Ghost Rider: The Magic 8 Ball Scene Says It All (Spoilers)
badth...@yahoo.com
dinner for a man who's very late. Because this is the modern, real
world, she checks her phone/Blackberry for messages from him. There
are none there. Her next action pretty much defines not just the
failure (in my opinion) of this film, but of many other films,
especially those based on fantasy material: she pulls a Magic 8 Ball
out of her purse. Not a miniature one that she may neurotically carry
around, but a fully-sized Magic 8 Ball. In her purse. That scene
sums up why Ghost Rider sucks, why Daredevil sucked, why Fantastic
Four mostly sucked (Johnny was spot on perfect; Ben and Reed were
okay) and why most comic book movies suck and will continue to do so.
The person/people behind it simply have no respect for telling a
story, especially one based on a comic book. End spoiler space.
In a movie where you want your audience to invest in a hero who sells
his soul to The Devil to save his father, there simply is no place for
scene like the Magic 8 Ball. It belongs in nothing less than a Nake
Gun or Scary Movie type comedy. Even in your ordinary romantic comedy
it would be considered an over-the-top joke. It would never make it
in say, Bridget Jones's Diary. There's no equivilent of a Magic 8
Ball in any comic book adaptation that we consider good (X-Men, Batman
Begins, etc), but check your lousy ones and you'll find plenty. No
one is claiming that you can establish too much *realism* in a movie
about someone riding a flaming motorcycle, but this doesn't work if
it's not *grounded* in reality, which means there are rules and you
simply can't dismiss them whenever you like "because it's a fantasy."
This is not only a lack of respect for the material, but the audience
as well. Simply put, to them "It's a silly movie anyway, so what's
the problem with more silliness?"
A good contrast for this film is The Crow. The Crow is what Ghost
Rider should have tried to be, a niftly little gothic fantasy action
film. After all, Ghost Rider is not light-hearted material. It's
about a man who sells his soul to the devil and finds himself cursed.
But despite it's even darker premise, The Crow still had more humor
than Ghost Rider without stooping to mocking itself. Nor did it
violate its own rules of character and of suspension of disbelief. As
opposed to Ghost Rider where, after claiming Johnny Blaze in
accordance to the deal he signed, The Devil for some reason decides to
make him *another* deal which will allow Johnny to get his soul back,
simply for doing what he's already obligated to do! To add to the
illogic, when Johnny does what's required and The Devil offers to lift
the curse and Johnny refuses, spouting off one of the worse speeches
of heroic justice in recent memory. Um, how can you *refuse* to have
a curse lifted? Either The Devil lifts it or he doesn't. What you
want really doesn't apply. Except in bad movies like this. There's
an even worse scene where Johnny is arrested for murder because his
license plate is found near a murder scene. Yeah, that's it. No
evidence, no motive. Because the writer/director (and I use those
terms loosely) wants a jail cell scene, this is all it takes to be
arrested for murder in this movie (but then again, this is the same
guy who had Matt Murdock, a private attorney, prosecuting a rape case
in the first five minutes of Daredevil). Again, no one is asking for
gritty reality, but if you're going to play in reality, you have to
obey the rules of it, which this guy is either too lazy or lacking in
talent to do. A talented writer who cared about his audience could
put Johnny Blaze in jail and according to the rules of all that anyone
who's ever seen a Law & Order episode would know. He would never have
Satan offer Johnny a deal to be free because he knows IT VIOLATES THE
CHARACTER OF FREAKING SATAN! And he would have Johnny not *choose* to
keep the curse, but to master it so that he's not at Satan's bidding.
But Mark Steven Johnson is not this guy and never will be.
And he sucks even on a basic visceral level, because even though the
motorcycle riding scenes are nice to see, the other action scenes are
stiff and dull. Ghost Rider fights a Wind elemental on a skyscraper
an a water elemental underwater and whatever you just imagined is 10
times better than what we see onscreen.
But it's all summed up by that damn Magic 8 Ball.
Sean Walsh
him to call her - when I'm pretty sure she never even gave him her
phone number in the first place.
--
Sean
Billy Bissette
@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
> There's
> an even worse scene where Johnny is arrested for murder because his
> license plate is found near a murder scene. Yeah, that's it. No
> evidence, no motive. Because the writer/director (and I use those
> terms loosely) wants a jail cell scene, this is all it takes to be
> arrested for murder in this movie (but then again, this is the same
> guy who had Matt Murdock, a private attorney, prosecuting a rape case
> in the first five minutes of Daredevil).
The TV show House had a 6+ episode story arc this season that relied
on even worse abuses and ignorance of the legal system, so it isn't just
bad comic book movies that fall to this issue.
It is sad when shows and movies can't even live up to Law & Order,
which itself is often itself a joke when it comes to legal matters.
Edward McArdle
"Sean Walsh" <sean...@gmail.com> wrote:
You pay too much attention! 8>)
--
my URL,
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~mcardle
KalElFan
<badth...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1171871548.6...@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> In the new Ghost Rider movie, there's a scene where a woman
> waits at dinner for a man who's very late....
Not just any woman, badthingus. It's Johnny Blaze aka the Ghost
Rider's love interest and former high school sweetheart. Some time
later in the ep when she sees a guy with a flaming skull riding a
flaming motorcycle up a skyscraper, she doesn't say "Eeek! What
is that terrible thing?" or the like. She whispers "Johnny..." under
her breath because she realizes the crazy "Devil's bounty hunter"
story that Johnny told her earlier is true.
Johnny Blaze aka the Ghost Rider's love interest would have to
be a bit flaky don't you think? If you want realism, it actually makes
perfect sense she'd be the kind of gal who'd carry around a large-
sized Magic 8 Ball. :-)
The movie was fun and it actually made just over $52 million dollars
for the four-day weekend in the final numbers. That's more than The
Crow, the R-rated movie you liked better, made in total. Ghost Rider
will be more profitable than Superman Returns because it cost about
$100 million less.
Nicholas Cage did an interview on a Canadian SF Channel show
that they aired last weekend. He mentioned that he bought the first
issue of Ghost Rider as a kid and loved the character. He wanted
to introduced it to the big screen for people who didn't know anything
about the character, in a way that conveyed all the things he loved
about it including the humor. The director mentioned the love story.
