Showing posts with label Fandom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Fandom. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

Star Wars: The Last Jedi


The Last Jedi is the spark that lit the fire that fueled a whole lot of internet nerd rage.  That nerd rage is why I was a little reluctant to write down my thoughts on the movie and put them someplace the entire internet can see them (Not that the entire internet reads this, but you know what I mean).

The Last Jedi is a controversial movie.  Audiences either love it or hate it, seemingly without much in the way of middle ground.  The great thing about controversy in film is it allows you to form your own opinions.  If a movie is crazy popular, you are expected to see it and like it by default.  Love it or hate it movies generate more discussion because they bring out passionate reactions.  Viewers will talk more about them because they either want to understand the opposite point of view or covert the other party to their way of seeing things.

Most people who hate The Last Jedi seem to focus primarily on the way Luke Skywalker 'Acts out of Character'.  This is fueled in part by actor Mark Hamill expressing his concern over the way Luke was written.  Fans are rallying to defend Luke's honor, and I kind of get that.  But personally I thought his character evolution made a lot of sense?  So, I don't see what the problem is?

I'll get into my thoughts on Luke's character arc a little more later on, but first here's a list of things I did and didn't like.  Spoilers to follow.


Liked - - - Paige Tico and her relationship with her sister, Rose.  The movie opens with a big space battle and a heroic sacrifice from a character we'd never met before.  Paige is somebody we've known for only 5 minutes, but her death left a bigger impact for me than all of the deaths in 'Rogue One: A Star Wars Story' combined.  I enjoyed Rogue One, by the way.  Not hating on Rogue One.  Just stating the facts as I see them.  This death gives us clear cut motivation for newcomer Rose Tico, and was brilliant use of shorthand to make us like and care about her.  Unless of course, you aren't some one who liked and cared about her.  Seriously, why do so many people hate Rose Tico?


Liked - - - Poe Dameron's story arc.  After I saw 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' I was like - 'Yeah! That was so cool! I loved all the new characters, like Rey, and Finn and...um, was there a third one? I'm not remembering anyone else...'  Poe left zero impact on me in the previous installment.  He's really given a chance to shine this time around.  We have here a subplot about recklessness vs. responsibility, consequences for our actions, and how bucking authority so we can go do our own thing isn't always the best plan of action.  I felt like this was a deconstruction of Luke and Han's carefree daring-do in the original trilogy - you know, the way they just sneak around the Deathstar and always come up with a plan of action on the spot, sending the message that 'Yeah, you can totally live your life flying by the seat of your pants. It'll all turn out okay in the end!'  But it real life you can't always fly by the seat of your pants.  And sometimes our actions have consequences.


Liked - - - C3PO.  He didn't have a huge role, but he had more than a cameo appearance this time around.  This is the first Star Wars movie in a long time where C3PO shows up on screen and I wasn't going 'Why is he even here?'  In Rogue One - and again, I like Rogue One, C3PO have the worlds most pointless, most in your face cameo that was basically 'Hey, remember these guys? Well, they're still here!' and that really really irked me.  Either give the droids something to do, or cut them out entirely.


Liked - - - Rey and Kylo Ren's force head games.  Rey and Kylo Ren spend large portions of this movie communicating long distance through the force.  These were actually my favorite parts of the story.  It felt like a psychological thriller, and how cool is a Star Wars psychological thriller?  Rhetorical question, because it's all kinds of cool.

Didn't like - - - That casino planet.  This didn't bother me as much as some people, but visually the casino on Canto Bite really looked like something out of the prequel trilogy.  It felt out of place with the aesthetics of the rest of the film.  Now you could say that this is Disney/Lucasfilm trying to put a band-aid on the prequels - throwing in the occasional visual callback to the trilogy as if to say, 'Yeah, that kind of visual COULD work in Star Wars. See? It's not such a glaring anachronism!'  As the giant tentacle slug monsters Han Solo was smuggling in 'The Force Awakens' also look like something from the prequel trilogy this seems like a plausible theory.

Didn't like - - - So...BB8 has superpowers now...?  There's a scene on Canto Bite where Finn and Rose are escaping from a prison cell, and they round a corner, and BB8 is there with a bunch of guards who have been knocked out and tied up.  A wide eyed Finn asks, 'Did you do that?'  Funny moment right?  Right.  The problem comes later where they take it a little too far - a little over the top.  If you've seen the movie you know the part I'm talking about.  It's the part where Finn and Rose are captured by the First Order when somebody driving an AT-ST walker comes to their rescue...and it is revealed that that somebody...is BB8.  BB8 stole an AT-ST.  That's really over the top and really really dumb.

As you can probably see, things I liked vastly the things I didn't so far.  And the things I don't like are pretty minor.  They might take me out of the story for a few moments, but they don't ruin my overall enjoyment of the movie.  So, without further adieu, here's my read on the Luke Skywalker story arc.


