Theatrical Review of Ghost Rider

---

Tools:
Send to a friend »

---

Disregard the negative hype. The latest Marvel comic-turned-movie "Ghost Rider" isn't as horrible as it's being made out to be. Granted, it never reaches the sensational heights of "Spider-Man" or "X-Men," but those are both top tier comic characters. To expect "Ghost Rider"-a decidedly C-tier character-to top them is out of the question.

Directed and written by "Daredevil" helmer Mark Steven Johnson, "Ghost Rider" stars Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze, a motorcycle stunt driver. As a teenager, he makes a deal with the Devil to save his father from cancer in exchange for his soul. Unfortunately, his father dies shortly thereafter in a stunt accident, leaving Johnny an angst ridden kid. As a grown man, Blaze continues the family profession...and is visited by the Devil. The Devil's son, Blackheart (Wes Bentley), is trying to take over his family's business and it's up to the newly transformed Ghost Rider-complete with fiery skull head-to stop him.

Okay, let's get something absolutely clear. This is a comic book thrown onto the screen. "Ghost Rider" isn't designed to be the next "The Godfather" or "American Beauty." We're supposed to have fun, be lost in the action and leave the theater feeling satisfied. And, by and large, the audience does. Perhaps a bit overstuffed and bloated, but satisfied.

Why overstuffed? Although the story is thin, there is a general feeling of too much happening. We have Johnny's backstory, his grown up years, trying to reconnect with an old flame, his transformation, multiple action sequences and then the grand finale. If there is one part of "Ghost Rider" which is better left not talked about, it's the love story between Cage's Blaze and Roxanne Simpson, played by Eva Mendes. Above and beyond the absurdity of the relationship (he left her alone after his father died, she coincidentally is assigned to interview him), there is no chemistry between the two actors.

Cage, wearing a laughable toupee, and Mendes, who can barely stand up straight in heels (check out their scenes in the stadium early on), aren't even compatible by comic book standards. I won't harp too much on this aspect of the film because there is source material and if it's not adhered to, the fanboys start to scream. Would it have been out of the realm of possibility to cast an actress the audience would buy as Blaze's interest? Not just someone he would want to have, but someone who would have an interest in him?

I am one of only a handful of people in the world who enjoyed "Daredevil" for what it was: a comic book movie. And, frankly, I also enjoyed "Ghost Rider" on the same principle.

Not every film out there has to shake the world or be the best thing to ever hit the screen. Sometimes, all a movie has to do is be fun. "Ghost Rider" is fun. Cheesy and a bit over the top at times, but fun. Every shot seems composed by Johnson to be part of an actual comic book. Notice, for instance, the shot near the end as Nicholas Cage's head fills the screen with a purple sky behind him in the desert. Or the sequence teased in the trailers of Ghost Rider on his motorcycle coming down the side of a glass building, flaming chain high above his head. This, above every other entry into this genre, is the definition of a comic book movie.

It's comic book-y right down to the most minute detail. The plot, thin as it is, doesn't make much sense in the context of the real world. The devil is not going to be looking for a list of damned souls (or whatever he's looking for). This isn't a revenge movie like "The Punisher;" a social commentary like "X-Men;" a meditation on growing up like "Spider-Man." It's pulp. Good pulp, but still pulp.

This is beginning to sound as though "Ghost Rider" is a bad movie. As I said before, it's not. It's actually very fun, all the way down to its questionable choice in music. The final action sequence takes place in the desert, so I wouldn't expect a score akin to "Hulk" to come blaring at me. But there is a very odd marriage of techno and western music covering the end of the film and credits. I half expected Serenity (from "Firefly") to drop out of the sky and lend a hand at any moment. Again, it's not bad; just an odd choice for a movie of this nature.

One last thing I wanted to nitpick. The visual effects for Ghost Rider himself. They're bad. Cartoon and video game-level bad. Creating a person in a computer is perhaps one of the hardest things to do because we know what people actually look like. Maybe that's the problem behind a flaming skull head. Everytime the effect is on the screen, it looks wrong. Wrong as in not refined enough, not believable enough. It may have been a good idea to keep this movie on the backburner for a while until the effects could suitably give us the title character.

Aside from all that, I find it hard to pick out what it is about "Ghost Rider" that makes me like it when nearly every other critic on the planet panned it. I was most entranced with the shot selection and framing, I think. Whether deliberate or not, what is on the screen feels like frame out of a comic book. Not just an isolated shot here or there, but the whole thing. Maybe that's where my good feelings for "Ghost Rider" come from. It doesn't pretend to be something it's not and never could be. It has fun with the premise and is two hours of eye candy.

I do question the wisdom in bringing lower level characters to the screen. This movie grossed enough in its first two weeks in release to nearly assure itself a sequel. Where does it go from here? There is no well-known villain for Ghost Rider to combat (Batman has a whole laundry list of bad guys to use) and this isn't even a character known to most people. The general populace knows who Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, the X-Men, the Fantastic Four and Spider-Man are. Ghost Rider? Probably not so much. However, based on the grosses, it seems as though "Ghost Rider 2" is an all but certain proposition. Let's just hope the creative forces behind it remember what made this film a fun experience.

"Ghost Rider," on the scale of 1 to 10, rates a 6.

---

---