Hellboy II is “Funny”

“Curmudgeonly, cantankerous, cigar-chomping Hellboy is a cross between a ’40s noir detective and a burning fireplace,” writes Variety‘s John Anderson, “but he’s also cool enough to make Hellboy II: The Golden Army the hipster’s hit of the summer. It’s certainly a more deliberately (and successfully) funny movie, thanks largely to Ron Perlman, who returns with the rest of the cast, and without whom an onscreen Hellboy would have been almost unthinkable.

“Yes, Catholic imagery has always run rampant through helmer Guillermo del Toro‘s movies, including Pan’s Labyrinth, which he made in between the two Hellboy entries, but he’s really an evangelist of fanboy excess: Given the right push by Universal, he’ll be making fantasy-horror acolytes out of the heretofore unconverted.”
“In a previous life, del Toro might have been a maker of clocks — clocks inhabited by gargoyles instead of cuckoos, and which exploded on the hour. But there’s a precision to the visual ornateness of Hellboy II that exceeds even that of its predecessor.”

  • Edward

    Del Toro but be a geek fanboy, but he’s a pretty damn good filmmaker. Pan’s Labyrinth was a masterpiece, which makes me very interest6ed in seeing Hellboy II.

  • http://ourladyofperpetualhell.blogsome.com/ longrunner

    Love the big red guy–so I can’t wait to see this. I wonder about it, though, ’cause originally GDT said that it would be more Mignolian than its predecessor but not long ago Mike Mignola said it’s more Del Torian. Don’t know what to think! Agreed, though, that without Perlman this wouldn’t even be possible. He was born to play HB.

  • Jeremy Smith

    It’s del Toro through and through, longrunner – which, no offense to the very gifted Mignola, is fine by me.

  • http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com Ray

    What a waste of Guillermo’s talents. After PAN’S LABYRINTH, this entire extravaganza feels like a step backward for him. I would really prefer it if he used his new powers on something fresh, rather than make sequels to box office hits or flops (HELLBOY and BLADE).
    Um, like THE HOBBIT. Ugh ….

  • Pelham123

    If you liked the first “Hellboy” and haven’t seen the Director’s Cut you should give it a look. The additional material, about 20 minutes I think, is not padding, but crucial character stuff all around, especially with John Hurt who is elevated from what was essentially a cameo in the theatrical release to a true supporting part. Del Toro’s commentary is fantastic as well. “The Golden Army” looks like a gas. Can’t wait.

  • Malone

    Is everybody taking crazy pills or what? I’m a lifelong film geek and loved HELLBOY (Perlman should’ve been nominated), but PAN’S LABYRINTH was a colossal, morose and undisciplined bore with the artistic priorities all out of whack. The same artistic priorities of GDT’s make HELLBOY a true delight. Pop Comic Book Films are the kind of films that GDT elevates; not a period “political” film that presents a poor girl’s beat-down by an over-the-top bad guy who stitches his face together in a awkward CGI sequence. I think GDT was more concerned with how the CGI mud looked in the tree tunnel than in any real filmmaking substance.

  • americanrat

    Pan’s Labyrinth isn’t junk, but it’s incredibly overrated. Devil’s Backbone is a much better movie.
    Hellboy doesn’t work 100 percent, but it shows us the potential del Toro has to be the next Spielberg.
    Looking forward to Hellboy 2. I suspect Hobbit will be one of the movies they remember del Toro by, despite the criticisms of people like Welles, who’s forgotten movies are supposed to entertain as much as they are to enlighten and inform.

  • frankbooth

    Better yet, no boring John Myers character in the new one. Maybe this guy is a talented actor, but he was big bore in Hellboy.
    And with all due respect, Malone, you are nutzoid.

  • dangovich

    And with all due respect, Malone, you are nutzoid.

    Seconded.

  • nemo

    Thirded. Both Hellboy and Pan’s Labyrinth are great.

  • http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com Ray

    Fourthed.
    PAN’S LABYRINTH is a masterwork.

  • http://reno-rambler.blogspot.com/ renorambler

    A friend of mine is convinced that if a film about Tom Waits ever comes about that Perlman is the obvious choice to play him. I can see that even if Perlman is probably twice as tall as Waits.
    Looking forward to HB largely because of RPs performance.

  • frankbooth

    Fifthed!
    …or is that poor form on my part?
    Reno — Waits is an actor, too. They’d make great brothers.

  • D.Z.

    Ray: Blade 2 was actually a good sequel, but I will agree that they could have gotten anyone to direct that one. Hellboy 2 seems to use more of his talent, though. As for whether comic book adaptations in general are beneath him, well, a lot of people who are under-qualified seem to get those projects, too; so it’s nice to get someone with some talent behind those adaptations every once in a while.
    Pelham: “If you liked the first “Hellboy” and haven’t seen the Director’s Cut you should give it a look. The additional material, about 20 minutes I think, is not padding, but crucial character stuff all around, especially with John Hurt who is elevated from what was essentially a cameo in the theatrical release to a true supporting part.”
    No thanks. Hellboy was already too long. The first one should have been the action film, and the second one the character development film. GDT’s just lucky that Universal needed another tent-pole film, or that really would have been it for him, career-wise. He’d be stuck in Gilliam Film Hell for the rest of his life. I also imagine he only got The Hobbit, because Raimi was sick of Spider-Man, and didn’t want to do any new tent-poles, while other directors would be too expensive. That doesn’t mean GDT hasn’t earned those projects, but few people as artsy as him ever get anything as big as LOTR. Hell, no one believed the guy who gave us “Meet the Feebles” could pull it off, either. So I just hope GDT doesn’t blow it like Pitof did on Catwoman.