 Luke has seen a lot since 'Return of the Jedi'.  In the original trilogy he was an Idealist, and now he is rather Cynical.  Can a series of traumatic events completely change one's world view?  Can idealism be crushed?  Realistically speaking, I think it can.  'Return of the Jedi' ends with Darth Vader returning to the Light Side and the Rebel Alliance overcoming the forces of the Empire.  But history has a nasty tendency to  repeat itself.  Between trilogies Luke attempts to restore the Jedi Order.  His apprentice Ben Solo turns to the Dark Side and tears down everything Luke had built.  The First Order rises, and from Luke's point of view everything he's fought for has been in vain.  This, quite realistically in my opinion, leads to apathy and depression.
 
Luke does what Obi Wan and Yoda did before him - decide that the problems of the galaxy are too big for him to face on his own.  He goes into a self imposed exile.  When Rey finds him he's had a lot of time alone to think about just how fragile the Jedi Order is.  How fragile it has always been.  Interestingly the writers of this trilogy seem to have swapped Luke and Han Solo's views on the Force.  In 'The Force Awakens' Han Solo has a little bit of Luke's Idealism: 'I thought it was a bunch of Mumbo Jumbo. A magical power holding together good and evil - the Dark Side and the Light? Crazy thing is...It's true. The force, the Jedi...all of it. It's all true.'  Han Solo has a new found faith in the Force, whereas Luke sees the Jedi order as something that does more harm than good that is always doomed to failure.

People make a big deal out of the flashback scenes where it's revealed why Ben Solo turned to the Dark Side - Luke foresaw that he would turn and tried to kill him first.  Fans everywhere where upset that Luke would try to murder his apprentice.  Except that's not what happens.  If you were actually paying attention to the story you'll notice that Luke never tried to kill Ben.  They explicitly spell out that in a moment of weakness the thought crossed Luke's mind, but he wouldn't have gone through with it.  LUKE DIDN'T TRY TO KILL BEN SOLO PEOPLE.  But Kylo Ren thought he did.  And that's why he turned.  It's like a Greek Tragedy where knowing the outcome of the future and trying to change that outcome causes the outcome.

And the other thing people complain about is the ending.  They think Luke didn't get the wow moment he deserved. To which I have to ask - did we watch the same movie?  Luke coming back when the rebellion needs him most to face off with Kylo Ren and the armed forces of the First Order - ALONE - so they could make their getaway.  And to me at least it really doesn't matter that Luke was just a force projection.  Let me spell out why.

Reason 1: This new Force Projection was really well set up.  In those scenes with Rey and Kylo Ren we see them touch hands through the force.  At one point Kylo Ren is sopping wet because it's raining were Rey is.  And when she fires a blaster at him, he's knocked across the room.  So whats going on in the environment where the Force User is projecting to has some effect on them.  Meaning that all of those shots that were fired at Luke and that part where Kylo Ren stuck his Lightsabre through his chest?  Yeah, Luke potentially felt every blow.  Also the fact that Luke is a projection is foreshadowed really well.  He doesn't leave footprints in the salt (Kylo Ren does) and he's using a Lightsabre that we saw get broken just a few scenes earlier.


Reason 2: The final battle really reminds me of the Spaghetti western film 'A Fistful of Dollars'.  In this movie Clint Eastwood returns to town specifically to rescue a hostage.  He overcomes the villains by using his wits.  Earlier in the movie the main villain, Ramón, whilst showing off his skills with a gun boasts about always shooting a man through the heart when he kills.  So Clint Eastwood's character stuffs a bulletproof metal plate up his poncho and taunts Ramón to aim for the heart.  Our hero appears to be bulletproof and the unnerves the villains, throwing them off balance, long enough for Eastwood's character to overcome the odds of their superior numbers.  


Luke basically does the same thing, outwitting the First Order, appearing unstoppable, and stalling them long enough for the Rebel forces to escape.  What I see as a 'Fistful of Dollars' homage makes me especially happy because Star Wars has always been heavily influenced by westerns and Samurai films - 'Fistful of Dollars' is a western remake of an Akira Kurosawa Samurai film 'Yojimbo'.

Reason 3: How would fans expect and actual battle between Luke, Jedi Master, and Kylo Ren, Darksider who was Snoke's apprentice until about ten minutes ago?  You expect Luke to defeat Kylo Ren, right?  I know I would.  But Luke couldn't have defeated Kylo Ren.  Because they need a villain for the third movie in the trilogy.  And I don't think Kylo Ren is strong enough to defeated Luke.  So the only possible outcome of that hypothetical fight is a stalemate.  Kind of like that fight between Yoda and Palpatine in 'Revenge of the Sith'.  Fights that end in stalemates tend to be disappointing storytelling decisions.  Having Luke not be physically there for the fight was a brilliant way to sidestep this problem in my opinion.

'So, why did Luke just die?' is something a lot of fans are asking.  Some think he died from exertion from the force projection.  A lot of fans resent this, saying that that's like dying because of a supernatural Skype call.  I'd disagree with that statement because of the way they showed us how force projection works.  If Luke felt the effect of every one of those hits - like Kylo Ren felt the effects of Rey's blaster - I think that would totally be enough to kill somebody.