They interviewed Eva Mendes (who plays his love interest Roxanne
Simpson) and Wes Bentley, who plays the main villain Blackheart,
son of the Devil aka Mephistopheles (Peter Fonda). Sam Elliott
plays the graveyard Caretaker aka the former Ghost Rider as we
learn later. They're all very good, all the more so because it does
get campy at times with lines that are tough to deliver but they all
collectively pull it off.
I don't think the movie could ever have been made like The Crow or
Constantine or the like, certainly not as successfully as this was.
I liked all three but I think they pretty much aced this one in the
sense of maximizing what it's possible to do with it. I knew next
to nothing about the character and I'm looking forward to the sequel.
Billy Bissette
@mid.individual.net:
> The movie was fun and it actually made just over $52 million dollars
> for the four-day weekend in the final numbers. That's more than The
> Crow, the R-rated movie you liked better, made in total.
To be fair, The Crow was based on an indy comic, not a Marvel comic.
Not that Ghost Rider would be that much more known. (Then again, the
soundtrack for The Crow includes a song about Ghost Rider...)
Also to be fair, The Crow suffered to an unknown degree with the
death of Brandon Lee. Several scenes were completed with a double, and
sections of the movie were altered.
Though some of those changes might have been for the better. The
soundtrack is one of the things that was changed, and the results were
pretty good.
The Crow also had a poorly written ending, with the whole catching
the raven and church battle stuff. (Mind, the comic was still
unfinished at the time. And the final volume still didn't match the
movie.)
On the other hand, The Crow movie did spin off a TV series which
was moderately popular.
Anlatt the Builder
>
>
> Johnny Blaze aka the Ghost Rider's love interest would have to
> be a bit flaky don't you think?
Actually, just the opposite. She loved him BEFORE he was the Ghost
Rider, and her main purpose is to ground the fantastic character in
the real world.
In today's comics, of course, the Ghost Rider's girlfriend would be
Madame Xanadu, Nightshade, or a succubus (well, give or take a shared
universe). Superhero/non-superhero match-ups are SO last century.
FSogol
> "KalElFan" <kalelfa...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:542440F1ud8ppU2
> @mid.individual.net:
>
> death of Brandon Lee. Several scenes were completed with a double, and
> sections of the movie were altered.
>
Gotta disagree. Brandon's death gave publicity and probably increased
the appeal of the movie.
--
FSogol
badth...@yahoo.com
> On Feb 20, 9:36 pm, "KalElFan" <kalelfanNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Johnny Blaze aka the Ghost Rider's love interest would have to
> > be a bit flaky don't you think?
>
> Actually, just the opposite. She loved him BEFORE he was the Ghost
> Rider, and her main purpose is to ground the fantastic character in
> the real world.
>
somewhat real world otherwise there is no drama. It's also why
there's a impact crater when he comes down off the skyscraper. The
fantastic is that he's totally intact, the *real* is his literal
impact on the world. She's a *real world* girl but this is tossed out
the window in a seriously bad attempt at comedy as she drags out the
Giant 8 Ball, asks the waiter if he thinks she's cute and empties a
bottle of wine into her glass. And why is this silliness here?
Because to Mark Steven Johnson and the producers "it's just a comic
book movie" so why try to make it any better? Let's practice the
seriously bad romantic comedy we're going to try and make one day.
KalElFan
news:1172045788.0...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 20, 9:36 pm, "KalElFan" <kalelfanNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Johnny Blaze aka the Ghost Rider's love interest would have to
>> be a bit flaky don't you think?
>
> Actually, just the opposite. She loved him BEFORE he was the Ghost
> Rider, and her main purpose is to ground the fantastic character in
> the real world.
Yes, I understand that first part because I saw the young love backstory
played by the different actors. But even there she was in love with a
motorcycle stunt driver. Eva Mendes in that interview I mentioned
referred to her character as being in love with a bad boy and joked
she thought women could identify with that. The point is it was an
problematic pairing from her character's point of view, whether it's
Johnny or the Ghost Rider, though much more unusual once she
learned he was the latter.
On the second part, being superstitious and having a big magic 8 ball
hardly disqualifies her from "grounding" the guy with the flaming skull.
Think of it as a bridge between a gal willing to take up with a motorcycle
stunt driver, and then open-minded enough even beyond that to not run
like hell when she finds out he's got a hell connection, literally. Then
she's still the quirky TV reporter who can ground him in the real world,
because he's way, way out there compared to her.
There were only two scenes in the entire movie where I at first thought
they might have been able to improve by doing it differently. Having
thought about those since, I think they probably got it right there too.
I don't think it's possible to make a better first Ghost Rider movie.
badth...@yahoo.com
> "Anlatt the Builder" <tirh...@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:1172045788.0...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
I was shocked anyone would make such a statement, then I remember we
first spoke as you defended the excellence of Smallville, so now
everything makes sense to me....
KalElFan
news:1172158685.4...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 22, 8:52 am, "KalElFan" <kalelfanNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip most of my response to get to the main exchange]
>> I don't think it's possible to make a better first Ghost Rider movie.
>
> I was shocked anyone would make such a statement, then I remember
> we first spoke as you defended the excellence of Smallville, so now
> everything makes sense to me....
I never defended the excellence of Smallville. I was arguing its potential
for greatness. At this point I think the show deserves to be cancelled.
Season 6 has been a major screwup.
OTOH you were saying Smallville sucked, but you couldn't stop watching.
So I'm thinking maybe you should be going back to see Ghost Rider
again and again, if you think it sucked. :-)
The context of my Ghost Rider comment is not that its Best Picture
fodder, or that it's as good as the Spider-Man movies. I"m judging it
based on its potential. You wanted it to be an R-rated version of The
Crow or some such, which I think would have been the wrong way to
go. The movie isn't a 60s Batman campfest, but it had to have some
humor and be fun. The decision to go for that and the PG-13 rating,
which yielded $52+ million, was the right one. If you've got something
besides an aversion to large magic 8 balls and a wish that the movie
be more like The Crow, you might have a point on how Ghost Rider
could have been better if done differently. I doubt I'd agree, but you
might have a point.
badth...@yahoo.com
> <badthin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1172158685.4...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Feb 22, 8:52 am, "KalElFan" <kalelfanNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> [snip most of my response to get to the main exchange]
>
> >> I don't think it's possible to make a better first Ghost Rider movie.
