’s not to say that Hellboy II: The Golden Army is a terrible movie, it’s just that it’s not worthy of del Toro. It’s a movie he could’ve given to a protégé, a second-unit director with a few films under his belt. Does del Toro elevate the quality of Hellboy II? Absolutely! But Robert Downey, Jr. undoubtedly made The Shaggy Dog a better movie, too, but it was still a fucking movie about a wooly mutt.

Likewise, Hellboy II is an empty spectacle — sound and fury and no goddamned soul. It’s like most British sketch comedy — you take away the accents, and you’re left with a bunch of guys in dresses running a joke into the ground. In other words: “Saturday Night Live.” Similarly, if you take the amazing special effects and the beautifully rendered creatures away from The Golden Army and you’re left with a dumb action comedy with a few sitcom elements, like gendered humor and a secret pregnancy. Indeed, aside from the visuals and the acting of Ron Perlman, there is nothing neither smart or creative in Hellboy II. Take, for instance, two guys getting drunk on canned beer and making fools of themselves by singing Barry Manilow, a scene that wouldn’t even make the outtakes on a Ashton Kutcher film, but for some reason, if the two guys are a demon with sideburns in a ridiculous muscle suit and Niles Crane with gills, we’re expected to laugh uproariously. P. Fucking. Shaw. It’s insulting, and we all know — after witnessing both Pan’s Labyrinth and The Devil’s Backbone — that del Toro can do better; he knows how to weave a tale with equal parts enchantment, horror, and heart. Hellboy II, on the other hand, is just horror, a Saturday morning cartoon with a $70 million budget — lame action movie one-liners, two insufferably corny romantic subplots, and lines seemingly written by 12-year-olds playing war in the backyard; it’s also another in a long line of movies that believe that the words “YouTube” and “mojo” are funny, in and of themselves.

But, goddamn: It sure is pretty. The set pieces are eye-dazzling, del Toro’s obsession with clockwork and gears is sublime and so much fun to watch, and the little monsters and trolls and fawns and nightmarish details that make up del Toro’s universe are an absolute marvel to look at. Del Toro has created an undeniably remarkable, breathtakingly majestic modern art museum. Unfortunately, it’s just not a very good movie.

For those who are jumping into the second film without seeing the original, all you need to know from Hellboy is that Red is a demon from another dimension that was secretly adopted by the U.S. government in 1944 and that his fate is to one day destroy the Earth, a destiny he and his tortured soul has to fight against. The second film’s premise is laid out in a bedtime story delivered to a young Hellboy by his adoptive father (John Hurt) and told through a visually impressive puppet show, about a war between humans and elf creatures that took place back in the day. The creatures built an indestructible Golden Army of robots, which defeated the humans with such ruthlessness that the elfin creatures, suffering from guilt, were shamed into signing a pact with humanity, agreeing to put the Golden Army in storage and allow the humans to take the Earth’s surface, while the elves lived beneath it. There was one holdout, however, Prince Nuada (Luke Goss), an exile who went into hiding until modern day, when he decided he wanted to merge the three pieces of the crown, reawaken the Golden Army, and destroy mankind.

In his way is Hellboy, a demon no longer secret to the public, and increasingly annoyed with the lack of appreciation humans show for him and his kind, “freaks” who work for the Bureau of Paranormal Research and Defense to save the planet from a more evil variety of freak. He is pitted in a war against his own kind, to defend a world that dislikes him. To boot, he’s also having relationship problems with his girlfriend, Liz (Selma Blair), problems that basically amount to a demon’s version of being incapable of lifting the toilet seat. Unbeknownst to Red, Liz is also pregnant, and she needs some space to think. Meanwhile, Red is also dealing with a new by-the-books supervisor, a plume of smoke in a “Lost in Space” outfit voiced by Seth MacFarlane. Elsewhere, Abe Sapien (Doug Jones) is smitten with Princess Nuala, the elfin twin of Nuada who holds the final piece to reawakening the Army. She, too, is torn between her brother and humanity. Yet, despite a conceit that, in the end, is similar and more predictable than the shit-balls retarded twist in Hancock, I doubt many will hold it against del Toro.

Undoubtedly, Hellboy II is superior to the original — it lacks the plodding origins story of the first one, and though the narrative is no less preposterous in The Golden Army, it is at least a little more coherent and merely dips its nose into that mawkish bag of idiotic sentimentality, rather than dive bombing into it, as the original did.

Still, I don’t care what anyone says — a movie lives or dies by its storyline, and, in Hellboy II it’s severely underwhelming. Granted, for an action movie, the characters are well developed; there’s just not anything within them we can latch onto, identify with, or relate to. The creatures, like the plot itself, are all vessels for del Toro’s brilliant artistry, and in the sequel, even Ron Perlman — who owned the screen in the original — is overshadowed by del Toro’s multi-layered, dense imaginative world. There’s no denying it; del Toro has talent to burn, and enough passion to fuel all the homes in New England through a ghastly winter. It’s just too bad he’s using it as Freon to cool down the nation’s multiplexes with a story best left to amateurs.

Dustin Rowles is the publisher of Pajiba. He lives in Portland, Maine, where even the U-Haul employees are genial. Please feel free to leave a comment or send an email.


Journey To The Center Of The Earth | Five Finger Mary



Comments

I haven't seen the second just yet, but I've been waiting all summer for this. I hope its not the cynical affair you have painted.

Posted by: Brian at July 11, 2008 1:07 PM

Snob.

Posted by: Keith at July 11, 2008 1:10 PM

I watched the first one when it came out, knowing nothing about the franchise. I was unimpressed. When I heard there was going to be a sequel, I couldn't imagine why. Perhaps this is a series best left for diehards of the Hellboy story.

You know, nerds.

Also, Seth McFarlane? Huh.

Posted by: Mella at July 11, 2008 1:10 PM

Your review betrays exactly what I expect out of it... I didn't even particularly like the 1st Hellboy when I originally saw it. Took me a couple of watches to enjoy it simply for what it is: an attractive spectacle with Ron Pearlman wit.

Even watching it last night (had to refresh my memory just in case I forgot something), it ended up leaving me ultimately unsatisfied as usual. I do like the nazi Kronen character the more and more I see it though. I'll see this one for the same reason I now enjoy the first and leave it at that.

Posted by: Colin at July 11, 2008 1:20 PM

You're disappointment saddens me Dustin.

IT'S HELLBOY! IT'S EYE CANDY! IT'S THE STUDIO EQUIVALENT OF A HOOKER!

And come five bells, I fully intend on bedding said mistress of the night and getting me a bright red case of the crotch itches!

Posted by: Skittimus Maximus at July 11, 2008 1:21 PM

I'm with Skitt...this is a marvel that everyone must partake in, like a gangbang of a all women and you, and the women are all from your Five Freebies list, and they want to make it all about you.