Others think he died because he was a peace.  He did what he had to do.  He saw Leia one last time, he made up for just walking away from the rebellion by returning when they needed him most, and he made (albeit one sided) piece with Kylo Ren.  He had said at the beginning of the movie that he came to the Jedi temple to die.  He just had some things he had to do first.  When those were done he gave himself up to the force, just like Yoda did in 'Return of the Jedi' because there was nothing more he could teach Luke.  It's an ending that's open for interpretation.  Personally I thought Luke fading away while looking off at the sunset as that theme from the original trilogy played (you know the one) was a beautiful moment.

I liked 'The Last Jedi.'  Personally I liked it better than 'The Force Awakens'.  If you're wondering about my current ranking of Star Wars movies it looks something like this:

1: Return of the Jedi
2: A New Hope
3: The Last Jedi
4: The Force Awakens
5: Empire Strikes Back
6: Rogue One
7: Attack of the Clones
8: Revenge of the Sith
9: The Phantom Menance

-Geekboy.

Thursday, December 21, 2017

Best Vs. Favorite: Geekboy Ranks the Star Wars Movies


So 'Star Wars: The Last Jedi' just recently came out, and audience reaction has been pretty divided.  There are those who are saying that it's the best Star Wars movie since 'Empire Strikes Back,' and those who are creating online petitions for Disney/Lucasfilm to call a mulligan and REMAKE IT, BUT DO IT RIGHT THIS TIME.  If you ask me, it's pretty ridiculous for an audience to think they have any right to demand that storytellers tell a story the way that they think it should go.  I've yet to see it, so I can't way in on the 'best ever or the worst ever' thing.  I've just been trying my best to avoid spoilers, which is hard because I apparently spend 25 hours a day on the internet, and that's the place spoilers call home.

What I can do is ask a simple question: Who ever said that 'Empire' was the best one in the first place?  And yeah, before you say "Like, Everybody? Duh?" it's a rhetorical question.  What I mean to say it that 'Best' is a OBJECTIVE term.  It's a universal truth, rather than a preference.  'Favorite' is always a better way to describe a movie, because 'Favorite' is a SUBJECTIVE term.  Odds are good that that somebody out there really really hates your favorite movie.  Therefore your favorite movie cannot be the 'best movie ever' because best is a universal truth.

Think of it like you would your favorite ice cream flavor.  Is Mint Chip the best ice cream?  As far a universal truths go, that one is pretty debatable.  Is it one of my favorites?  Yup.  And I try to apply the same logic to movies.

And before you try to tell me that 'Empire' is the best from a critical standpoint, or from as storytelling standpoint, let's take a quick look at one of the first scenes in the movie.  It's the first scene where two of the characters we'll be spending way to much time with (AKA Han and Leia) interact.  And I find this scene really painful to watch EVERY SINGLE TIME.  So Han comes back from a scout trip and informs his superior officer that he's leaving the resistance to go pay off his debt to Jabba the Hutt.  Hey, good use of foreshadowing right?  Right.

 
 The problem is that Leia clearly shown within earshot and is presumably eavesdropping.  So anyway, Han goes over to say goodbye to Leia, and she gives him the royal brush-off.  So he leaves in a huff, and the next thing you know she's chasing after him, acting shocked that he's leaving even though she clearly overheard that he was leaving, heard him give his reasons for leaving, and he basically said 'Bye Leia, I'm leaving now. Here's lookin' at you, kid.'  The way this scene is written and edited together, in my opinion, makes Leia look really really dumb.  And we know Leia's not dumb.  So, tell me again how 'Empire' is the best from a storytelling standpoint?

A lot of Star Wars fans like 'Empire' best, and that's their prerogative.  There is this mindset though, that if you don't think 'Empire' is the best, you're somehow a not a real fan.  Except, going back to my ice cream analogy, there's no such thing as a best movie.  So, is 'Empire' really your favorite, or do you just like it because somebody else said it's the best one?  Because if it's only your favorite because a lot of people say it's the best, well, quite frankly that makes you a sheep.

Here's a list of the Star Wars series in the order of my favorites.


#1: Return of the Jedi: I love a good ending to a story.  'Jedi' isn't a perfect movie by any stretch of the imagination but that doesn't stop it from being my favorite.  In any good trilogy the final installment SHOULD be the most satisfying, because we've traveled with the heroes on their journey and have watched them grow into the characters that they're supposed to be.  Lately a lot of third installments have felt like disappointing cash grabs, like Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, but in the Original Star Wars trilogy and in Indiana Jones, this rule holds true for me.  My favorite part of 'Return of the Jedi' is the way our attention is divided between the Luke's fight with Darth Vader and the Emperor, Lando Calrissian's space battle, and Han and Leia's struggle on the Moon of Endor.  We cut back and forth between these three battles, and I'm equally invested in all of them.  It's pretty intense.  And the themes of redemption and the culmination of Darth Vader's relationship with Luke is so satisfying.  'Return of the Jedi' gets top spot from me.