>
> > I was shocked anyone would make such a statement, then I remember
> > we first spoke as you defended the excellence of Smallville, so now
> > everything makes sense to me....
>
> I never defended the excellence of Smallville. I was arguing its potential
> for greatness. At this point I think the show deserves to be cancelled.
> Season 6 has been a major screwup.
>
> OTOH you were saying Smallville sucked, but you couldn't stop watching.
> So I'm thinking maybe you should be going back to see Ghost Rider
> again and again, if you think it sucked. :-)
>
related more than once, Smallville being just another example of
that. It's a super-cheesefest of a show that I hate myself for
loving. Hell, I stopped watching the infinitely superior Buffy when
they were in conflict (but even on Smallville, Lois would not pull a
Giant 8 Ball out of her purse).
> The context of my Ghost Rider comment is not that its Best Picture
> fodder, or that it's as good as the Spider-Man movies. I"m judging it
> based on its potential. You wanted it to be an R-rated version of The
> Crow or some such, which I think would have been the wrong way to
> go. The movie isn't a 60s Batman campfest, but it had to have some
> humor and be fun. The decision to go for that and the PG-13 rating,
> which yielded $52+ million, was the right one. If you've got something
> besides an aversion to large magic 8 balls and a wish that the movie
> be more like The Crow, you might have a point on how Ghost Rider
> could have been better if done differently. I doubt I'd agree, but you
> might have a point.
I don't like it because it's bad. The direction is poor, the lighting
is sub-par, the writing is atrocious and actors move like they're
daydreaming about what to do with the paychecks they're getting from
it. Satan sets up Johnny to get his soul then turns around and offers
him a way out!?! Why? We're shown that the contract gives Satan
control over Johnny, but somehow Satan can't lift it without his
approval? The requirements to be arrested for murder are now simply
to have your license plate found near a murder scene? And my favorite
is the "Ghost Rider" collects evil souls to go to hell. Um, this is
bad *why* exactly? Isn't that where evil souls are supposed to go?
Why is not sending them there a good thing? So many utterly
nonsencial things and all with Nicholas Cage doing another bad Elvis
impression---complete with the stance. Sigh. Crap. Just crap. It's
got nothing to do with comparing it to The Crow. This is bad compared
to almost anything. Smallville looks like The X-Men in comparison.
KalElFan
news:1172182264.6...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> I don't like it because it's bad. The direction is poor, the lighting
> is sub-par, the writing is atrocious and actors move like they're
> daydreaming about what to do with the paychecks they're getting
> from it.
Up to there it's just assertion with no real specifics. The closest
you came was the lighting point, but I saw nothing inappropriate.
Whatever it is you disliked may have been intended for a movie
about a bounty hunter for Mephistopheles, or to make the Ghost
Rider's motorcycle-and-skull-on-fire shtick stand out in a shot a
certain way. The effects in the movie were good.
> Satan sets up Johnny to get his soul then turns around and offers
> him a way out!?! Why?
Because his son is mounting a reverse takeover, and the way he
takes care of even "regular" business when evil types go off the
reservation is to send his Ghost Rider. Here it's a special, very
important job with high stakes. I knew next to nothing about the
character before the movie, and that was clear I thought. Even
the Caretaker and former Ghost Rider was surprised when he
found out Blackheart was the target. Anyway, you just buy into
the premise that the Devil isn't all-powerful even when it comes to
things evil. Sounds like an okay premise to me and they run with it.
These were potentially very campy characters and writing, with both
Mephistopheles and his son Blackheart, but Peter Fonda and Wes
Bentley pull it off. Fonda's also there to poke a bit of fun at Easy
Rider, just like Sam Elliott is part of the riff on Westerns.
One of the two scenes I thought might have been better at first was
the ride the two Ghost Riders (again, played by Cage and Elliott) take
across the desert. I was rooting for Elliott's character to maybe go
into the town and take out a few evil souls there, or help take Blackheart
out. But just passing the torch so to speak, and then Cage's Ghost
Rider goes in alone, with his girlfriend wielding the rifle at one point,
made it like a riff on High Noon. That was a good movie, badthingus,
in case you hadn't heard. Anyway, it worked better the way they did
it. I'd be bringing all of them back for the sequel.
> We're shown that the contract gives Satan control over Johnny,
> but somehow Satan can't lift it without his approval?
Sure. He had to get the contract to curse him in the first place,
so why not for the reversal? He was worried about Blackheart
taking over. Now Johnny gets to be a thorn in his side. There
is the issue of how you top the devil and his son story next time,
but that's why I'd be bringing 'em all back. Father and son both
have an ax to grind with the Ghost Rider at this point, and I think
it was the Elliott character who had a line about getting God on
your side or some such. So maybe that gets invoked and it's how
the Elliott character gets to come back too.
> The requirements to be arrested for murder are now simply
> to have your license plate found near a murder scene?
Maybe there were closed circuit cameras in the vicinity as well,
badthingus. :-) Not that the license plate was trivial evidence,
and it got them the jailhouse scene where Johnny didn't want to
be there in the holding cell for the prisoners' sake. He knew the
"at night, in the presence of evil" thing (gotta love that! :-))
would bring out his flaming skull within. :-)
> And my favorite > is the "Ghost Rider" collects evil souls to go
> to hell. Um, this is bad *why* exactly? Isn't that where evil
> souls are supposed to go? Why is not sending them there a
> good thing?
It is a good thing, which is why Johnny's decided to hang on to his
Ghost Rider Title Belt and give Mephistopheles the ol' Smackdown
with it. :-) C'mon, badthingus, this is fun stuff. It couldn't have been
done this good if they'd gone in thinking of The Crow. It might well
have been a fiasco. Now they get to say "nyah nyah" all the way to
the bank and have people anticipating the sequel.
> So many utterly nonsensical things and all with Nicholas Cage
> doing another bad Elvis impression---complete with the stance.
What impression? Cage probably can't help himself. :-) Truth is
I actually didn't notice until I saw a review later that mentioned it.
To me, it's what I expected from Cage. They all did good. Eva
Mendes' Cleavage shoulda had a separate co-starring credit. :-)
They did the quirky thing with the Karen Carpenter song and
Johnny watching the cartoon and eating jelly beans or something
out of the wine glass -- again, I think what's happening here is you
just hated the tone of the movie. You wanted it to be this humor-
free zone or something. If there's one thing that this movie and
its success will hopefully prove is that comic movies don't have
to avoid humor and a bit of camp like the plague. Some properties
work better that way, and this is one of them. It wasn't like the
60's Batman where it permeates everything. The movie ran the
gamut and it worked.
