Cool News
Mr. Beaks Makes The Most Of Ben Stiller's TROPIC THUNDER
SPOILER ALERT !!
Ben Stiller's TROPIC THUNDER is a film that does not believe in "murdering your darlings". Though it's comfortable with the shockingly gory dispatching of many other creatures (great, small, or endangered), the edict in the editing room was apparently "Spare the laughs, damn the satire!".
By easing up on the vitriol, Stiller has blown a golden opportunity to craft the most vicious Hollywood broadside since THE PLAYER (at great expense to the town's oldest studio!). It would've been a beautiful burn. It also would've been hacked to pieces when it tested poorly, stitched together for an obligatory two-week release, and derisively remembered as the HEAVEN'S GATE of comedy. And it would've landed Stiller in "Director Jail" for an eternity, thus consigning him to a lifetime of paycheck gigs in four-quadrant pap like A NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM.
In refusing to risk pariahdom for an odd angry shot at glory, Stiller has imbued TROPIC THUNDER with a caustic undercurrent of self-loathing. Perhaps this is because he realizes he's too caught up in the money-making, standard-lowering machinery of Hollywood to turn a flamethrower on it and get away clean: how does the star of MEET THE FOCKERS and ALONG CAME POLLY excoriate the vulgarity of the business that's made him a multi-millionaire without coming off as a champion hypocrite?
That he can't bring himself to torch the lie pisses him off all the more - which explains the savagery of the "Simple Jack" parody that's prompted a pack of bored do-gooders to organize an ill-considered boycott against TROPIC THUNDER. Stiller knows a day will come - maybe five or ten years from now - when he'll be susceptible to appearing in a prestige-pic piece of shit intended to showcase his "virtuosity" by spazzing out in a caricature of mental retardation; he understands the movie star disconnect from society that makes this seem like a noble thing to do. So while Stiller's Tugg Speedman may play like a garish swipe at an aloof icon like Tom Cruise (more on his TROPIC THUNDER scene-stealing in a moment), it's mostly aimed inward; it's THE BEN STILLER SHOW parody of what Ben Stiller might yet (or has already) become.
This lashing out in every possible direction addles the viewer pretty good, but Stiller at least indicates that he's in on the madness by kicking off the film proper with The Temptations' "Ball of Confusion" as a fleet of helicopters buzz the tree line of what's supposed to be the Vietnamese jungle (this all comes after those fake trailers that cleverly precede the DreamWorks logo). It's a confident opening that portends something unique, and it deftly leads right into the climactic action sequence of the film-within-the-film - an adaptation of a highly-regarded piece of Vietnam War nonfiction penned by a hook-handed veteran named "Four Leaf" Tayback (Nick Nolte, subtly kicking ass and sending up his own eccentricities in the bargain). It's convincingly overwrought (replete with squib-riddled Willem Dafoe Christ-pose), and it all appears to be proceeding as meticulously choreographed until Speedman's inability to emote as effortlessly as his five-time Academy Award-winning co-star, Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr.), compels him to sabotage the scene right as the production's lunatic demolitions expert (a judiciously-used Danny McBride) sets off the fireballing money shot.
There's nothing especially cutting or revelatory about actors' egos derailing the best laid plans of, in this case, an in-over-his-head director (Steve Coogan), but the characters' excesses certainly catch one's attention: Downey's in blackface, Jack Black's a drug-addicted comedian, and Brandon T. Jackson's a branding-obsessed hip-hop star sporting the moniker "Alpa Chino". They're not an honorable or even remotely likable group, which leaves poor Jay Baruchel shouldering the audience's sympathy as a young ingenue who has yet to be corrupted by stardom (though he's definitely game for the spoils: when the film's completion seems an impossibility, Baruchel mourns that he never got to use his performance to get laid).
Still, when the boys get caught out in a real firefight with a heavily-armed drug cartel, their erratic behavior is more than inventive enough to keep the laughs coming. Downey's monologue apprising Stiller of the perils of going "full-tard" for an Oscar has already been spoiled in myriad clips and trailers, but it still works within the context of the film because it's so disgustingly true (he could've reached further back for Cliff Robertson's win for CHARLY, which can be caveated as a "full-tard" to "no-tard" and back again conversion). And Black's unhinged portrayal of a scumbag character-comic suffering from withdrawal is probably the most nuanced work he's done since JESUS' SON (which means he's slashing away at his own sell-out compromises as well).