#2: A New Hope: Hey, it's iconic.  The movie that stated it all.  It's hard to think Star Wars without thinking of Jawas, Obi Wan mentoring a young and naive Luke, twin sunsets, Leia's cinnamon roll hairstyle...the list goes on.  A well earned #2 spot, and if I wasn't more interested in the ending of story arcs then the beginnings, it would be an easy #1.


#3: The Force Awakens: Yeah, this is hard.  As something of an original trilogy purist, I was rather disturbed when I realized I liked this movie more than 'Empire.'  I have major problems with 'Awakens,' such as 'Starkiller Base' aka, 'we're too lazy to come up with an original plot device!' but I have more fun WATCHING this movie than I do 'Empire'.  And as this is a favorites list, not a best list, how mush fun I have watching a movie is pretty important.


#4: The Empire Strikes Back: Um, I enjoy all the parts that have Luke in them?  Here's the deal: Some of the SCENES in 'Empire' are my favorite SCENES in a Star Wars movie.  The fight with the Wampa, the battle with the AT-ATs, the stuff with Yoda...and then there are all the parts that have Han and Leia in them.  At least all the parts before Cloud City.  I really cringe at most of the romantic stuff in this picture.  And we spend so much time with Han and Leia, that Luke's scenes kind of make him feel like he's a minor character in his own story.


#5: Rogue One: A Star Wars Story: This is the best Star Wars movie we didn't need.  Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed this movie.  But when it was announced it felt like Disney was just making more Star Wars to make more Star Wars.  Your getting a new Star Wars movie shoved down your throat every year for the next six years whether you want one or not.  Oh, and we just canceled Tron 3.  That movie you actually wanted to see.  Because we're too busy making more Star Wars.  What I like about Rogue One is that they made it definitively a stand alone movie.  I respect Disney/Lucasfilm for not trying to create a dozen spin-off franchises with Rogue One.  That said, part of what I likes so much about 'Force Awakens' is the way it opened up new story telling possibilities.  It makes you excited for what comes next.  Rogue One is a good movie in it's own right, but it doesn't leave you wanting more.  It's biggest strength is sort of it's biggest weakness.


#6: Attack of the Clones: ...Is not a good movie.  It's a bad movie with a good movie trying to get out.  It's my favorite of the prequel movies because of it's potential.  Every now and then I remember how much I really hate the Anakin and Padme love story, and C3PO's awful string of one-liners in the climax - "This is such a drag!" and think of the parts I like - such as the assassination plots, the web of intrigue Obi Wan is slowly unraveling, that part where Padme is trapped in a crucible that's about to fill with molten metal, the dumb fun flying car chase, the dumb fun booby trapped conveyor belt, and the dumb fun arena fight.  If you're looking for a dumb fun action movie, this might just be the Star Wars for you.  If I turn off my brain and put on Nostalgia Goggles, there are parts of 'Attack of the Clones' I really enjoy.


#7: Revenge of the Sith: ...Is a better movie than Attack of the Clones.  A better Star Wars movie too.  Too many of the parts I enjoy about 'Clones' don't really belong in a Star Wars movie - they're more like a Cyberpunk B-movie version of Minority Report.  'Revenge of the Sith' is the only movie in the prequel trilogy that feels like Star Wars.  But refer back to my 'How much fun do I have watching it?' point from 'The Force Awakens' - I find 'Attack of the Clones' much more fun to watch, even though I think 'Revenge of the Sith' is a better movie.


#8: The Phantom Menace: ...Introduced Jar Jar Binks, Midi-Chlorians, and a child actor who does his best with the material he is given.  Qui-Gon-Jinn is a good character, but his introduction as Obi Wan's mentor seemingly contradicts the original canon - Yoda is the one who trained Obi Wan.  So much of this movie is either pointless, (like pod-racing) annoying, (like Jar Jar, Anakin, the Jedi Council, and Boss Nass) or contradictory to the cannon (like Midi-Chlorians and Qui-Gon).  Phantom Menace doesn't bring enough new stuff to the table to make re-watching it ever again worth my time.  It's the only Star Wars movie I can say that about.

So, That's my list.  At least until I see 'The Last Jedi.'  And I'd have to really love it or really REALLY hate it for it to replace my top or bottom slot.

-Geekboy

Monday, November 20, 2017

Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events (2004)


 You know that feeling when you first find out that a story you really like is going to be turned into a movie?  And there's a part of you that's really excited, but another part of you remembers having seen movie adaptions of other stories that you loved, but the movie turns out to be horrible?  And so you don't know if you want to put yourself through the torment of seeing another awful adaption?

This is more or less how my siblings and I felt way back in 2004 when the 'Series Of Unfortunate Events' movie was released.  We had been going through the books together as a family.  Having started reading them when the series was in full swing (I think I started on them when Book 8: 'The Hostile Hospital' was the current release, so 2001ish) we had caught up to the current books and were eagerly awaiting the annual releases as they began ending in cliffhangers.