> Sigh. Crap. Just crap. It's got nothing to do with comparing
> it to The Crow. This is bad compared to almost anything.
> Smallville looks like The X-Men in comparison.
The X-Men was good and so was Blade. I didn't see Daredevil
or Elektra, and I don't have any interest in Iron Man. Hulk was
somewhat of a disappointment. I liked Fantastic Four. Spider-
Man (both movies) are clearly the best IMO, but of the others
I think I liked Ghost Rider the best. If I were seeing any of the
others a second time, not just now but 10 years from now, I think
it'd be Ghost Rider. A few reviews called it a guilty pleasure, but
put plainly it's just a bit more fun. Nothing to feel guilty about. :-)
badth...@yahoo.com
> <badthin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
There's no pleasure in bad writing, bad direction, bad acting and
shoddy production.
Martin Phipps
My take? badthingus doesn't like the genre. If you take what you see
in the comics, like MSJ did with Daredevil and now Ghost Rider and you
call it "bad" then you couldn't have liked the source material that
much. People keep complaining that the X-Men and Spiderman and the
Hulk aren't like what we see in the comics but when we see scenes
taken right out of the comics (eg Bullseye killing Elektra or Ghost
Rider riding up a building) and presented on the big screen we call it
"cheesy". Face it, badthingus, comics are cheesy... and if the movies
weren't cheesy then you would complain that it didn't live up to the
spirit of the source material. They can't win, not if they just try
to please you. So why should they bother? Just let them make as good
a movie as they can while still staying true to the source material
and watch the money roll in. Chances are Ghost Rider will outdo
Daredevil and that's good news for the people currently working on
Iron Man and The Incredible Hulk.
Martin
Martin Phipps
> I never defended the excellence of Smallville. I was arguing its potential
> for greatness. At this point I think the show deserves to be cancelled.
> Season 6 has been a major screwup.
I think it is trying to compete with Heroes at its own game. Now
Chloe _might_ have powers. (Since when have her computer skills not
been super powers?) It could be made into something interesting.
They are definitely trying to preserve interest for a Season 7. My
question is this though: if Clark is still in contact with Oliver
Queen then isn't he technically working with them? Can't they call
his cell phone whenever he needs assist? They are trying to keep the
stories grounded in Smallville when season 2 took them to Metropolis
and season 4 took them to China. If they have to put him in the cape
and tights and change the title of the show to "Justice" or something
then that might be what they have to do to finally, once and for all,
divest themselves of the need to set everything in Smallville. Oh and
there should be a new rule: no red kryptonite. It's hard to root for
a guy who turns evil when he snorts red rocks.
Martin
Edward McArdle
"Martin Phipps" <martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Sorry, everyone, but I'm with badthingus. I thought the movie was
basically crap. I enjoyed X-Men, Spider Man FF and even the Hulk.
Vic Vega
> In article <1172225045.067008.219...@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> - Show quoted text -
Haven't seen it yet but I'll give the movie folks this: The idea of a
biker with his head of fire is HYSTERICALLY FUNNY ON ITS FACE. If they
tried to inject levity in an absurd premise, kudos to them. I'll judge
for myself if they suceeded.
P.S. They weren't going to make this an R-rated movie anyway. Why take
money out of your pocket? PG flicks make more that R flicks usually.
Blade was made early in the Marvel movie cycle before they knew how
much money these kinds of films could make.
George Peatty
wrote:
[snip]
>Face it, badthingus, comics are cheesy... and if the movies
>weren't cheesy then you would complain that it didn't live up to the
>spirit of the source material.
Hear, hear! Spot-on. What looks wonderful and real in panel art format,
often looks bizarre and phony on the big screen.
Tony
> On Feb 22, 4:47 pm, "KalElFan" <kalelfanNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > <badthin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:1172158685.4...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > On Feb 22, 8:52 am, "KalElFan" <kalelfanNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > [snip most of my response to get to the main exchange]
>
> > >> I don't think it's possible to make a better first Ghost Rider movie.
>
> > > I was shocked anyone would make such a statement, then I remember
> > > we first spoke as you defended the excellence of Smallville, so now
> > > everything makes sense to me....
>
> > I never defended the excellence of Smallville. I was arguing its potential
> > for greatness. At this point I think the show deserves to be cancelled.
> > Season 6 has been a major screwup.
>
> > OTOH you were saying Smallville sucked, but you couldn't stop watching.
> > So I'm thinking maybe you should be going back to see Ghost Rider
> > again and again, if you think it sucked. :-)
>
> I've admitted my inabillity to turn away from all things Superman
> related more than once, Smallville being just another example of
> that. It's a super-cheesefest of a show that I hate myself for
> loving. Hell, I stopped watching the infinitely superior Buffy when
> they were in conflict (but even on Smallville, Lois would not pull a
> Giant 8 Ball out of her purse).
--I think you're overreacting to the Magic 8 Ball. Sure it was a bit
cheesy, but I don't see it as any kind of indication that the movie
was bad. I believe that there are women in the world that would carry
one around in their purse. Moreover, if one were inclined to believe
in superstition or the supernatural, inclusion of it adds to their
characterization.
All the *other* points you bring up in your original post *do*
highlight how bad the movie was (though personally, I thought it was
better than Elektra...is that saying anything?)
Tony
badth...@yahoo.com
Oh. My. God. You did not just compare the excellence that was Frank
Miller's Daredevil to the steaming heap of dung that was the movie. I
loved the Daredevil comic, but the movie was shit. Then again, like
KalElFan you think Smallville is some standard of quality, when is
pales so obviously to Buffy The Vampire slayer, a show that proved you
could do quality work with the "superpowered teen in a small town"
idea if you wanted to. The difference between Smallville and shit-
storms like Ghost Rider and Daredevil, is that Smallville does capture
the spirit of Superman and occasionally---if for no other reason than
if you plant a thousand seeds something going to grow---gets it dead
on. That *never* happens in Ghost Rider or Daredevil. Not once. Not
with the horrendous miscasting in either. Spider-Man captured Peter
Parker perfectly (say it three times fast). X-Men got the essence of
those characters right. FF got Johnny right. Batman Begins got Bruce
Wayne. Even The Hulk got a few things right. At no time in Ghost
Rider or Daredevil do you see Johnny Blaze or Matt Murdock, not even a
little. And that's the difference. FF was as incompetent technically
as GH and DD, but they came closer to the characters and that's what
allows you to forgive an otherwise bad movie. And Ghost Rider is a
bad movie and the producers knew it when they avoided giving it
critical screenings, something the producers of X-Men, Spider-Man,
Batman, etc didn't feel the need to do.