Damn...now I want a gangbang...

Posted by: Shadows of Dakaron at July 11, 2008 1:28 PM

I respectfully disagree and really only write to say that I am bummed David Hyde Pierce is not back as the voice of Abe Sapien because I think he classes up any joint.

Posted by: coveredinbees at July 11, 2008 1:29 PM

I was actually looking forward to this movie. While I didn't love the first one, it grew on me after a few viewings on TV.

I agree that the story is everything (the reason Wall E. is the weakest of Pixar's collection.) However, if this movie is similar to the first with a weak story and yet better visuals, I think I may enjoy it.

What the hell else am I going to see ... Dave?

Posted by: Duane at July 11, 2008 1:31 PM

I think it deserves to be mentioned among the high-quality superhero movies this summer has blessed us with. (At least until Dark Knight blows them all away.) The plot was pretty standard comic book stuff but it was pretty and it had a kickass male lead. Funny how much that sounds exactly like Iron Man.
(Also, I'd like to see Julie or Pissboy's take on the mechanics of this pregnancy.)

Posted by: Rex at July 11, 2008 1:34 PM

PORTLAND MAINE?

Posted by: Alex McQ at July 11, 2008 1:35 PM

Yep, good thing I already saw it. I was hoping it wouldn't get one of the Pajiba "here's the whole plot" writeups. But, alas.

Posted by: Jay at July 11, 2008 1:36 PM

But did you like it, Jay?

Posted by: Shadows of Dakaron at July 11, 2008 1:39 PM

I did, and I really enjoyed not really knowing where it was gonna go, or where, for instance, they were going to get John Hurt in, or how Hellboy and Liz's relationship has been going. I just knew "Faerie Invades!" and had a good time.

Posted by: Jay at July 11, 2008 1:45 PM

This is pretty much what I expected to hear about this... just enough story to give a traditional narrative structure, so the audience knows exactly what's happening and what's going to happen and can concentrate on the visual aspect.

I can't wait to see it. (Sadly I probably have to wait, as it's pseudo-husband's birthday and he probably won't want to go. Bah! Selfish.)(oh, wait, that selfishness is actually on my part, isn't it? Damn.)

Tomorrow it is then. Extra large popcorn, here I come!

Posted by: Anastasia Beaverhausen at July 11, 2008 1:55 PM

Bah bah and double bah. Yes, I'm looking forward to next Friday so much I could cry, but today I am friggin excited for Hellboy! I'm one of those Pajibans that loved the first one (rather inexplicably), and this looks to be better in every way.

Also, I got married today, and for my wedding night I'm going to eat a giant steak crusted in horseradish, drink a bottle of wine, and then go see Hellboy II. It's going to be a great night!

Posted by: Snath at July 11, 2008 1:57 PM

Happy Marriage!!

Posted by: coveredinbees at July 11, 2008 1:59 PM

Snath,

Congratulations!

After Hellboy, have so much sex. Like so much.

Posted by: David at July 11, 2008 2:05 PM

Actually, Snath,

If you get bored during Hellboy, have sex during Hellboy. And if you get bored during dinner, have sex then too.

K, good talk.

Posted by: David at July 11, 2008 2:10 PM

Shit. I love the first film even though I know it's a little hollow and clichéd as fuck but Ron Perlman rules and it's so pretty. And you've got to say it has more story than Transformers.
I hope your just being very harsh about this. And a spoiler warning would be nice.

Posted by: CarpeJugulum at July 11, 2008 2:16 PM

Wooo, happy hellboy honeymoon bliss, Snath!

I plan on seeing this, though I never saw the first Hellboy, simply because I must go to the movies at least once a week and this is by far the most appealing of today's openings. Luckily, I don't just enjoy introspective arthouse indies, I can get my movie buzz from total popcorn cheese, especially in the summer. I'm sure I'll wind up satisfied enough.

I don't really get all the LotR hate here. Am I the only one? It's like the Crash of sci-fi/fantasy films or something, the way you people go on.

Posted by: Roads at July 11, 2008 2:16 PM

Damn, Snath, congratulations!!! And going to watch Hellboy on your wedding night? Hell Yeah!

Jay...I'm glad you thought it was still good. That's all I was hoping for...pretty and actiony

Posted by: Shadows of Dakaron at July 11, 2008 2:16 PM

Congrats, Snath! enjoy and enjoy, and happy ever after.

I will definitely see this, don't care if it disappointed our fearless reviewer, I'm in it for the eye candy. And sometimes, that's just enough to enjoy a flick.

Posted by: nancy at July 11, 2008 2:17 PM

Wait. You mean the guy who actually wrote a reviewing calling the original Hellboy an "Overappreciated Gem" (which still baffles me. I mean, really? Really? You consider Hellboy, of all movies, to be overappreciated? Really?), didn't like the sequel?

I'm stunned. Stunned, I say.

Least. Surprising. Review. Ever.

Posted by: ajax19 at July 11, 2008 2:19 PM

Not much surprised by your take on it, "OH Lord of the Fiefdom".

I haven't seen it yet, but I have no doubt that I will adore it as musc as I did the fist entry.

I think there is one important thing that people who dislike the film are missing: this is a fucking Comic Book Movie, not Citizen Kane, nor should it be - would it really have been better with deeper psychological underpinnings? Dude, it stars a cigar smoking demon. Could this character ever be as relatable as Tony Stark or Bruce Wayne? Fuckin obviously no. I agree with Ebert in his review of the last "Lord of the Rings" movie when he makes the argument that a story involving so many fantastical elements will keep you from having a significant emotional connection to the material. Its nearly unavoidable.

That being said, the first Hellboy was exactly what it should have been - a lighthearted, funny, entertaining comic book projected to the screen; the sequel should be no different. I appreciate the approach Del Toro takes, one that makes him special: the movie just FEELS like a comic book, almost as if the material spilled directly from the pages of Mike Mignola's graphic novels, which is a refreshing approach in a summer full of Reality/Comic hybrids (even though I love those, too). The trend seems to be toward adapting a comic book to a real world setting, whereas Del Toro has enough vision and balls to make a pure fantasy, a la Sin City.

Which brings me to another issue I have a problem with. Most critics whom dislike the film (as you have, your lordship) consistently mention the dichotomy of its director, and how they wish he had stuck to his art house side. Look, "Pan's Labyrinth" is one of my all time favorite films - a movie with great emotional power despite its fantastical elements - but does it really make sense to think of this movie in terms of a masterpiece like Pan. Surely not. In fact, I would go as far as saying that Del Toro is one of the few living directors in league with greats such as Spielberg; both Directors can create masterpieces of emotional power as well as the unabashed action-adventure popcorn flick. Shouldn't this be lauded instead of lamented?

Anyway, I rarely comment, but Pajiba has been my favorite website for years (have any of you visited the archived version of the site - man its come far) and I just want to say I love all you pompous bastards.