We had every right to be concerned.  They were squishing three books into one movie.  How were they going to handle Sunny Baudelaire, an infant who spoke only in gibberish, whose siblings could understand?  And that casting choice of Jim Carrey as Count Olaf - loved him in 'The Mask' but he's been in some real stinkers since then.

In short, we didn't see the movie right away because there was no way we thought it would work.  And by all rights it shouldn't have.  But it did.

It's not a perfect movie.  Squishing the first three books together - or rather, chopping 'The Bad Beginning' in half and inserting 'The Reptile Room' and 'The Wide Window' between the two halves, could be viewed as a mistake.  The movie is barely over an hour and a half, and it moves along at breakneck speed.  Re-watching it, I checked the time stamp and they only spend about 17 minutes on 'The Reptile Room', which is a murder mystery, and they kind of skip over the solution of the murder.  I haven't seen the new Netflix adaption of the books but as they spend two episodes per book the stories probably have more time to breathe.

As an adaption though, it is true to the spirit of the books.  The story is framed with narration from Lemony Snicket, chronicler of the many misfortunes that have befallen the Baudelaires and writer of the books.  He's every bit the character in the movie that he is in the books - a mysterious shadowy figure who's face is never clearly seen - who interrupts the story every now and then to apologies for just how woeful the tale is and to show off his vocabulary.  Fun fact: If I hadn't read the books when I was a kid there's a chance I wouldn't know the meaning of words like schism or penultimate.  When I saw the promotional material for the Netflix show and saw the character of Snicket front and center instead of lurking in the shadows I was horrified.  How could this show that was supposed to be more faithful to the books get wrong what the movie got so right?

The kids are handled well in the movie too.  Sunny's gibberish is translated with subtitles, and this solution works well.  I feel like they didn't give Klaus much to do - perhaps because of that aforementioned murder mystery element in 'The Reptile Room' that they downplayed: Klaus really shines in the climax of that book.  He does get to decode a secret message later on, (which is from the third book) so that's something.  Violet (played by Emily Browning who would go on to star in 'Suckerpunch') is like a steampunk teenage girl version of Macgyver - so I'd say they nailed her character.  It's fun to see Emily Browning in an early role and see her future promise.  She's got a very expressive face here, and so much of her character is portrayed through expressive reactions.  In the books these three are practically super-geniuses, and by relying on each other's strengths they can take on anything the world throws at them.  Some of the bits of the stories that they cut are the parts where the kids are showing off their individual talents - like a scene in 'The Wide Window' where they use a peppermint allergy to escape from a nasty situation.  There are some added scenes where they really capture this though - like the sequence where the Baudelaires are locked in a car on the railroad tracks and the train is a-coming.  They manage to escape only by using their combined talents, and this is one of my favorite sequences in the movie.

And how is Jim Carrey as Count Olaf?  He's sinister.  He's hilarious.  You love to hate him.  In short, he's just about perfect.  There may be a moment or two where he takes things a little too far - a little too Jim Carrey and not enough Count Olaf - with the silly faces and funny noises, but for the most part he's great.  And as Count Olaf is a master of disguise (well, sort of.  He'll never fool the kids, but the adults fall for it every time.)  Jim Carrey is really playing three different characters, and he makes each of them his own.  It could be argued that Count Olaf gets too much time in the spotlight, and the story is supposed to be about the Baudelaire orphans, not the villain.  But hey.  I love to see a great villain.


Things are changed around for the ending a little bit.  One thing that happens from time to time in the books is the siblings get separated and either Klaus or Violet has to pick up the slack as they are down one of the skill-sets they need to get out of a sticky situation.  The movie has that too, with Klaus tapping into Violet's talents and inventing a grappling hook to rescue Sunny.

Some of the main themes of the books are how bad things happen to good people.  That's just how the world works.  How we wish things could be are not the same as how things are.  The movie captures 'How we wish things could be' vs. 'How things really are' well in two scenes near the end.  One where Lemony Snicket says that he wishes he could end the story with 'And then they caught Count Olaf, and he was forced to endure all the hardships that he inflicted on the Orphans.'  We get a hilarious montage of Count Olaf getting run over by a train and attacked by carnivorous leeches.  And then we learn that in actuality he escaped justice and would be back once again to torment the Baudelaires.  The other is where the Orphans visit their childhood home (which had burned down in the beginning of the story) and see it as they wish to see it - in it's former glory - as the camera pans over it and the beauty fades to ashes before their eyes.  It's a beautiful and sad scene.

I'd be shirking my duties as an amateur film discussing person if I failed to mention that this movie is really gorgeous.  Seriously, it's just really nice to look at.  It's got a quirky Gothic/German Expressionistic/Steampunk type feel to it.  A bit like a Tim Burton movie, but it's not just copying Burton, it's doing it's own thing.  It doesn't quite capture the feel of Brett Helquist's illustrations from the books, but it knows what aesthetic it's going for and stays true to that aesthetic.  It's a good movie to pop in of you're in need of some creative inspiration.