And this continuing idea that premise dictates quality is insane. By
that asinine logic Shakespeare's "Midsummer Night's Dream" is cheesey
and doesn't deserve a talented execution because it's about faries and
a guy with the head of an ass! Maybe we should let Mark Steven
Johnson adapt that too and he can throw in all his funny ideas like
Giant 8 Balls and jelly bean martinis, because a story about faries
and a guy with an ass head is stupid and doesn't deserve better. I
mean, obviously a guy with flaming skull didn't.
Tony
> <badthin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
--I disliked that scene. We were told early in the movie that there's
one Ghost Rider every 100 years. Yet now there's 2. That violates
the rules the movie set for itself. We're never given any reason why
Caretaker is still alive/around, though on guessing I'd say it's to
protect the contract. There's no reason why he couldn't have given it
(and directions) to Johnny at the cemetary. Nor is there any reason
he had to ride with Johnny and *then* give him the shotgun. It
doesn't make sense that he'd tell Johnny to stick to the shadows when
you're dealing with demonic elements that not only thrive in darkness,
but have a knack for knowing where you are. It doesn't make any sense
that Caretaker would suddenly be freed of his curse since A: it was
given to him by Satan, and B: he never completed the terms of his
contract. Why would Mephistopheles release him? Oh, wait, we get the
answer that maybe God is involved and he'll give him a second chance.
Ugh. Insert Plot Device B to rid us of Plot Device A.
This very short scene, which was incredibly bad and poorly thought out
is what illustrates--in large part--what was wrong with the movie.
>
> > We're shown that the contract gives Satan control over Johnny,
> > but somehow Satan can't lift it without his approval?
>
> Sure. He had to get the contract to curse him in the first place,
> so why not for the reversal? He was worried about Blackheart
> taking over. Now Johnny gets to be a thorn in his side. There
> is the issue of how you top the devil and his son story next time,
> but that's why I'd be bringing 'em all back. Father and son both
> have an ax to grind with the Ghost Rider at this point, and I think
> it was the Elliott character who had a line about getting God on
> your side or some such. So maybe that gets invoked and it's how
> the Elliott character gets to come back too.
--Caretakers' comment about God is supported by nothing more than
supposition and hope on his part.
And Satan *has* the contract between he and Johnny, so according to
the movie's own rules, he owns Johnny's soul until the terms of the
contract are fulfilled. The movie should have been clearer that since
Johnny completed those terms, he got his soul back, and with it, the
choice to master the demon within him vs giving it up (though again,
I'm not certain how he'd be able to deny Satan in such a way; the
implication is that Satan doesn't have the power to take back the
demon he gave Johnny, which is just silly).
> > The requirements to be arrested for murder are now simply
> > to have your license plate found near a murder scene?
>
> Maybe there were closed circuit cameras in the vicinity as well,
> badthingus. :-) Not that the license plate was trivial evidence,
> and it got them the jailhouse scene where Johnny didn't want to
> be there in the holding cell for the prisoners' sake. He knew the
> "at night, in the presence of evil" thing (gotta love that! :-))
> would bring out his flaming skull within. :-)
--that scene was completely unnecessary and gratuitous. Take out the
entire "subplot" of the license plate (and toss it on the cutting room
floor where it belongs), and how much of the movie is changed? The
DVD of the movie should be the only place a useless scene like that
should have appeared.
> > And my favorite > is the "Ghost Rider" collects evil souls to go
> > to hell. Um, this is bad *why* exactly? Isn't that where evil
> > souls are supposed to go? Why is not sending them there a
> > good thing?
>
> It is a good thing, which is why Johnny's decided to hang on to his
> Ghost Rider Title Belt and give Mephistopheles the ol' Smackdown
> with it. :-) C'mon, badthingus, this is fun stuff. It couldn't have been
> done this good if they'd gone in thinking of The Crow. It might well
> have been a fiasco. Now they get to say "nyah nyah" all the way to
> the bank and have people anticipating the sequel.
--good stuff? Ugh.
The only Marvel movie worse than this was Elektra. Yes, I enjoyed
Hulk more than Ghost Rider. At least the former didn't violate it's
own internal logic and thrive on plot holes.
Tony
selaboc
Tony wrote:
> --I disliked that scene. We were told early in the movie that there's
> one Ghost Rider every 100 years. Yet now there's 2. That violates
> the rules the movie set for itself.
(I thought it was something like each generation, not specifically 100
years, but I could be mistaken, anywho...) And there was one Ghost
Rider 100 years ago and one Ghost Rider today. The fact that the 100
years ago one never died off is neither here no there because he quit
working for the devil 100 years ago freeing the devil up to create
another one when the next generation's time comes around.
> We're never given any reason why
> Caretaker is still alive/around, though on guessing I'd say it's to
> protect the contract.
I'd say that's a good guess.
> It
> doesn't make sense that he'd tell Johnny to stick to the shadows when
> you're dealing with demonic elements that not only thrive in darkness,
> but have a knack for knowing where you are.
If you paid attention to the movie, the reason why he said that makes
perfect sense. Johnny's demonic powers don't work in daylight, he can
only manifest them in the darkness (ie the shadows) as you saw
onscreen (well, they showed it onscreen, I'm not sure what you saw) in
the final confrontation scenes as day started to break. When Johnny
was in Daylight - NO ghost rider power, when Johnny was in the shadows
he could manifest the powers.
> And Satan *has* the contract between he and Johnny, so according to
> the movie's own rules, he owns Johnny's soul until the terms of the
> contract are fulfilled.