Viva Pajiba!

Posted by: JAk at July 11, 2008 2:28 PM

Snath: that's awesome, and congratulations. Going to see Hellboy on your wedding night is cooler than my best friend, who watched the Corpse Bride with her fiance on the morning of her wedding.

I haven't seen the first Hellboy, but I'm probably going to hit the theaters this weekend. It has all the signs of something I'll enjoy, so long as I don't stop during the movie to ask questions (like Wanted or, if anyone's seen it, Allegra: An Enchanting Fable. Stop to wonder who in their right mind thinks bullets work that way, or why little slave children are able to grow individual blossoming roses in hanging test tubes in a dark warehouse, and the whole damned thing falls apart).

That doesn't always work, though...even though it had all the marks of a movie I should at least enjoy, 300 just left me foaming at the mouth and screaming bits of history and legend, much to the annoyance of the friend who rented it just because she thought I'd like it. But Hellboy doesn't look like it's going to punch those buttons, so I should be able to go to a theater and behaved like a civilized human being while watching it.

Posted by: Tyburn Blossom at July 11, 2008 2:39 PM

BRPD is always going to be better than the movies, I think. Which is fine. I can still watch it for the Del Toro pretty.

I don't really get all the LotR hate here. Am I the only one? It's like the Crash of sci-fi/fantasy films or something, the way you people go on.

I liked it just fine. I'm not a total fanboy for it, but I liked it, and I sure as hell liked it because the odds of getting another one like it in the next decade are significantly close to zero.

Yeah, Jackson has this wierd obsession with close-ups that I hope doesn't follow him into His Majesty's Dragon but anyone who's going to give me an hour-long siege scene, I'm not going to nitpick.

... and no, I'm probably not the Pajibaratti but I cling like a fierce barnacle to the MurderBoat regardless.

Posted by: twig at July 11, 2008 2:41 PM

Oh, and congrats Snath!

Posted by: twig at July 11, 2008 2:43 PM

Re: the lotr trilogy

i've only ever seen the lotr trilogy and the frighteners by jackson (none of his other movies), and i loved all 4...

the extended scene in return of the king with Bruce Spence's character was completely bad-ass.

that it mind, i also love most of what del toro has done, but would i rather of seen the lotr trilogy done by him? no. it would be sweet to see it now in contrast to jackson's, but i feel jackson's style fit the trilogy better (and i thought the CGI was pretty phenomenal myself).

Posted by: Colin at July 11, 2008 2:49 PM

"...I have no doubt I will adore it as musc as I did the fist entry."

Eeeyyoowww, sounds like you had a great time with that "fist entry" there, JAk!

My weekend doesn't look nearly as exciting.

Posted by: TMax at July 11, 2008 2:55 PM

Shit. I didnt spell check that fist fucking sentence. For the record, I do not like to be fisted; its not up my alley.

Posted by: JAK at July 11, 2008 3:01 PM

Sorry, JAk, just being a pompous bastard on a Friday afternoon.

Posted by: TMax at July 11, 2008 3:03 PM

Oh and now you're punning.

Incorrigible!

Posted by: Jay at July 11, 2008 3:04 PM

Jay,

You know, punning is the essence of wit. Just ask Dustin.

Posted by: JAK at July 11, 2008 3:12 PM

This and batman are the last two movies I am anticipating this summer. I am definately going to see this.

Posted by: EricD at July 11, 2008 3:13 PM

Who cares, it is 100 degrees outside! I sit in the a/c and watch a freakin' Julia Roberts movie just to get out of the heat!

Posted by: MRod at July 11, 2008 3:24 PM

Anastasia Beaverhausen

Posted by: EricD at July 11, 2008 3:35 PM

oops. that was supposed to say:
Anastasia Beaverhausen is that is a great name.

Posted by: EricD at July 11, 2008 3:36 PM

/facepalm. gahh. I give up. can't type or edit today.

Posted by: EricD at July 11, 2008 3:37 PM

Snath that's fantastic! Many heartfelt congratulations!

Roads, you're not alone. Frankly I love, LoTR, and have just made a habit of skimming past the hate while I'm here.

Mr. Rowles, you are my favorite writer on Pajiba. But coming from you (a well-known hater of Hellboy, those who like it, and all things geekish in general), I take your lukewarm words as a high compliment to the film :)

Saw it for work, and for whatever its worth, I really enjoyed it. It struck me as Pan's Labyrinth+ a healthy dose of Brian Froud+goth/punk comic heroes+tongue-in-cheek attitude and humor. I didn't fall all over myself with adoration, but I certainly had a good time!

With love,
ShinyKate
(aka socially functional, sexually active, self-sufficient lady who just happens to have geekish tastes, thank you)

Posted by: ShinyKate at July 11, 2008 3:56 PM

OMG guys the comic book movie isn't Shakespeare how awful!

Posted by: Andrew831 at July 11, 2008 4:07 PM

But most especially for leaving out the battle for the Shire which was the point of the whole god damn fucking thing in the first place.

Challenge Problem: Shove the Scouring into a movie that is already three hours long without killing half the audience.

Note: You are not allowed to touch one fucking minute of the Minas Tirith siege sequence.

Posted by: twig at July 11, 2008 4:26 PM

You know, EricD, I read your first post quickly and said to myself, "Did I even say anything about LoTR?" I really had to think about that for a minute... That's what Fridays do to you, my friend.

P.S. I can't claim any kind of credit for the name. I stole it from Will & Grace. I'm terrible at making up good names. It's why I was banned from D&D... took me days to come up with anything, and then (I'm sure) it was terrible.

Well, goodbye work! Off to have a stiff drink @ Happy Hour. Greatest invention ever, that is.

Posted by: Anastasia Beaverhausen at July 11, 2008 4:43 PM

Wish someone (anyone) else could have reviewed this?

I do.

Also, congrats, Snath!

Posted by: Anne (in Reno) at July 11, 2008 4:43 PM

I didn't dislike Hellboy II, but everything about it that wasn't a del Toro monster, critter or machine was blah. I liked the Prince Nuala character quite a bit.

The plot just suffers from plot deficit disorder. I'd ten times trade the backstory of the first Hellboy for the wanderings of Hellboy II's plot.

I'll put it this way: I went to see the original twice in the theater. I'll wait for a second viewing of this one until it hits HBO...but I don't regret the price of admission.

Posted by: patrick at July 11, 2008 4:54 PM

Snath, Mazel tov! Long life and a happy one!

I saw the original Hellboy and it wasn't that bad in terms of the story or the SFX (never having read the comic book, I had no preconceptions). The Cthulhu-like monsters from Outside were cool, in my opinion. Tentacle hentai all around!

I digress.

The ads for the second movie are quite stunning, and I may be persuaded to see it based solely on Dustin's review. But not at full price.