The themes of family sticking together and relying on each other to get through hard times are really strong in this movie.  As a fan of the books, I don't mind that they changed things around a little bit.  They captured the spirit of the books but they weren't afraid to be their own thing.  I think I'd miss all of the scenes they added if they weren't there.  And honestly, if this were an adaption that were 100% faithful to the source material, what would the point be of making an adaption?  If a movie is identical to the book, you may as well just read the book.  This captures the feel of the books and brings something new to the table as well.

Good movie.  Check it out.

-Geekboy.

Thursday, November 9, 2017

Geekboy's Movie Poster Collection: Part 1


So I just spent the last two weeks doing a massive remodel of my bedroom.  Throwing Spackle around, repainting, building new shelves, tearing out old carpet, and rearranging my furniture.  I decided I wanted some new wall art to go with the new paint job.  I'd found a dealer on Ebay who specializes in the reproduction of vintage posters at reasonable prices, and I'd been drooling over them for a while.  I finally took the plunge and purchased some of my favorites.

First up we have the 1941 Republic serial 'Jungle Girl'.  If you know me you know that this is my all time favorite serial, so picking up this one was an obvious move.


As this dealer also had the 1942 follow up, 'Perils of Nyoka,' I bought it as well so I'd have a complete set.


Third we have 1949's 'King of the Rocketmen'.  This is the first of four Republic serials to feature the Rocketman suit - the others being 'Radar men from the Moon' (1952) 'Zombies of the Stratosphere' (1952) and 'Commando Cody: Sky Marshal of the Universe' (1953).  Each of the Rocketman serials uses a significant amount of stock footage from the previous installments, so watching them back to back can get pretty redundant.


Fun fact: The Rocketman serials are the primary source of inspiration for Dave Steven's comicbook hero 'The Rocketeer'.


George Lucas also named one of the Clone Troopers from Star Wars 'Commander Cody' as a tribute to the character from 'Radar Men' and 'Sky Marshal'.


And finally we have the 1968 science fiction film 'The Green Slime'.  This is kind of the odd one out in a collection for Cliffhanger Serial posters, but it's an awesome poster and I wanted it, okay?


It may be an awesome poster, but the movie that goes with it is slightly less awesome.  It does have a rocking theme song though - give a listen here:

 -Geekboy.

Monday, August 8, 2016

Thoughts on: Suckerpunch




I know I've talked about Zack Snyder's 2011 film 'Suckerpunch' a few times before on this blog.  But since it's a movie that I can't seem to shut up about, maybe it's time I wrote down all of my thoughts on it.

*DISCLAIMER* This movie features a lot of adult themes that I'm not going to shy away from.  At the end of the day it's basically a story about sex, sexual abuse, and sex in the media and I don't plan to just ignore that elephant in the room.  The theatrical release may be rated PG13, but this story is clearly intended for mature audiences and I cannot in good conscious recommend seeing it if you are under the age of 18.  Also, I'll be getting into spoilerville in this post.

Like all Zack Snyder's films, this one is rather divisive.  Everyone tends to either love or hate it.  I knew this was a love it or hate it type deal going in.  I also knew the basic plot synopsis going in, so I didn't really find jumping between parallel worlds confusing and knew about the twist of a downer ending going in.  And I still didn't know what to make of it the first time.  Did I love it?  Did I hate it?  I honestly couldn't tell.  It was an exhausting and emotionally draining movie to watch.  But I had a sort of sick fascination with it and couldn't wait to see it again.  What did that say about me?  Was I a weirdo for 'enjoying' what may just be a horrible movie?

So I watched it again.  And again a year or so later.  After the third time I made up my mind.  Suckerpunch was a work of art.  It transcended storytelling and became something greater.  It was a bit of a guilty pleasure for me though.  I was a little afraid to tell people about the movie, thinking they might watch it, hate it, and think I was weird for liking it.  So I had to hedge a little bit.  "I just love this movie.  But you'd probably hate it.  Don't see it.  And if you do and don't hate it outright, make sure you watch it more than once."  That's right guys.  The ol' Geekboy suffers from major self esteem issues when it comes to what he likes.


Suckerpunch is all about repeated and parallel themes shown to us in three different realities.  In the 'real world' our nameless protagonist is having the worst day ever.  Her mother has just died, her evil stepfather is sexually abusing her and her younger sister, and she accidentally shoots and kills her sister in an attempt to protect her from the stepfather.  The stepfather takes heh- 'steps' to cover up what he's been doing.  He has our heroine committed to the local sanitarium.  Once there he bribes an orderly, who we'll come to know as 'Blue,' to forge an order to have our heroine lobotomized so she'll be an unreliable witness.  He's effectively covering his tracks, and up until the end of the story we're led to believe he might just get away with it.

Pause the review for just a second: One of the things I like about Suckerpunch is how it can correct my perspective when I'm having a bad day.  "You think you have it rough Geekboy?  What you're going through is nothing compared to the main characters in Suckerpunch!"