And according to the movie, Satan considered the contract completed
when Johnny defeated Satan's son. did we watch two different movies?
badth...@yahoo.com
> On Feb 22, 4:11?pm, badthin...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 22, 4:47 pm, "KalElFan" <kalelfanNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > <badthin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> > >news:1172158685.4...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > On Feb 22, 8:52 am, "KalElFan" <kalelfanNOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > [snip most of my response to get to the main exchange]
>
> > > >> I don't think it's possible to make a better first Ghost Rider movie.
>
> > > > I was shocked anyone would make such a statement, then I remember
> > > > we first spoke as you defended the excellence of Smallville, so now
> > > > everything makes sense to me....
>
> > > for greatness. ?At this point I think the show deserves to be cancelled.
> > > Season 6 has been a major screwup.
>
> > > OTOH you were saying Smallville sucked, but you couldn't stop watching.
> > > So I'm thinking maybe you should be going back to see Ghost Rider
> > > again and again, if you think it sucked. :-)
>
> > I've admitted my inabillity to turn away from all things Superman
> > related more than once, Smallville being just another example of
> > loving. ?Hell, I stopped watching the infinitely superior Buffy when
> > they were in conflict (but even on Smallville, Lois would not pull a
> > Giant 8 Ball out of her purse).
>
> --I think you're overreacting to the Magic 8 Ball. Sure it was a bit
> cheesy, but I don't see it as any kind of indication that the movie
> was bad. I believe that there are women in the world that would carry
> one around in their purse. Moreover, if one were inclined to believe
> in superstition or the supernatural, inclusion of it adds to their
> characterization.
> All the *other* points you bring up in your original post *do*
> highlight how bad the movie was (though personally, I thought it was
> better than Elektra...is that saying anything?)
>
> Tony
My point about the Magic 8 Ball is that it was an over-the-top
occurence from the character that was supposed to be grounded. That's
a movie with no discipline or sense of itself that every aspect of it
is open to the fantastic. Ghost Rider is only fantastic if the things
around him are *normal*. A giant 8 Ball out of nowhere is not
normal.
The way that works is for Roxanne to carry a miniature Magic 8 Ball on
her keychain that we see her consult MORE THAN ONCE! Oh, and maybe,
just maybe WE CAN SEE THE RESULT! (after all, the joke of the Magic 8
Ball is the abiguious answer). This way it's not an over-the-top, out-
of-character occurence, but a character aspect that makes her three-
dimensional and not just *pretty girl." Since it's so cheesey it
makes sense that it would be something Johnny won for her at carnival
when they were kids that she still carries around. We see her
joyously check it under the tree while waiting and we get our
foreshadowing when it reads "My reply is no." Obviously correct when
Johnny rides off without her. Then we have to see her check the
little 8 Ball in the newsvan after she agrees to have dinner with
Johnny. It's our sign that yes, she still cares after all these
years. As the cameraman reacts with a raised eyebrow, the outlook
reads "Better Not Tell You Now." And then at dinner when she checks
it, "Outlook not so good." Finally, at the end when they're going off
together, she checks it. He's surprised and delighted to see it. The
outlook this time reads "Outlook good."
That's how it works, kids.
Also, no one up-ends a bottle of wine. An actual person just says,
"Leave the bottle." The joke of her frustration is still there but
not ridiculous. And the "You think I'm pretty" bit never should have
been shot at all.
Again, Johnny is the fantastic; Roxanne is the real. It diminishes
them both not to follow this. Then again, I like good, well-written
movies.
badth...@yahoo.com
The terms of the contract are for Johnny to be "The Rider" not to
defeat Blackheart. Satan says he'll let him go if he just defeats
Blackheart and get the contract---but since getting souls is his
contract he should have to go get it anyway because he's now the new
rider. So Satan is actually giving him a break. Satan. The creature
who tricked him and killed his father to get his soul is being a nice
guy. Yeah, that makes sense. Satan has no reason to release Johnny at
all. And since he gave him the curse, he can lift it at any time.
Johnny can't give himself demon powers so the only thing dumber than
that speech he gave was him being able to do so. That's the movie I
unfortunately saw.
Aaron F. Bourque
> Face it, badthingus, comics are cheesy... and if the movies
> weren't cheesy then you would complain that it didn't live up to the
> spirit of the source material.
. . .
Plays are cheesy, too. So all movies based on plays should be cheesy,
or their not living up to the source material?
You're a moron, get off my intarnets.
Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque
Tony
> Tony wrote:
> > --I disliked that scene. We were told early in the movie that there's
> > one Ghost Rider every 100 years. Yet now there's 2. That violates
> > the rules the movie set for itself.
>
> (I thought it was something like each generation, not specifically 100
> years, but I could be mistaken, anywho...) And there was one Ghost
> Rider 100 years ago and one Ghost Rider today. The fact that the 100
> years ago one never died off is neither here no there because he quit
> working for the devil 100 years ago freeing the devil up to create
> another one when the next generation's time comes around.
--I'll preface this by saying that my comments will be snide free
(civility really isn't that hard). I think it does matter, if the
movie states that there is *one* GR within _whatever_ period of time.
Then suddenly there are two. It's neither here nor there that
Caretaker gave up the role, he was still bound by Satan's contract.
If Satan has the power to bind souls through a contract, as well as
make those souls do his bidding when he desires, how in the world was
he unable to keep control of Caretaker?
> > We're never given any reason why
> > Caretaker is still alive/around, though on guessing I'd say it's to
> > protect the contract.
>
> I'd say that's a good guess.
--a guess is all it is, since the movie never actually gives us any
straight answer.
> > It
> > doesn't make sense that he'd tell Johnny to stick to the shadows when
> > you're dealing with demonic elements that not only thrive in darkness,
> > but have a knack for knowing where you are.
>
> If you paid attention to the movie, the reason why he said that makes
> perfect sense. Johnny's demonic powers don't work in daylight, he can
> only manifest them in the darkness (ie the shadows) as you saw
> onscreen (well, they showed it onscreen, I'm not sure what you saw) in
> the final confrontation scenes as day started to break. When Johnny
> was in Daylight - NO ghost rider power, when Johnny was in the shadows
> he could manifest the powers.
--point. I did forget about that part. Though now that you mention
it, I *don't* recall Caretaker telling Johnny the reason to stay in
the shadows. Why be vague?
>
> > And Satan *has* the contract between he and Johnny, so according to
> > the movie's own rules, he owns Johnny's soul until the terms of the
> > contract are fulfilled.
>
> And according to the movie, Satan considered the contract completed
> when Johnny defeated Satan's son. did we watch two different movies?