The mechanics of Liz's pregnancy? My friends, when you're dealing with the Elder Ones and various eldritch specialties, there's very little that isn't possible.

And the only two flaws I could see in the Lord of the Rings was it wasn't long enough. There was no sign of Tom Bombadil, and leaving out the Scouring of the Shire should have earned Jackson a red-hot poker in a tender spot.

Posted by: The Wanderer at July 11, 2008 4:58 PM

But most especially for leaving out the battle for the Shire which was the point of the whole god damn fucking thing in the first place.

Ahhh, no. The Scouring of the Shire was boring and lame. The point was about destroying the Ring.

Cutting out Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire are the two primary reasons why the movies are better than the books. There are many others, but there's no need to go into them.

Yeah, the ending of Return of the King was a bit much. I could have done without the sun-dappled hobbits jumping around in the bed, but other than that, I think the other scenes worked:

-The coronation of Aragorn and the whole "you bow to no one" was great.

-The scene back in the "Green Dragon" when they're all sitting around the able together was fantastic.

-You have the scene where Frodo finished his book and shows that he still hasn't recovered.

-And then they sail off in the ships.

A bit drawn out, yeah, but the man made three massive movies. If he wants an extra ending or two, have at it. He earned it.

As for the common "Clerks II" complaint (I think that's where it's from) about the films just being about "walking, walking, walking, fight, walking, walking" or whatever, hey, that's the story, fellas. That's how the books were written.

Posted by: ajax19 at July 11, 2008 5:13 PM

And the only two flaws I could see in the Lord of the Rings was it wasn't long enough. There was no sign of Tom Bombadil, and leaving out the Scouring of the Shire should have earned Jackson a red-hot poker in a tender spot.

Flaws? Nay, Pippin. Those are two of the best things about those movies. Tom Bombadil is LAME. He and Goldberry, both. Super lame. The Scouring of the Shire? Pointless and lame.

You have this entire, long series all about the One Ring and this great threat to the entire world, you destroy the Ring, the world is saved, and then you have another 100+ pages about the freakin' Shire? In fact, I don't think I ever finished that part of the book. I couldn't fathom why it existed in the first place.

Posted by: ajax19 at July 11, 2008 5:16 PM

I'm glad there are so many die-hard fans of the LOTR trilogy- I personally haven't seen any of them, mainly because I'm more of a horror movie/superhero/documentary fan than a sci-fi/fantasy fan(although many do appeal to me, & there are many in the genre that I love).

But if I'm not mistaken, I believe we were supposed to be commenting about HellBoy, NOT LOTR. We're going off-subject here.

So, to do the same: I didn't know Peter Jackson directed The Frighteners (must not have been paying attention to the opening credits the SIX times I watched it), and I think that's really cool. I think that one should be considered for an underappreciated gem.

But no one takes my advice anyway, so fuck you, I'm going back to my News Radio 3rd season DVDs and my fourth glass of cheap white zindanfel.

Posted by: TMax at July 11, 2008 5:36 PM

Uuhh, Zinfandel dammit.

Sorry, too busy laughing at my own ignorance to continue

Posted by: TMax at July 11, 2008 5:39 PM

LotR was a good series, I guess. I mean it's no In the Name of the King: a Dungeon Siege Tale, but it's alright.

Posted by: Mella at July 11, 2008 6:22 PM

To state that the work of Mike Mignola, one of the most accomplished and acclaimed artists in graphic storytelling today, is "beneath the talent" of an equally gifted artist such as Guillermo del Toro is beyond snobbish. It's willfully ignorant and foolish. This was not a committee-written, studio-mandated screenplay handed to a hack who would follow every instruction that came down from the corporate offices. This was a work in which two artists collaborated to produce a unique take on much-loved material. Mignola has said that these movies represent del Toro as much as they do himself. How can a work that del Toro directly and actively participated in co-creating be beneath his talent? That's a ridiculous argument.

The first Hellboy movie was not without flaws, and del Toro himself has admitted this on many occasions. Some of the most admired classics of cinema have flaws and plot holes; nevertheless, they strike a chord. Hellboy is not a collection of soulless special effects and empty spectacle. Quite the contrary: Hellboy is one of the great souls in fiction. (The same can be said for Abe and Liz.) And that is why some of us love the character and appreciate these films.

I had fun seeing the first Hellboy movie. I had even more fun seeing the second -- not because I am blind, as implied in the first sentence of this review*, but because those of us who have been immersed in the world of Hellboy for over a decade can see what the reviewer cannot: Mignola and the artists he has chosen to collaborate with are building a grand modern myth for us to explore and study and enjoy. That is a worthy effort -- worthy of my attention and worthy of what I paid for the tickets.

*Thanks, by the way, for doing readers the service of making it clear that the review was written as if from the point of view of an arrogant arsehead. It made the task of interpretation much simpler.

Posted by: magsman at July 11, 2008 6:51 PM

Damn, I keep trying to convince myself that Pajiba hasn't jumped the shark, but boy has it. The reviews have not only ceased to be useful, but the writing quality is spiraling the drain as well.

Posted by: Squarah at July 11, 2008 6:57 PM


ugh...let me get my dead horse beating shoes on! Another biased and obtuse review from Rowles. Glad to see you moved to southern Canada, hater.

Posted by: karmanaut at July 11, 2008 7:27 PM

magsman,

Your points are well-constructed and indeed need to be added to this comment thread. Your love for del Torro and Mignola is obvious, and you defend their work in a way the artists themselves would truly be proud of.

In that spirit, I ask you to re-read your first post, and maybe concede that some of the points you mentioned were accompanied by some enmity and over-zealous passion to, for lack of a better phrase, "shoot the messenger."

I doubt that you could count on one hand the number of Pajiba readers who actually base their entire decision on whether or not to see a particular movie solely based on one reviewer's words alone. For (a sad) example: I absolutely hate the Kenny Rogers vehicle 'Six Pack', yet I absolutely HAD to see it for the sole reason that Diane Lane was in it. NO review would keep me away from seeing a film I've been determined to see, including, and regardless of,the first time I saw it advertised or written about.

When you read regularly, you get a sense of each reviewer's preferences, and consequently, you tend to mainly dispose of the negative reviews by the particular reviewers you don't agree with as much, and vice versa.

This forum is the only one I'm comfortable with airing my views about the topics, without fear of (unmanageable) reprisal, and I for one really want to read what these reviewers write, so what other reason is there to keep coming back if you just want to trash them? (which is, of course, your own right).

I think honest, passionate discussion over a film's merits, or lack thereof, is the only reasonable explanation as to why there is a comments section here in the first place.

So I gotta go now.