Now, we're about to jump to the second world.  Are you ready?  3, 2, 1, JUMP!  Okay.  We're now in a dance hall.  The inmates of the asylum are now dancing girls, the staff of the asylum are sleazy mobsters who 'own' the girls.  The inmates are given 'names' in this reality.  Bond Girl style stage names such as Babydoll, Sweetpea, Rocket, Blondie, and Amber.  Also, our heroine, Babydoll, gets her first line of spoken dialog in this reality.  Interestingly enough, she's more 'real' in this imaginary world than she is in the 'real' world.


We are introduced to Sweatpea, 'the star of the show' and a bit of a diva.  She resents everything about Babydoll.  Sweatpea would be completely unlikable if not for her relationship with her younger sister Rocket.  Rocket is a dreamer, a little flighty, and a little naive.  She forms a bond with Babydoll early on.  It's revealed later that Rocket was a runaway, and that Sweetpea followed her in order to protect her.

Babydoll rescues Rocket from an abusive cook in a scene that parallels the abuse scene at the beginning of the movie.  This starts a sisterly relationship that is key to the entire rest of the movie.

Babydoll is ordered to 'dance' by Madame Gorski (Dr. Gorski in the 'real' world).  Gorski delivers some pretty inspirational dialog in this scene.  "You have all the weapons you need.  Now fight!"  This phrase is repeated throughout the movie.  So Babydoll 'dances' and we enter the THIRD reality.  This is a visually spectacular fantasy, science fiction, steam/dieselpunk world.  Our first glimpse of this world is a Japanese Temple/Dojo.


Babydoll meets a wise old man who tells her how to find freedom.  He gives her a list of items she needs to acquire in the 'real' world.  A map of the asylum, a way to start a fire and open the automatic doors, a knife, a key, and a fifth thing 'a great sacrifice'.  The old man takes on a mentor role, and in some ways he actually parallels Madam Gorski.  After fighting some awesome mecha samurai Babydoll returns to the dance hall reality.


Blue and all of the other mobsters are entranced by the dance.  Sweetpea, being the diva that she is, feels threatened by this and resents Babydoll even more.  Babydoll reveals that she has a plan to escape the asylum/dance hall.  Rocket and Amber are enthusiastic, Blondie is reluctant, and Sweetpea downright refuses to help.  It's not until Rocket reveals to Sweetpea how Babydoll protected her that Sweetpea will even listen to the plan.

The plan is pretty simple: Babydoll will 'dance' to distract the mobsters, and the other girls will steal what they need to escape.  Each time Babydoll 'dances' we switch to another fantasy world.  The first fantasy was a Dojo, and each fantasy that follows is a war-zone.  The first dance was practice, and all the ones that follow, Babydoll is fighting for freedom.  In the war-zone reality the stage names take on a new meaning.  What had been Bond Girl names now become feminine army nicknames.  Also, each girl who is stealing the object while Babydoll is 'dancing' faces a special peril in the war-zone reality.  In the first war-zone Sweetpea is surrounded by zombies while she's getting the map in real life.  Amber is attacked by Orcs while she's stealing the cigarette lighter in real life.

Also, the first war-zone has another parallel to the attempted rape scenes earlier in the movie.  Rocket is separated from the rest of the group and completely surrounded by zombies.  Sweetpea goes completely berserk, mowing down zombies with her machine gun to save her sister.  Sweetpea steps into Babydoll's shoes as Rocket's rescuer in this scene.


Unfortunately their actions don't go unnoticed.  Blue is suspicious, and after he confronts our heroines, Sweetpea and Blondie are scared off.  Babydoll, Rocket, and Amber decide to go through with the plan.  Blondie spills her guts to Madam Gorski, and Blue overhears them.  Sweetpea changes her mind about helping.  "Somebody has to make sure you don't get yourself killed," She tells Rocket.  Ouch.  If you've seen the movie already you'll appreciate the tragic irony of that bit of dialog.

This time things go wrong.  A short in the radio's wire causes the music to stop, breaking the spell of Babydoll's dance.  The cook whom they are stealing the knife from realizes what's going on tries to stab Sweetpea, but Rocket jumps between her sister and the knife.  This parallels not only the death of Babydoll's sister, but Babydoll's sacrifice that is still to come.


Rocket is pretty much my favorite part of this movie.  She's the catalyst that makes the story work.  She represents everything that Babydoll is fighting for, everything that she's lost, and everything that she will ultimately be willing to give up.  And she brings the main characters together.  Rocket, Babydoll, and Sweetpea form a sort of Freudian trio.  Rocket, with her naivety, idealism, and knack for getting herself into trouble is an Id.  Sweetpea, with her caution, protective nature and cynical realism is the Superego.  And Babydoll is the Ego who moderates between the two and actually get things done.