As the stranded cast presses farther into the jungle, Stiller makes a point of exhausting every tired music cue one might run across in films of this ilk (or, as the meta case may be, the ilk of the film-within-the-film): "Sympathy for the Devil", "Run Through the Jungle", "For What It's Worth"... they're all here - with the last brilliantly signaling the phony spiritual conversion of Speedman from unappreciated vanity case to appreciated vanity case (the cartel loved "Simple Jack"). Though the movie stumbles when it gives in to action movie convention (Stiller's commenting on nothing when he gives the actors their hero moments in order to extricate them from "the shit), it's been so rough and so consistently uproarious up until that point that the cheat is excusable.
That's because TROPIC THUNDER diminished expectations for true satire an hour earlier when Tom Cruise came grandstanding into view as Les Grossman, the balding, paunchy, invective-flinging Satan whose studio financed the over-budget misadventure of the title. Though Cruise is fantastic in the part (the consensus seems to be that he saved his career with this one performance), his participation gives the superstar hierarchy a pass. At least Bruce Willis and Julia Roberts had the balls to play themselves in a shitty Oscar-grubbing drama at the end of THE PLAYER; Cruise getting to clown it up in a movie that's so clear-eyed about the soullessness of the industry he epitomizes lets everyone in on the joke.
It's a generous act on Stiller's behalf to help a fellow professional when he's down, but a true satirist would've gone in for the kill. That Stiller can't summon up the bile to say all of what he knows about this industry leaves him complicit in the fraud. Still, he's nothing if not honest in defeat: Cruise dancing triumphant over the credits is a killer white flag.
Faithfully submitted,
Mr. Beaks
-
+ Expand All
-
YEAH!
-
did you like it or not?
-
I was asking myself the very same question. So-- didya?
-
But the real question, Beaks, is did you look at it for a satirical comedy that can only ever get so far as Hollywood lets it? The sickest satires, I feel, are Bret Easton Ellis' novels that satirize life in general. These make you feel awful for laughing, but they are never belly laughs, they're "oh my god james van der beek is masturbating" laughs or "christian bale just axed leto in the face" laughs. Stiller goes for belly laughs, and belly laughs will block the view of subtle satire any day of the week.
-
You're really starting to lose coherence. You're reviewing an imaginary movie that you think Ben Stiller made and then edited into the movie he really nade. Think now....did you even go to the theatre, or did you only IMAGINE you did? Get help, Beaks. Get help now.
-
If you could let us know a bit more about yourself, it would clear some things up: Top 5 Comedies Top 5 SciFi Films Top 5 Action Films Top 5 Dramas Favorite TV Show of All Time If you could please respond to this post with those lists, it would help us out tremendously. Many thanks,Adrian
-
Saw it last night and thought it pretty funny, but it definitely felt like it didn't go far enough, and left you grateful for the laughs, but also sort of mourning what it might have been. McConaughey was pretty good, too. A good, compromised movie, and this was the review it deserved.
-
now we're confused...
-
No. You would definitely be wrong in labeling him a satirist. A moralist, yes, but not a satirist.
-
Damn You Michael Bay
-
You are a fine writer....one the best on the site. I'm glad you realized you didn't fit in with those cunts at Chud. Fuck them....and fuck Ben Stiller. Tropic Thunder looks like shit.
-
He doesn't think his novels are satire. He never set out to write satire. He just is satire, unintentionally so. But to credit him for it like he's some sort of modern day Swift is probably the ultimate in unintentional hilarity.
-
What the fuck does this review mean? Did you like it or what? This is like one of those cryptic Moriarty reviews where he doesn't wanna really bash a film Harry loves, even though he himself despises it. What gives? Come out and straight up say fuck this bullshit.....
-
Um. Mr. Beaks, did you enjoy it?