Well, I certainly dragged this shit out, didn't I? (In between all my social engagements for tonight)

Just wanted to write- everyone have a good weekend

Posted by: TMax at July 11, 2008 7:29 PM

ajex19 said: You have this entire, long series all about the One Ring and this great threat to the entire world, you destroy the Ring, the world is saved, and then you have another 100+ pages about the freakin' Shire? But that's where you are absolutely wrong. LotR isn't about destroying the ring and saving the world. It's about the hobbits and their journey/quest. And the battle for the Shire is the ending to that story.

Posted by: EricD at July 11, 2008 8:21 PM

magsman said: How can a work that del Toro directly and actively participated in co-creating be beneath his talent? That's a ridiculous argument

I don't see how a guy participating in the creation of something automatically means it's not beneath his talent. Picture Shakespeare writing a book of lymrics.

Posted by: EricD at July 11, 2008 8:46 PM

TMax: My "first post"? Until now, I'd only made one post in this thread. In any case, I didn't come here to trash the reviews. I often agree with the reviews here.

People who have followed Mignola's work on Hellboy over the past dozen years or so, and have developed a deep appreciation for it, have a different perspective on this material. I see the movies as part of a larger picture, a mythical world that, through the efforts of some very talented artists, is evolving and changing, branching out into new permutations. For the reviewer to state that this represents blindness is just plain stinkpiss arrogance.

So I'm happy to shoot the messenger -- when the messenger is being a bonehead.

Posted by: magsman at July 11, 2008 8:53 PM

Poor Dustin......the backlasher becomes the backlashee.

Shit you guys, take it easy. So someone doesn't share the same opinion as you - HOW FUCKING SMUG!

Please.

Its not like he bashed Del Toro, either. It seems he just wished he could have made a film in the vein of some of his more serious films.

Posted by: JAK at July 11, 2008 9:13 PM

Del Toro has said that he dreamed for years of being able to make a Hellboy movie starring Ron Perlman and finally got to the point where he could... I love Chronos, The Devil's Backbone, Pan's Labyrinth, even Mimic and Blade 2, but I adore Hellboy because the director's affection for the character shines from the screen. Del Toro is one of the greatest directors alive, he has an outstanding world (created by Mignola) to play in, and one of the all time great casts, especially now that Doug Jones is voicing Abe as well as portraying (I never really felt that Hyde-Pierce's voice was right).

I have learned that 90% of the time, that a movie Dustin likes, I'll hate and vice versa. After seeing Golden Army, that seems to be still holding true. I thought it was great, and will be seeing at least once more this weekend.

Posted by: Adam C at July 11, 2008 10:11 PM

Just got back from, interestingly enough, a Hellboy II/Hancock double header with the niece and nephews.

Listen, I know Dustin has this creeping self-hatred of his geek side, that manifests as this irrational need to envy and attack those who live the lifestyle he cannot. You know, like a nerd-based Ted Haggard.

That said, the film was pretty good. I agree that when del Toro whips out the fantasy, nobody does it better. The Troll Market(?) was fantastic, and I want my own personal Golden Army, just to look at. Okay, and maybe take over the world.

And Prince Nuada was 10 levels of bad ass. Just saying.

But one of the other commenters mentioned my issue with the film: too much plot. You had

1) Hellboy dealing with the public rejecting him, while being tempted to join those who were more like him, even though they wanted to destroy the world he swore to protect;

2) Liz and Hellboy's relationship troubles, based mostly in her pregnancy and his reluctance to grow up;

3) The regulation hinting at Hellboy's destiny to destroy the world (I loved the gag with the glasses that showed his true form)

4) Abe falling in love with Nuala;

5) The whole "elves and monsters war against humans" deal;

6) Johann Krauss (why such a neat character in the comics had to be voiced by Macfarlane...);

7) And I am sure I missed more.

I think the problem was that del Toro had TOO much story, the opposite of Dustin's claims of shallowness of the material. There was so much to be done, the guy couldn't bring himself to limit it with a smaller, tighter focus. Unlike Pan's Labyrinth (which was created lock, stock, and barrel by del Toro), Hellboy has piles upon piles of juicy background material, and del Toro got a bit carried away. And as many a director finds out, sometimes caring too much about the material can hurt more than help.

I admire what it took to even put together this much, and I did enjoy the result. Great movie? Not really. Best he has ever done? Nope. But it was clear that his heart was truly into the project, and maybe, given another sequel, he can bring himself to calm down a bit and not overstuff the movie.

Besides, I always thought Hellboy was better suited for a TV series anyway.

Posted by: Vermillion at July 11, 2008 10:36 PM

Del Toro is not actually attached to the Hobit project, I know its a side note but that's just a rumour.

Posted by: Endless Dave at July 11, 2008 11:13 PM

Dustin (the Ryan Reynolds fanboy) has always had a certain snobbish delusion of grandeur.

My recommendation would be for him to jam his outstreched pinky up his pebble-pooper ass and then jam it in both eyes for good measure.

I'm sure a doctor will say the same.

Posted by: MadMonk at July 11, 2008 11:16 PM

And once again, Dustin inadvertently sparks yet another LOTR shitfest in the message board, distracting us from the movie at hand. I have a suggestion for you Dustin; instead of prolonging the Basher vs. Fanboy vendetta, write another "Pajiba's Overappreciated Gems" article about LOTR as a whole. Make your points about how why you thought it sucked in full Rowlesian detail, and then let the whole goddamn debate settle in the comments section. Think of it as a massive single conflict instead of a protracted military campaign.

It won't be pretty, but this LOTR is growing like a pus-filled bubble on this site. Lance the motherfucker.

Posted by: SJ at July 11, 2008 11:32 PM

JAK-- as a fellow non-commenter, I agree and agree and agree. I mean, if your don't like "el formo comico", which seems to be what the real issue is, then I feel you won't be able to review the film based on, you know, does it do what it aimed to do? I loved the first movie. It was FUN. That is a word that would do much GOOD here.

Posted by: Pheagan at July 12, 2008 1:40 AM

EricD: If Shakespeare had devoted several years of his life to writing limericks -- as the artists involved in this movie devoted years of their lives to expanding the world of Hellboy -- the results might have been appealing to some people and unappealing to others, but they wouldn't have been beneath his talent.

Only an idiot or a fool puts years of effort and energy into something that is beneath his talent. And Guillermo del Toro has proven that he is neither of those.

Posted by: magsman at July 12, 2008 5:29 AM

I really don't understand why the Hellboy nerds are so unwilling to admit that the storylines of their favorite cheap pornos are genuinely stupid and mediocre, and that this is a legitimate criticism. Dustin gives del Toro and Perlman props -- what more do you want? If this site gave other films the pass Hellboy fanboys give to their fetish it would be a terrible website.

Posted by: Brian at July 12, 2008 6:04 AM

I really don't understand why the Hellboy nerds are so unwilling to admit that the storylines of their favorite cheap pornos are genuinely stupid and mediocre, and that this is a legitimate criticism.