  • Rothchild

    D.Z.,
    As usual, you’re out of your goddamn mind. Universal didn’t do Hellboy 2 because they needed another tentpole. They did it because they wanted to get into the GdT business. But when he went off to do The Hobbit, they got fucked. Everyone wants to be in business with him. He’s one of the top shooters and he has a vision. He gets offered every big franchise movie. He’s completely A list, in spite of his modest financial success. Pan’s is loved by the people that hire directors.
    Every studio salivates at the idea of getting him on a film they’re developing in the same way Universal was stoked to get Timur on Wanted. They want to combine a director with a vision with material that they believe is highly commercial. Guillermo would never end up in Gilliam Film Hell. You don’t know shit about shit.

  • D.Z.

    Roth: “As usual, you’re out of your goddamn mind. Universal didn’t do Hellboy 2 because they needed another tentpole. They did it because they wanted to get into the GdT business.”
    There is no GdT business. The guy only had one hit, and it was Blade 2.
    “But when he went off to do The Hobbit, they got fucked. Everyone wants to be in business with him. He’s one of the top shooters and he has a vision.”
    If shooting and vision mattered, Bay would have long been out of a job.
    “He gets offered every big franchise movie. He’s completely A list, in spite of his modest financial success. Pan’s is loved by the people that hire directors.”
    He’d been B list for quite a while, and only got up on the A list because he knew the right people. Pan’s Labyrinth isn’t the kind of movie that gets you hired, and you know it. What gets you hired is a badly shot MTV video.
    “Every studio salivates at the idea of getting him on a film they’re developing in the same way Universal was stoked to get Timur on Wanted. ”
    They got Timur to do Wanted, because he was cheap, and because he’d do anything for the dough after Fox Searchlight screwed him over on Night Watch.
    “They want to combine a director with a vision with material that they believe is highly commercial. ”
    If it was highly commercial, then they wouldn’t have picked it up in turnaround, and they’d have paid for the first one up-front. And if they cared about vision, they wouldn’t have put potentially valuable prints of classic films in a place susceptible to fire.

  • Rothchild

    You may be the dumbest person that’s ever lived.

  • Howlingman

    DZ: “And if they cared about vision, they wouldn’t have put potentially valuable prints of classic films in a place susceptible to fire.”
    Wow. Just. Wow.

  • Call me Kenneth

    I’d like to see Ron Perlman in a Will Ferrell biopic. Or vice versa.

  • Richardson

    “Pan’s Labyrinth isn’t the kind of movie that gets you hired, and you know it.”
    Yeah, Hollywood gave it a buttload of Oscars because they didn’t think it was well made.

  • mizerock

    I thought the first HB was excellent, or at least the first 2/3 was. For some reason, the ending seemed tacked on and unfulfilling – “insert fight with boss creature here, with maximum CGI”.
    The trailers for HBII remind me of the trailers for “The Chronicles of Riddick” – it’s supposed to look grand, epic, awe-inspiring, but it just leaves me cold. I hope I’m wrong. It’s not impossible but it’s rare that I get a bad vibe from a trailer and then wind up loving the full movie.

  • Thrudvangar

    I’ve been looking more forward to Hellboy II than The Dark Knight. I love both characters though.

  • D.Z.

    Richardson: “Yeah, Hollywood gave it a buttload of Oscars because they didn’t think it was well made.”
    Getting Oscars and getting hired are two different things.

  • Rothchild

    D.Z., Pan’s made ten times as much as Y Tu Mama Tambien, and he got the gig directing Harry Potter. You don’t know anything about anything. You’re a retard.

  • D.Z.

    Roth: First of all, Pan’s Labyrinth and Y Tu Mama Tambien are completely different films, with one being more accessible to audiences not normally allowed to see R-rated movies. Second of all, Cuaron directed “A Little Princess” for WB, which is probably the reason he got picked for Potter. Third, his Potter would have made money, regardless of whether or not Cuaron directed it. Fourth, his follow-up, Children of Men, bombed. So once again, if GDT had no experience in genre pictures, he wouldn’t get hired.

  • Rothchild

    A Little Princess made 10 million in ’95. He got Harry Potter in 2004. That’s 9 years later. He got the gig because everyone in town wanted to work with him after Y Tu Mama. Blade 2 made 81 million domestic and 150 worldwide. He’s also won Oscars. And he’s a genius.
    You got dropped on your head by your parents when you were a child.

  • D.Z.

    By your logic, everyone would want to work with Bertolucci; and yet he only got as mainstream as “The Last Emperor” and “Little Buddha”.

  • Rothchild

    Okay, mentally retarded person. It’s clear someone like Cuaron or GdT can apply their vision and talent to a commercial property or script. If you had them tackle an audience friendly piece of material then you’re set. Do you really think Bertolucci would direct a summer blockbuster with explosions, romance, and monsters? Do you smoke crack? Are you out of your fucking mind?

  • D.Z.

    Roth: “Do you really think Bertolucci would direct a summer blockbuster with explosions, romance, and monsters? ”
    If it’s good enough for Donner and the Wachowskis, why not him?