-
Sounds like you wanted a movie that shoves its message down your throat repeatedly. I prefer Stiller's version, thanks. And I don't think he despises the industry as much as you seem convinced he does. Tropic Thunder simply celebrates the ridiculous side of Hollywood.
-
Thumbs up? Thumbs Down? Thumbs Up? Thumbs Turn Around. We're doing the F L A P. DOIN THE FLAP.
-
for not being rated R. You wanted a different movie, Beaks. You forgot to review this one.
-
He liked it, but with qualifications. There were ways the movie constrained itself that made it less than wholly satisfying, but it still had a good amount of laughs and a couple excellent performances. Christ, go read Harry babble incoherently about something if you can't tell what this means. Beaks is trying to raise the godamned standards of discourse in these reviews.
-
It's an ambivalent review of an ambivalent film. I laughed a lot. I'd definitely recommend it to people who aren't burned out on this kind of thing. But it feels like a compromise to me.
-
whooosh!!!
-
I understand. But seriously dude....I enjoy your reviews. You are a welcome addition.
-
Five Favorites from each genre off the top of my head (in other words, far from authoritative or "the best" - and I'm being imprecise since you limited me to four):Drama 1. TOKYO STORY, 2. CASABLANCA, 3. CLAIRE'S KNEE, 4. ONLY ANGELS HAVE WINGS, 5. BARRY LYNDONComedy: 1. TO BE OR NOT TO BE, 2. HIS GIRL FRIDAY, 3. BROADCAST NEWS, 4. TOP SECRET, 5. DR. STRANGELOVESci-Fi 1. 2001, 2, BLADE RUNNER, 3. METROPOLIS, 4. John Carpenter's THE THING, 5. FORBIDDEN PLANETAction/Adventure 1. JAWS, 2. DIE HARD, 3. NORTH BY NORTHWEST, 4. RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, 5. THE GREAT ESCAPEFavorite TV Show of All-Time: THE WIRE.
-
Aug 14, 2008 4:52:13 PM CDT
I'm giving my money to Mummy 3 this weekend....
by dannyglovers_dickblood
...and sneaking into Clone Wars. Fuck Ben Stiller....
-
I agree with you & Laserhead up there. McConaughey deserves some props as well.
-
But once he entered Cruise's orbit, he sort of disappeared.
-
Aug 14, 2008 4:59:07 PM CDT
more important news-- Harry Potter pushed to 2009!!
by dannyglovers_dickblood
FUCK THIS!
-
To compare TT, a broad Stiller comedy, to The Player, one of Altman's masterworks. The amount of money Stiller had to spend on his film left him beholden to the studio to at least make the money back. Altman had no ties and could do what he liked. But that's probably the point of your review so hey, mostly I agree with you.
-
If you give money to The Mummy 3 you need a swift kick in the nuts, twice.
-
Downey Jr's line where he says his piss smells like bologna may be the funniest line of any film this year.
-
Broadcast News > Network, really??
-
"Former" and "latter" apply only to pairs, duos, twosies! If you have three or more items, the last among them is referred to as the LAST! Christ, I must have seen this mistake three times this week on AICN alone - in the reviews!
Thanks for the review, otherwise, Beaks. I enjoyed it. -
Please, please don't listen to Beaks this time; it's a really funny movie, even Beaks laughed a lot, right? What kind of review is so snarky that you have to admit that you laughed a lot in the talkbacks? Something behind the scenes, someone who didn't want to talk to you, I suspect?
Funniest so far this year. -
At least give the money to Dark Knight (again)!
-
I have not seen the movie, so I do not know if it is good or bad, but you have to review the movie you are watching for what it is, not what you want it to be. I am not saying TT is a piece of art, but critical reviews should follow art and literary criticism. You do not harshly critique a Van Gogh because it is not a Monet. You critique it for what it is.
-
But I laughed my ass of watching this film. I went to see this film solely to see what Downey Jr would do in blackface, and ended up loving the whole thing.
-
As much as I loved Dark Knight...its made its money. I want to see some future Mummy films that aren't mummies...I like the idea of them taking on other cryptozoology creatures.