Maybe because most of the folks that don't like it can't seem to say so without such hyperbole as calling it "cheap pornos"? Maybe because we thought that was the point of commenting: to express our feelings, positive or negative, about the film or the review? Or maybe it is because we actually don't think the storylines are that bad?

And once again, before folks get all comic book bashing again, might I remind you what movies were the in the top grossers this year? And what movie is coming out next week?

I was more than willing to acknowledge the film wasn't particularly good. I just didn't agree with the reason why. And like others have said, it is hard to see the point of view of a guy who actively hates the previous entry, so much so that he is the only person who thought "It was pretty good to me" is the same as overrated.

Geez, nobody is saying you got to like it. We are just saying that the material is a lot better than some consider it. And that everything that folks seem to hate about it, we actually love. Why is that so hard to understand?

Hell, even del Toro is a big fan! That has to count for something, right?

Posted by: Vermillion at July 12, 2008 8:31 AM

Well, yeah, I was gonna say I'm not giving these movies a pass nor do I think Guillermo Del Toro is slumming. I just like them.

Plus, will you all watch that unaired Justice League TV movie already? Get some perspective on a what a real laughable abomination is (David Ogden Stiers is J'onn J'onzz. I recommend pre-intoxication).

Posted by: Jay at July 12, 2008 9:18 AM

Honestly magsman, at this point you have pretty much disqualified yourself from being able to make a fair judgment of this film. You simply can't expect an acolyte to give an impartial opinion of their religion. Which is fine, you don't have to. But you have to be self aware enough to know that those not steeped in the knowledge are going to have a different take. So did Dustin get overly snarky when reviewing the movie? Of course he did. That's what this site is about. Just this time he trod on your personal toes and you got bent about it.

The first movie was a total cheese fest that made almost no fucking sense. But it was a really fun, pretty and energetic movie. It sounds like that's exactly what this movie is too. Which is all I was expecting anyway and doesn't in the least diminish my desire to go see it?

Posted by: EricD at July 12, 2008 9:26 AM

god damn mother puss bucket.
please ignore the question mark at the end of that.

Posted by: EricD at July 12, 2008 9:29 AM

You know, it hardly seems fair to base a rather negative review of one film on its thin and possibly ridiculous plot and then essentially have a literary orgasm over another film that suffers from the same problem (SEE: WANTED).

I'm just sayin'...

Posted by: ArrMatey at July 12, 2008 11:51 AM

Actually, I have to agree with Dustin on this one. HB2 was all sparkle and no plot. The scenery and many of the characters were staggeringly beautiful, but quite frankly the storyline wasn't up to snuff. There were countless threads of plot followed loosely here and there, but they were never woven together in anything that could be called complete. The director simply jumped from one to the next as his fancy took him. The visuals were gorgeous, but visuals do not make up for plot, and oftentimes I felt like I was trapped in a Jim Henson wet dream.

Now, that being said, I would like it if Elf Prince Nuada would report at once to my bedroom. That is all.

Posted by: Lammergeier13 at July 12, 2008 12:48 PM

Challenge Problem: Shove the Scouring into a movie that is already three hours long without killing half the audience.

Note: You are not allowed to touch one fucking minute of the Minas Tirith siege sequence.

Posted by: twig

I took me a looooong time to accept that most audiences would NOT GET that the Scouring was the whole point of LoTR. I mean -- Hobbit War! C'mon. But leaving out Tom Bombadil was necessary and right. I doubt that Tolkien knew what the hell he was doing there.

Posted by: Meander at July 12, 2008 1:36 PM

The talented fantasy filmmaker and heir to the Lord of the Rings throne gets the tone right throughout Hellboy 2, and the hip retro charm alone is enough to merit recommendation.
I m watching Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) Movies Here
http://www.80millionmoviesfree.com still i am Using Download Movies

Posted by: cyber at July 12, 2008 4:25 PM

Possible spoilers

Oh Vermillion, really? I'm sad.

Let me preface- I'm a big old Hellboy movie geek (I can give or take the comics). I loves me some Hellboy, and if they ever make a baby Hellboy doll I want one because- so fricking cute. I thought the first story was all kinds of fun, comic book-y goodness and worship at the Sci Fi altar of Ron Pearlman.

Hellboy 2 was the biggest ball of suck I have seen in a loooong time. I can't even jump on the "wow it was beautiful" bandwagon. How many "OMG He has eyes NOT ON HIS FACE" monsters do we have to suffer through? Why did that weak ass princess not just stab herself in the hand or some shit? Why did she let them all fight and THEN decide "gee, this knife in the chest would end all this drama?!?! And gimme a break if you wanna call it a spoiler- it was so fricking obvious she was gonna go all stabby on herself from, oh, the third minute you saw her.

I don't wanna get into the demon / hot fire chick mechanics of the pregnancy, but how about the WTF of the relationship? Really, you're fighting over a toothbrush after you did the whole "hell and back" for each other? Is it a Hellboy thing that your IQ and maturity level goes DOWN with each passing year? Who was this movie made for??? 9 year olds? If so, I'll calm down a bit, but seriously, watching Papa Bluth go all "he doesn't liiiiike meeeee" whiny was painful as hell.

So pop question: You're a mystical creature made up of mist. You can pretty well take over whatever you want to and make it all cool and shiny and move and shit. So as a "home" for your misty goodness do you REALLY choose the most god awful suit made from left over scuba diving uniforms circa 1947? I mean, really? Not one upgrade? Records to 8-tracks to tapes to cds... and you stick it out in the suit. riiiiiiight. Ok.

It is so, so, so many shades of bad. I think Dustin gave the kindest review possible. I found the pain to be even more acute with my love for the first Hellboy.

Oh, and lannergeler, you are so, so right about the Jim Henson wet dream. I couldn't decide whether we were supposed to be awed by the trolls or wait for them to break out into song. "Down at Fraggle Rock cha-cha."

Redeeming point: tooth fairies. They were pretty awesome.

Posted by: lilianna28 at July 12, 2008 4:36 PM

lilianna you are a sucking asshole. not only drop a spoiler in the middle of that but do it knowingly.

Posted by: EricD at July 12, 2008 5:52 PM

It is fine, lilianna28. And I agree with many of your issues, especially the ridiculous pansy-fication of Manning. This guy was about ready to pop a cap in the back of Hellboy's skull in the first one, now he wants his approval like a lovesick teenager? When did that happen?

But I suppose I could see the intent instead of the execution. There were some great ideas on screen, but it was just too much. If del Toro could have held back a bit, and focused on only one or two plot lines, it would have been much better.

As far as Johann's suit, it was another holdover from the comic. And he wasn't a mystical creature, per se. He was a ghost trapped in ectoplasm and stuck on the earthly plane. And I will admit, I personally like the steampunk elements like that.