--no we didn't. I just can't believe that anyone would think that the
Prince of Lies would actually tell the truth. He's a demon. He's a
collector of souls, so even if he tells Johnny he's going to let him
go, why should he {Johnny} or we believe him?
Tony
selaboc
badth...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > And according to the movie, Satan considered the contract completed
> > when Johnny defeated Satan's son. did we watch two different movies?
>
> The terms of the contract are for Johnny to be "The Rider" not to
> defeat Blackheart.
Exactly, in order to get Johnny to defeat Blackheart, he needs to give
Johnny an incentive.
> Satan says he'll let him go if he just defeats
> Blackheart and get the contract---but since getting souls is his
> contract he should have to go get it anyway because he's now the new
> rider.
his contract does not cover fighting Blackheart, and the souls
Blackheart was going after were already recovered by a Ghost Rider, so
again not covered by Johnny's contract (the contract is to get souls,
those have already been "gotten" by a previous Ghost Rider)
> So Satan is actually giving him a break. Satan. The creature
> who tricked him and killed his father to get his soul is being a nice
> guy. Yeah, that makes sense.
because he's not being a nice guy, he's changing the terms of the
contract to get Johnny to do what wasn't covered by the contract in
the first place. He didn't forsee his son's plans when he made the
contract with Johnny.
> Satan has no reason to release Johnny at
> all.
The reason is that Mephisto keeps his word (just as he kept his word
about curing Johnny's father of Cancer).
> And since he gave him the curse, he can lift it at any time.
He gave him the curse through Johnny's willing agreement (the
contract), so to lift it, it makes sense that he'd need Johnny's
willing agreement.
> Johnny can't give himself demon powers so the only thing dumber than
> that speech he gave was him being able to do so. That's the movie I
> unfortunately saw.
Johnny's not giving himself demon powers, he refusing to give them
back. Unfortunely you apparently didn't see the movie that was showing
in theathres but instead some other version in which Johnny gave
himself demon powers.
badth...@yahoo.com
> badthin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > And according to the movie, Satan considered the contract completed
> > > when Johnny defeated Satan's son. did we watch two different movies?
>
> > The terms of the contract are for Johnny to be "The Rider" not to
> > defeat Blackheart.
>
> Exactly, in order to get Johnny to defeat Blackheart, he needs to give
> Johnny an incentive.
>
> > Satan says he'll let him go if he just defeats
> > Blackheart and get the contract---but since getting souls is his
> > contract he should have to go get it anyway because he's now the new
> > rider.
>
> his contract does not cover fighting Blackheart, and the souls
> Blackheart was going after were already recovered by a Ghost Rider, so
> again not covered by Johnny's contract (the contract is to get souls,
> those have already been "gotten" by a previous Ghost Rider)
>
without fighting Blackheart, he still fulfills the second deal Satan
strangely agrees to make with him.
> > So Satan is actually giving him a break. Satan. The creature
> > who tricked him and killed his father to get his soul is being a nice
> > guy. Yeah, that makes sense.
>
> because he's not being a nice guy, he's changing the terms of the
> contract to get Johnny to do what wasn't covered by the contract in
> the first place. He didn't forsee his son's plans when he made the
> contract with Johnny.
>
> > Satan has no reason to release Johnny at
> > all.
>
> The reason is that Mephisto keeps his word (just as he kept his word
> about curing Johnny's father of Cancer).
>
> > And since he gave him the curse, he can lift it at any time.
>
> He gave him the curse through Johnny's willing agreement (the
> contract), so to lift it, it makes sense that he'd need Johnny's
> willing agreement.
>
> > Johnny can't give himself demon powers so the only thing dumber than
> > that speech he gave was him being able to do so. That's the movie I
> > unfortunately saw.
>
> Johnny's not giving himself demon powers, he refusing to give them
> back. Unfortunely you apparently didn't see the movie that was showing
> in theathres but instead some other version in which Johnny gave
> himself demon powers.
No, I saw the one where Johnny suddenly gets the ability to keep demon
powers and the person who gave them, cannot take them back. That's
the silliness I saw
Martin Phipps
> On Feb 23, 2:04 am, "Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Face it, badthingus, comics are cheesy... and if the movies
> > weren't cheesy then you would complain that it didn't live up to the
> > spirit of the source material.
>
> or their not living up to the source material?
I've seen a couple of movies in which Shakespeare's plays Romeo and
Juliet (with Leonardo Decaprio) and Richard III (with Ian McKlenon -
sp?) were set in modern times but with the original dialogue and, yes,
the result is a bit cheesy. I'm not saying movies based on comics (or
plays) have to be cheesy but it is true that people will complain that
a movie like Hulk was too serious and wasn't enough like the comics -
that it wasn't cheesy enough in other words. You can't please some
people. So why bother?
> You're a moron, get off my intarnets.
I'm not on your "intarnets", moron.
Martin
consul
> I've seen a couple of movies in which Shakespeare's plays Romeo and
> Juliet (with Leonardo Decaprio) and Richard III (with Ian McKlenon -
> sp?) were set in modern times but with the original dialogue and, yes,
> the result is a bit cheesy.
I didn't think Romeo & Juliet, or the Hamlet was cheesy there, as it was
more of a style issue, and I thought it was integrated pretty well. It
could have been cheesy if you weren't expecting it though.
Hmm ... perhaps it had a bit of 'camp' in it. :)
--
"... respect, all good works are not done by only good folk. For here,
at the end of all things, we shall do what needs to be done."
--till next time, Jameson Stalanthas Yu -x- <<poetry.dolphins-cove.com>>
SirDeuce
What actually happened was the devil trying to make another deal.
"Defeat Blackheart and I'll end the contract" We saw how well the LAST
deal went, so Johnny's deciding not to take the new deal makes sense.
THAT'S the movie I saw. Nothing about the devil not being able to take
away any power he gave someone, but a devil unable to break a contract
unless the other party agreed to a new bargain (which he'd loophole to
his advantage).
bentur...@gmail.com
movies?
Eminence
<martin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Perhaps a better way to express the idea is to say that when you, the
reader, open a comic, you almost always have preconceptions about the
characters, plots, and situations -- in short, the whole superhero
milieu. You're either prepared to suspend your disbelief and immerse
yourself deep in the plak-tow, or you're unable to get past the
genuine absurdity of the premise. Subscribers to the former notion see
a grim vigilante dressed to strike fear into the hearts of cowardly,
superstitious criminals; those who support the latter interpretation
just see an eccentric millionaire costumed like a flying rodent.