-
Aug 14, 2008 5:48:02 PM CDT
frongbak -- yeah piss smelling like bologna is just hilarious...
by dannyglovers_dickblood
I'm rolling around on the floor cause its so fucking funny. Thats about as funny as Seth's line that the barrel of the gun smells like tapioca pudding. Gosh darn what a good time that was!!
-
Is clearly an analytical review. There hasn't been an analytical review to this point on Tropic Thunder, so where is the issue? I don't feel Stiller had to go into the territory that Beaks described as being a fuller, more cutting satire, but it's still interesting to read a good dissection of the film.
I liken it to a mechanic breaking down a vehicle and describing it critically, piece by piece, to some students. I for one appreciated a review with a difference to the others.
One question though Beaks, with all the hallmarks of success here, do you believe this movie is going to milk itself dry in sequel territory, or do you feel Stiller will be too proud of this piece? Could this movie be more cuttingly satirical with the confidence Stiller would have for a sequel?
Ok, a couple of questions then. -
Did i just read a Village Voice movie review on Aint it cool? I'm confused.
-
It's a lazy mistake, and one I make all the time. Thanks for catching it.
-
I don't know what you're smoking where you think that Ben Stiller (a child of show biz parents), who has made a long career of working for the Hollywood system, could, should, or have even wanted to make a $70 million flip-off of Hollywood that would've died a horrible box office death; but you should consider stopping before you fatally bleed after cutting off all the "worms" you hallucinate are coming out of your arms.
That you believed that $70 million in studio money should be burned for your self-indulgent film nerd jackoff fantasy indicates you have no use for reality. While you at least admit that it would've be career suicide for Stiller, you sound disappointed that he didn't come home to Christine Taylor and tell her that she may want to start looking for a big refrigerator box for them to live in because he was going to "make a movie Beaks will approve of." Idiot.
My problem with the movie is that it was tonally inconsistent. Parts were gritty-realistic (e.g. McBride, Nolte); parts were gritty-comedic (e.g. Black, Downey et al); parts were satiric (e.g. Hollywood weasels); but there was too much a sense that this was "Derek Zoolander Goes to War" whenever Stiller turned the camera on himself. The whole bit with the thing he kills and his cluelessness seemed too familiar and kinda wrong for what was around it.
It's not flawless – I'd give it a 7/10 – but when it hits, it kills and, yes, Tom Cruise buys himself a ton of goodwill here (which he'll surely squander.) If Heath Ledger wasn't guaranteed an Oscar – even if he'd lived, too; it's like how Samuel L. Jackson would've won if not for Martin Landau – this could've been RD Jr.'s year for his performance here. -
Aug 14, 2008 5:57:18 PM CDT
to say a more hardcore finger to Hollywood would bomb...
by dannyglovers_dickblood
...is just ignorant. It would have done the same exact business if it were a little more edgy in its mockery. The general public doesn't give a fuck who you're making fun of....most monkeys going to see this piece of shit are just happy to get their fill of Ben Stiller.
-
Unless business picks up this weekend, there's no reason for Stiller to worry about sequels. But even if it makes, say, $150 million, it's very much a standalone movie. Perhaps they'd pull a FIERCE CREATURES and reunite for something unrelated (because that worked so well for Cleese and co.)?
-
He's got a comedy brain, but little soul. His screen presence is unappealing, compromised and (fatally) unfunny. His best work remians THE CABLE GUY, which has patches of excellence, but is cautious and restrained where it should be batshit mental.
-
Slightly funny, definitely oversold
All the best jokes are in the trailer
Stiller has interesting ideas, but is unable/unwilling to stick the knife deep when he should.
Downey's performance almost singlehandedly saves this movie.
Wait for the DVD -
Yep.Ditto Pineapple Express, but substitute Franco and McBride for Downey and Nolte as saving graces.