Posted by: Vermillion at July 12, 2008 6:06 PM

Aw, I thought Hellboy 2 was really fun. Yes, it's a pretty standard fantasy-logic-ridden action story -- but imagination, visuals, and some really good action go a loooong way with me, and this movie delivered those in spades.

The first one was only okay, mostly because of a disappointing (lack of a) climax, but I really enjoyed this one.

Posted by: Gordon at July 12, 2008 7:30 PM

stupendous review

Posted by: dandy at July 12, 2008 7:33 PM

Saw it last night and man, it is fucking beautiful, but not much else. I mean besides Ron Perlman being great as Hellboy.

Note for Dustin: Don't let these assholes let you down. I may not always agree with your opinions but your reviews are always great.

Posted by: the_wakeful at July 12, 2008 7:43 PM

I completely agree with this review. I simply didn't give a shit about anything on screen, no matter how shiny...except Johan Krauss. He steals every scene.

Otherwise, has no one mentioned how absolutely wretched an actress Selma Blair is in both films? Even worse in the sequel.

Ugh. I gave Del Toro 12 bucks because he was a nice guy. Even with lowered expectations, I didn't get anything out of Hellboy II.

Posted by: Drew at July 12, 2008 8:10 PM

Why go to a crowded theater at night anyway?

Posted by: Jay at July 12, 2008 8:19 PM

V- I'm not sure I'm charitable enough to see the intent. The story development was sad. They couldn't think of a believable way to make Liz and Red fight. They couldn't think of a less beat-you-over-the-head way to show his "readiness" to be a dad than have a mom walk away from a car with her kid in it (moms will back me up here- I'd be cold and dead before I'd leave my kid in the car and then just kind of wander off with a "there there") and then have Red proceed to toss said baby all over creation during a battle. They established waaaaay too early that the brother and sister were tied together with their pain, and then to make the sister so insipid and tragically late to the party... it's just bullshit. I have not seen more "stand around before you do the obvious". Hmmm... lots of flying things, should Liz burn them??? Let's let lots of people get eaten first. Let's leave the library without the thing I desperately need in order to let the group join me for the painful plot finale. I mean, can't hurt me without hurting my sister, I can pretty much go where I please. Oh, except it doesn't hurt my sister when you beat the shit out of me- stuff that makes me fall in agony doesn't even make my sister flinch!

I will give you the comic book suit thing. I'll let that go. serenity.

EricD, darling, fuck off. It isn't a spoiler when it's PAINFULLY FRICKING OBVIOUS in every single moment. Grow up.

Posted by: lilianna28 at July 12, 2008 8:23 PM

Saw this today and it was excellent.

Posted by: fairmaiden327 at July 12, 2008 9:06 PM

Endless Dave: It was a rumor for a couple of months, but it was made official back in APRIL. You're a bit behind.

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2008/04/24/28739-its-official-del-toro-to-direct-hobbit-films/

Posted by: Gordon at July 12, 2008 9:08 PM

the_wakeful delivered the best comment of the day, of which I wholeheartedly agree, & wish I'd written myself.

Since I have no snappy comebacks of my own, I'll gladly ride wakeful's wave if, for nothing else, just to see an incredible review forthcoming from Dustin in the near future; he ain't always on his game, folks, but when he gets inspired his reviews are downright awesome- I know this because I've saved many of them, and they haven't 'aged' with time. They're priceless.

If Dustin were to somehow tragically die at his new home in Maine, in a horrible death that only someone with a very sick mind could conceive or anyone could explain, it would not discount the fact that he has already made an indelible mark on the entire 'jiba attitude...

And when our lust for quality literature starts expiring in this dead heat of summer, Dustin will indeed rise to the occasion, when such occasion demands it, in his own sweet time, and blow us all away, and cool our souls, mark my words.

Pajiba only lies sleeping until the mighty rage of Rowles, Richildis,Carlson, Phillips, AB, Beckylooo, TK and the rest are let loose upon an already hardened audience, only to be overwhelmed when bathed in lucious and satisfying reviews, of which I live for, pardon my blandness.

You all have seperate dishes to savor, some more than others at times, and anyone who checks in regularly is guaranteed to get a new perspective, or at least a good hard laugh, from a review here than they would anywhere else (far as I can tell), and it seems to be working for these guys.

So that's all I wanted to say tonight, after an unusual Sat overtime thing that left me checking in here late.

Be well everyone

Posted by: TMax at July 12, 2008 9:45 PM

I always love it when people get sweet as pie right before they tell you to fuck off. A true sign of maturity.

The movie exec that decided this should come out a week before The Dark Knight should be fired hands down.

Posted by: Hmm. at July 12, 2008 10:04 PM

Hey,

Thanks for giving away the entire plot you shithead. The first rule of giving reviews, as a pompous gasbag like yourself would surely have learned by now- you know, working on a publication that majors in witty and intelligent reviews of films, IS THAT YOU ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO SPOIL ALL THE MAJOR PLOT POINTS FOR THE READER REGARDLESS WHETHER YOU ENJOYED THE FILM OR NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: disgruntled bob at July 13, 2008 1:31 AM

Well, if one thinks a plot is telegraphed, it's still a bit crass to spell it all out as an argument against the scripting. One could just say "the climax of this movie was completely telegraphed". Others could later see if they agreed with this view or not.

Beyond that there's just very widely spaced differences in taste going on, and apparently anyone who enjoys the movie is some kind of apologist or an idiot. So...another one of those. Ho hum.

Posted by: Jay at July 13, 2008 1:52 AM

bob, darling, there ain't shit in this review that doesn't happen in the first 10 minutes so chill the hell out.

Posted by: lilianna28 at July 13, 2008 1:54 AM

Gripe all you want, but it's true. It was a flat, uninspired story line with lame sitcom-grade subplots, and a host of pretty interesting characters being wasted, shifting around like checker pieces on a bedazzling board.

The plot is too convoluted to be the kind that you can sit back and don't have to think about, but lacks any creativity or nuance, and isn't worth bothering following. The CG is breathtaking, but let's be honest, there's really nothing left visually that can't be done in modern movies anymore. All that's left is story.

Sure, it's fine to enjoy an action flick that's all eye candy and no depth. That's pretty much what Wanted was, and it's instinctually gratifying enough to ignore the ridiculousness of the plot. Those movies are like empty calories, though. Eventually, you get sick of eating Cocoa Puffs week after week.

The one thing I have to disagree with about the review is that Del Toro is no storyteller. He's clearly not a hack and can craft parts of his films very well, but I've yet to see a complete movie of his that didn't crash and burn on its narrative at one point (and don't say Pan's Labyrinth - that was a very good story with an awful ending).

It's pretty clear they intend to do a third one. I'm hoping they can get their act together before starting it, but I'm skeptical.

Posted by: Craig at July 13, 2008 2:51 AM

lilianna28 darling, go slip your ass back on the doorknob. It's a fucking spoiler when I now know the moving ending without seeing the fucking movie.