Eminence
_______________
Usenet: Global Village of the Damned
Edward McArdle
Eminence <grey.e...@charter.net> wrote:
There is a difference. In a comic you see Batman standing on a roof,
throwing his Batline, then a shot of him swinging through the air, then
a shot of him arriving on another building.
If you see him in a film you generally realise it can't be done.
(But web-lines work!)
bentur...@gmail.com
http://www.cafepress.com/ghostrider8ball
badth...@yahoo.com
> ahahahahahahttp://www.cafepress.com/ghostrider8ball
Oh. My. God.
Vic Vega
Finally got around to seeing this.
I thought it was pretty good!
What I liked:
Nic Cage: Nic plays Johnny Blaze as a collection of his signiture
tics. He's kind of a cross between Evil Kenivel and Elvis that's a
Karen Carpenter fan to boot(!).
Eva Mendez: I'd pay money just to watch that woman BREATHE. The script
doesn't ask her to do much beyond being likably sexy and somewhat
goofy (She carries around a magic 8 ball).
The F/X: You will believe a motorcyclist with his head on fire can pop
wheeles. Or something.
The Script: It makes slightly more sense that the original GR comics.
Which isn't saying much, but there it is.
What I didn't like:
The Villains: They have no defining characteristics at all beyond the
FX used to depict them. Peter Fonda is mailing it in. Denis Hopper
should have played Mephisto. The movie could have used one more
scenery chewer.
Understand that there was NO WAY this movie was going to be an R.
That's taking money out of your own pocket to do that (Blade was an
abberation that occured early on Marvel's movie cycle:no-one expected
anything from it.).
Also the concept of a flaming skull motorcycle dude isn't so much
scary as it is funny. So I can see why the creators when the way they
did.
On the terms they set the movie was enjoyable. Hulk, on the other hand
was an utter failure.
Just my two cents.
tamsin...@yahoo.com
> In the new Ghost Rider movie, there's a scene where a woman waits at
> dinner for a man who's very late. Because this is the modern, real
> world, she checks her phone/Blackberry for messages from him. There
> are none there. Her next action pretty much defines not just the
> failure (in my opinion) of this film, but of many other films,
> especially those based on fantasy material: she pulls a Magic 8 Ball
> out of her purse. Not a miniature one that she may neurotically carry
> around, but a fully-sized Magic 8 Ball. In her purse. That scene
> sums up why Ghost Rider sucks, why Daredevil sucked, why Fantastic
> Four mostly sucked (Johnny was spot on perfect; Ben and Reed were
> okay) and why most comic book movies suck and will continue to do so.
> The person/people behind it simply have no respect for telling a
> story, especially one based on a comic book. End spoiler space.
>
> In a movie where you want your audience to invest in a hero who sells
> his soul to The Devil to save his father, there simply is no place for
> scene like the Magic 8 Ball. It belongs in nothing less than a Nake
> Gun or Scary Movie type comedy. Even in your ordinary romantic comedy
> it would be considered an over-the-top joke. It would never make it
> in say, Bridget Jones's Diary. There's no equivilent of a Magic 8
> Ball in any comic book adaptation that we consider good (X-Men, Batman
> Begins, etc), but check your lousy ones and you'll find plenty. No
> one is claiming that you can establish too much *realism* in a movie
> about someone riding a flaming motorcycle, but this doesn't work if
> it's not *grounded* in reality, which means there are rules and you
> simply can't dismiss them whenever you like "because it's a fantasy."
> This is not only a lack of respect for the material, but the audience
> as well. Simply put, to them "It's a silly movie anyway, so what's
> the problem with more silliness?"
>
> A good contrast for this film is The Crow. The Crow is what Ghost
> Rider should have tried to be, a niftly little gothic fantasy action
> film. After all, Ghost Rider is not light-hearted material. It's
> about a man who sells his soul to the devil and finds himself cursed.
> But despite it's even darker premise, The Crow still had more humor
> than Ghost Rider without stooping to mocking itself. Nor did it
> violate its own rules of character and of suspension of disbelief. As
> opposed to Ghost Rider where, after claiming Johnny Blaze in
> accordance to the deal he signed, The Devil for some reason decides to
> make him *another* deal which will allow Johnny to get his soul back,
> simply for doing what he's already obligated to do! To add to the
> illogic, when Johnny does what's required and The Devil offers to lift
> the curse and Johnny refuses, spouting off one of the worse speeches
> of heroic justice in recent memory. Um, how can you *refuse* to have
> a curse lifted? Either The Devil lifts it or he doesn't. What you
> want really doesn't apply. Except in bad movies like this. There's
> an even worse scene where Johnny is arrested for murder because his
> license plate is found near a murder scene. Yeah, that's it. No
> evidence, no motive. Because the writer/director (and I use those
> terms loosely) wants a jail cell scene, this is all it takes to be
> arrested for murder in this movie (but then again, this is the same
> guy who had Matt Murdock, a private attorney, prosecuting a rape case
> in the first five minutes of Daredevil). Again, no one is asking for
> gritty reality, but if you're going to play in reality, you have to
> obey the rules of it, which this guy is either too lazy or lacking in
> talent to do. A talented writer who cared about his audience could
> put Johnny Blaze in jail and according to the rules of all that anyone
> who's ever seen a Law & Order episode would know. He would never have
> Satan offer Johnny a deal to be free because he knows IT VIOLATES THE
> CHARACTER OF FREAKING SATAN! And he would have Johnny not *choose* to
> keep the curse, but to master it so that he's not at Satan's bidding.
> But Mark Steven Johnson is not this guy and never will be.
>
> And he sucks even on a basic visceral level, because even though the
> motorcycle riding scenes are nice to see, the other action scenes are
> stiff and dull. Ghost Rider fights a Wind elemental on a skyscraper
> an a water elemental underwater and whatever you just imagined is 10
> times better than what we see onscreen.
>
> But it's all summed up by that damn Magic 8 Ball.
To be fair, it's the only thing you ever remember about Roxanne. Other than the fact that in her first scene as an adult, her dress matches the colour of the environment she's standing in.