-
Cruise has demonstrated time after time that he’s a capable actor able to tackle diverse roles. The problem is that, over the years, he’s become increasingly strange and creepy and that reality bleeds through on interviews, making him an easy target for the media to objectify and ridicule. That isn’t to say Cruise doesn’t deserve it given how bizarre he’s acted the last few years but at the same time I’m not going to pretend that his body of work isn’t solid and I think it’s silly to deride the film for including him. Also, this review is really quite bad for two obvious reasons: 1) You basically review a movie that you wanted to see versus what was right in front of you, which pretty much makes this editorial an exercise in futility. 2) You’ve confused long, rambling prose with good writing. You literally inject a thousand dollar word into every sentence you write, even when a smaller word would have not only sufficed but would have actually read better. Good writing isn’t about shoving as many variants of words into a paragraph as possible or proving to all your readers that you have a robust vocabulary; good writing is about the flow and symmetry of words. I’m really not trying to be a dick here but that review was clunky and read like something over at CHUD and trust me, those guys, despite their pretentiousness, can’t write for shit.
-
Is it good? Did you like it?
-
So I guess if you are the kind of person who, you know, doesn't hate everything, then this will be good.
-
So you have to make compromises to have an multimillion dollar-project like this even greenlit and financed. Stars like Downey Jr., Jack Black and Tom Cruise don´t work for pennies as well, even if they can fire some jabs at the producers, management and whole industry as well. After all, they are just "hot" right now, ´cause they were happily starring in a whole lot of stupid, shitty movie for an easy to please, broad audience since quite some time, just to cash in the next best paycheck and to stay on the radar of fans and average moviegoers.
-
Aug 14, 2008 6:46:40 PM CDT
Why do people pay to see comedies at the theater?
by dannyglovers_dickblood
I'll never understand that.
-
So you expect the kind of film Stiller would never make...and it disappoints you. Odd. Why attack a film for not being what it never could be? Stiller is mainstream Hollywood...am confused as to why you expected something different ...please, review the film you're given.
-
I'm pretty sure in the movie they say retard and not tard as you quote. If the film had used that word then the bored do-gooders might have had a point. You've actually made it offensive, something the film doesn't even do.
-
I definitely got a bit of a pretentious film student vibe, but on AICN it is kind of refreshing not to see reviews -- written -- like this one -- without so many -- fucking dashes.
-
Abbreviating the term doesn't make it any more offensive.Also, I was careful to use the preferred terminology in the paragraph *not* dealing with the Downey/Stiller exchange.
-
Well, I respectfully disagree. Retard, retardation and retarded are now derogatory terms but it wasn't all that long ago that they were used by the medical profession. This doesn't make them any less offensive or inappropriate today but they were not born from hate. "Tard however has never been anything other than derogatory and offensive. I'm sure they don't use it in the movie, it's been a few weeks since I've seen it, if I'm wrong on that score then I offer an apology. Changing the word in what purports to be a quote is unacceptable behaviour for any kind of journalist, plus saying you were careful to use the preferred terminology makes you sound like you had to make a conscious effort not to use tard all over the piece.
-
Taking yourself so seriously. Fantastic. How can any movie breach your wall of pretentiousness.
-
Because they are too well written. They are written almost as an attempt to be a serious review about a not so serious movie. It's the sort of review I'd expect to see at Slate or the Village Voice or the Atlantic Monthly than something out of the Sacramento Bee. Thing is, sometimes I like to read lowbrow reviews, and especially about lowbrow movies. Was it side-spittingly funny? You'd never know it from this review. Did Mr. Beaks have a good time? You wou'dn't know it from his review. It's full of cynicism about people making satirical movies. The one thing that struck me about the review is how "tired" he thinks this all is. Any reviewer who uses "tired" to describe a movie or what it attempts to do is himself "tired". Not all movies are fresh, and I don't care how many times I hear a fart in a movie, it's funny. The review reeks of cynicism, which I loathe.I watched it last night and had a blast. There are tons of memorable lines, and this was actually one of the Stiller comedies I could tolerate. Downey, Jr. was amazing and pitch perfect. The actors were trying to do a lot of things and I think they succeeded just fine. You 'tards should go see it!
-
...this weekend's box-office needs to go to Clone Wars to ensure an Indy V and to keep Shia in the starring roles he deserves!! START THE REVOLUTION!! YES WE CAN!! YES WE CAN!! SI SE PUEDA!!! SI SE PUEDA!!!