Posted by: EricD at July 13, 2008 6:30 AM

Having not seen the fucking movie, and completely unable to determine the 'spoilerness" of the most obvious point of the movie, you're obviously just bitching to bitch EricDarling. And wow, you are really really into violence through anal sex. Methinks this is a window into your personal life. Hey, to each his own, but damn.

Posted by: lilianna28 at July 13, 2008 12:21 PM

No, I'm not advocating strange uses of orifices and doorknobs on anyone, that's a bit harsh, but, having seen the movie, yes, you've written down several significant details of the plot (as did the review itself). Again, I'd think it's up to the individual viewer to decide whether there were obvious setups or not (though one could say "I REALLY don't recommend this movie, the plot was very sloppily written" or whatever), and one can't simply decide that discretion is moot because one thinks the plot was too obvious and unworthy of any preservation and then state that anyone who'd rather not know, or would actually be surprised by anything happening is pretty unintelligent. That seems a little rude.

Posted by: Jay at July 13, 2008 2:10 PM

Jay- fair enough, but by comment 84? Where we've got some existential discussion of whether it's fair to say the movie sucked... I think you get to a point where "plot spoiler" in a shit=plot movie is pretty difficult to do. And if EricD hadn't thrown the biggest fricking anally charged snit fit about it, 90% would have glossed on over it. If anyone else is still here, most probably haven taken a look at the movie by now and are thinking, "damn, Dustin was spot on. Must avoid hypocrisy..."

Posted by: lilianna28 at July 13, 2008 7:01 PM

What's the hyprocrisy?

Posted by: Jay at July 13, 2008 7:27 PM

Look, I'm in the tank for del Toro; I even like Mimic and so want a DVD of his cut. That said, Hellboy 2 was a disappointment. Manning is wasted. The "Liz is preggers" subplot was beyond sitcom moronic. Nuada's whole "you have more in common with us than with them" bit had no motivation or sense behind it. Krauss's switcheroo was utter bosh and his last line an asinine attempt at action-movie wit. Develop the Nuala/Abe subplot to go along with the Golden Army and you've got enough story for a good movie. I guess I'm not as in love with Hellboy/Liz as del Toro.

Still, if he makes a third one, I'll see it. del Toro may make some bad movies, but I don't think he'll ever make a boring one.

Posted by: alone in the dark at July 13, 2008 8:07 PM

I liked the movie. I enjoyed it more than the first one.

That is all.

Posted by: BFFredo at July 14, 2008 12:26 AM

You're absolutely spot on with this one Dustin. Its a very entertaining movie, but is it really what the director of Beautiful, layered film like Pan's Labrynth should be doing?

But if you ever hear him talk about it, he's too nerd for his own good. He LOVES doing movies like this and says he'll never change.

Just got back, again; enjoyed the film. But everything Dustin said is absolutely justified.

Posted by: TajMc at July 14, 2008 12:53 AM

Christ, because I enjoyed the movie and now feel ashamed for doing so, I'm going to say this.

There were no fawns in the movie. Maybe a faun, but no fawns.

Take that!

Posted by: Noah at July 14, 2008 1:05 AM

utter fucking bullshit lilianna28. you spoiled the ending of this movie for me personally and if fucking pisses me off. i couldn't give a rat's ass what you think is obvious. I know it probably makes you happy to spoil movies for ppl, why else do it. which just proves what a fucking asshole you are.

Posted by: EricD at July 14, 2008 1:50 AM

I love the Hellboy & BPRD comics. Love love LOVE. Having said that, I thought this movie was crap.

From an I-love-the-comics standpoint, the story is so far gone from what happens in canon that I can't for the life of me figure out where they got some of these ideas from. Could I see the Golden Army somehow being a part of the storyline? Sure! But the fact that the characters themselves are changed so dramatically kept me from even being able to get into the movie in the first place. Hellboy is a dark comic. It's about a guy who's whole purpose is to destroy the world, for crying out loud! It is not "comicky" in the sense of being slapstick funny. (Also, Liz is a redhead and is in love with Abe, who is SO much more intelligent and not a complete fool)

From an I've-never-heard-of-it standpoint: Where the heck is the story? There are so many side- and sub-plots that the main plot is totally overshadowed and ends up seeming rushed and horribly confusing. Visuals are pretty, but don't add anything to the story.

Now, I've heard that Mignola had a lot of input on the script, so the only explanation I can come up with is that he wanted to try out an alternate storyline with the movies that has almost nothing - other than the world it's set in and a few major characters - in common with the comics he's written.

Posted by: Cait at July 14, 2008 3:35 AM

*GASP!*

British sketch comedy soulless? I'm thoroughly and horrifically offended by this disparagement! What about Little Britain, the greatest British creation since the Earl of Sandwich invented Cheese-On-Toast?!

Well... perhaps something was lost in the translation from British English to American English... it's hard to laugh without the silent U in "humour".

Posted by: Steak & Kidney Pie at July 14, 2008 7:21 AM

Comparing the HB movies to the books ain't apples/oranges... more like apples/Buicks (and no, I have not worked out the mechanics of that comparison).

The books are goddam stellar. The movies, eh.

Posted by: firedmyass at July 14, 2008 1:43 PM

I absolutely love Ron Perlman. Same for Luke Goss. (Stemming in part from Blade II. Coincidence? Eh, probably.) So I've been very excited. I saw this yesterday afternoon. I could live with the meh storyline and all that, if there had been a spectacular ending. But alas, no. Very anti-climactic. When the credits started rolling, my only thought was "That's it? Huh."

So disappointing...but loveLoveLOVE the visuals.

Posted by: Nadha at July 14, 2008 3:53 PM

Oh man...it sucked...I was so DAMN excited about it too. Guillermo del Toro needs to stop being a geek and just become the damn great director he's meant to be! WTF?!

Posted by: paris herpes at July 14, 2008 11:43 PM

Wow, guess I should have come back and read this sooner! Thanks everyone for the well wishes, we had a great time and we enjoyed Hellboy just as much as we thought we would. Then we had lots and lots of sex. Wheeee!

Posted by: Snath at July 15, 2008 8:52 AM

The movies really have nothing to do with the source material. Its not so much a question of whether the original comics provided worthy material for Del Tormo: its more a question of why Del Tormo decided to make two really awful movies out of said material. If Del Tormo is such a nerd, with all the respect for the comic original implied by that moniker, why on earth did he go so out of his way to barf all over the opportunity to make something intelligent and interesting out of this project? Honestly, i am just so disgusted.

Posted by: Alyce at July 16, 2008 4:48 AM

"It's like most British sketch comedy -- you take away the accents, and you're left with a bunch of guys in dresses running a joke into the ground."

That was really all I needed to read to know I wouldn't give a shit about anything Dustin had to say about the film.

Posted by: Hakobus at July 20, 2008 2:39 PM