-
...and I enjoyed it thought I did feel that it was hyped up to be something more than it really is.
Tom Cruise owns every scene that he's in. I like Tom Cruise. I think he puts out good work more often than not but I definitely understand why his career has been "faltering." The whole creepy scientology thing and his erratic behavior is something to take note of but that's not what I'm thinking about when I go to the movies.
If an actor’s off-screen behavior influenced what movies I watched then I would never watch any movies because they ALL say or do stupid things at one point or another.
Do I think Danny Glover is an extreme loony leftist/socialist piece of shit mother-fucker? Yes. I do. Is that going to stop me from watching Lethal Weapon 5 should it ever come to fruition? No. It won't.
Danny McBride. I keep hearing all this fuss about Danny McBride and how he's gonna be one of these next top comedy guys...I just don't see it. What is the big deal? "A nutless monkey" could have played his part in the movie.
It's not like Steve Coogan for example. Heard good things about the guy...and they're warranted. The dude stands out...makes things his own. He's fresh...can't say the same about McBride. Probably would've enjoyed watching Bill Hader with that role instead.
Downey Jr. is a genius in this movie. So what? Everybody is acting as if he HASN'T been one of the best actors working in Hollywood in the last twenty years. The guy brings his A game ALL the time.
I think they nailed it with the Alpa Chino role. The "rapper" image which they satirize at the beginning of the film is spot-on. It actually made me wonder...who listens to shit like this? This sounds like what you listen to when you're growing up...you know, like in that little-shit teenager stage...and then you're supposed grow up and listen to real music.
All in all, worth checking out...at least this one doesn't have an embargo on it.
-
He sued Ben Stiller over the similarities between "Zoolander" and his novel "Glamorama." They settled out of court and neither party speaks publicly about it.
-
Talk about a guy getting whalloped for a while lot of nothing...
Did I like the comments made about Brook Shields and the need for no medication - no. Did I like the all-knowing condescending attitude given to Matt Lauer concerning psychiatry - of course not. But everyone remembers Oprah and the "Couch incident" to which I say big freakin' deal!! Correct me if I'm wrong but is Tom Cruise not MARRIED happily to Katie Holmes at the moment? Did she just not have their baby? Does she not love him? Yes, yes, and yes. My point is, the guy was heads over heels in love and he got excited and for that he's "nuts." I never got that for a second. I could see holding it against him now if their relationship would have been garbage and he was a total hypocrit but I thing they're past that now. Lay off the guy already - he's a pro and he's great at what he does. -
You've missed the point - people think he's nuts because the whole couch-jumping thing, and further to that his marriage to Katie Holmes, came across as mind-bogglingly and creepily insincere. Now, that could be a total misreading of the situation, but for someone who has presumably never met either of them, you seem disturbingly confident that the reverse applies. To reiterate, people weren't ragging on him for the fact of his being in love - it was because they suspected that he actually wasn't, and that the whole thing was a weird publicity drive.
-
I totally agree with you. My point though is that you have to start believing in something when these people back it up with action. For instance, Brad Pitt was a bad guy for awhile because he broke it off with Aniston. Then it came out that he wanted kids and she didn't. Well, now he has like 12 kids. So I believe him! Trust me, I wouldn't care if the story broke in 5 minutes that the Cruise camp was split, or that Tom sliced and diced Katie with a leftover prop from The Last Samurai, all I'm saying is that acting a little goofy over a woman you're in love with isn't that big of a deal. And it's REALLY not a big deal after you see that they REALLY are in love! How long? Who knows? We should also remember that the actors and actresses we all follow are the grown up versions of the same overdramatic weirdos from Drama club in high school. How else do you expect them to act? But I understand it was a combination of things that led to the Cruise backlash.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 383 total posts 380 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 111 total posts 111 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 75 total posts 73 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 71 total posts 68 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 77 total posts 55 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 54 total posts 48 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 165 total posts 41 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 41 total posts 41 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 500 total posts 35 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 28 total posts 28 posts