So.  Everything has fallen apart at this point in the story.  Rocket is dead, Sweatpea is a hysterical mess, Amber and Blondie are murdered by Blue, and then Blue tries to rape Babydoll.  Here we have another parallel to the attempted rape in the beginning.  Only this is the first time that the victim fights back.  In a fulfillment of those arc words "You have all the weapons you need!" Babydoll reaches for the knife they stole, stabs Blue in the shoulder, and steals the key around his neck.  After everything she's been through already in this story this is so satisfying.

Babydoll rescues Sweetpea, and the two decide to escape.  They start a fire to open the automatic doors, and use the map and key to find the exit.  Even though they're still dressed like dancing girls, the building they're escaping from looks much more like the asylum then the dance hall.  When they reach the gate they discover it's heavily guarded.  Babydoll remembers what the old man said.  A fifth thing is needed: a sacrifice.  She distracts the guards so Sweetpea can escape.  After all, Sweetpea is the only one with a family to go home to.


And now we come to the twist ending.  After everything she's gone through to escape, Babydoll is lobotomized after all.  You as an audience are left to believe that there's no hope for her at this point.  But Dr. Gorski and the Lobotomy doctor realize that something is wrong.  They discover that it was Blue who forged Dr. Gorski's signature, and the police arrive to arrest him just as he's about to abuse Babydoll one last time.  Blue spills his guts to the police about Babydoll's stepfather.  We are left knowing that justice will be done, and the wrongdoers will be punished appropriately.  This wouldn't have happened if Babydoll hadn't allowed herself to be lobotomized.

Sweetpea is shown at the bus stop.  She is stopped by the police just as she's about to board the bus.  She is saved by the bus driver, who is the same old man who kept appearing in the fantasy world.  This calls everything into question.  What exactly was real in this movie?  Everything?  Nothing?  Does the old man represent some higher power?  A guardian angel?  That seems the most likely answer given Sweetpea's opening narration: "Everyone has an angel.  A guardian who watches over us.  We can't now what form they'll take.  One day an old man, the next day a little girl.  But don't let appearances fool you, they can be a fierce as any dragon."

Now I mentioned at the beginning of this post that this movie is about sexual abuse and sex in the media.  Zack Snyder has gone on record to say that he was trying to make a statement about how women are portrayed in popular culture.  And what he does in this movie is compare sexual abuse, prostitution, and sex in the media.  He's basically saying that THEY ARE ALL BAD THINGS.  I don't know what Zack Snyder's religious beliefs are, if any, but this reminds me of the Bible verse: "But I tell you, any man who looks at a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart." Matthew 5:28.  A lot of people who don't like this movie completely misinterpreted Snyder's intentions and call the movie sexist.  So how effective this movie is in conveying it's intended message is debatable.  Frankly the family friendly sci fi comedy Galaxy Quest does a better job conveying the same idea with 2 seconds of humorous dialog from Sigourney Weaver's character.

I called Suckerpunch a work of art at the beginning of this post.  Here's why I think that is.  Zack Snyder doesn't give us the ending we expect or want.  A happy ending in which everyone escapes would have compromised the story.  He gives us the ending that fits the story even though it may upset the audience.

Also the story is so ambiguous as to what is real, and if everything we're shown happened or if it happened the way we were shown.  This has led to countless fan theories.  Is Babydoll real?  Or is she a figment of Sweetpea's imagination?  Did Rocket really die?  Did she die before the story started?  Is she actually the ghost of Babydoll's sister?

This ambiguity is another part of why some people hate Suckerpunch.  They find it confusing.  But it doesn't really matter what happened.  50% of art is what the artist brings to the table.  The other 50% is audience interpretation.  So any and all interpretations are valid.

Love or hate Suckerpunch, it will force you to think.  And if you don't get anything more out of the story than gorgeous Zack Snyder visuals, that's fine.  But you could get more out of it than that.  And you may find something new each time you watch it.  Suckerpunch is one of my all time favorite movies.  That might make me a weirdo.  But I'm okay with that.

-Geekboy.

Wednesday, July 20, 2016

Thoughts On: Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom


"Hey Geekboy!"  You say.  "If you're doing the Indiana Jones movies, shouldn't you start with 'Raiders of the Lost Ark?  Hmm?  The first movie in the franchise?  Hmm?"

Firstly, 'Temple of Doom' is the first one I saw - from start to finish anyway.  I saw part of 'Raiders' on TV when I was 4 or 5, but Mum and Dad thought it was too adult for me and changed the channel.  And rightly so.  I would go on to see 'Temple of Doom' at age 12 during my obsession with the Orient Expedition Lego comics and games.  Johnny Thunder is more or less an Australian version of Dr. Jones so he was the proper stepping stone to the movies.

Secondly, the title card tells us 'Temple of Doom' takes place in 1935, one year before 'Raiders of the Lost Ark'.  Yep, technically speaking 'Temple of Doom' is a prequel.

Oh yeah.  Spoilers I guess, if you haven't seen 'Temple of Doom', but you probably have.

George Lucas and Steven Spielberg wanted to get down to the nitty gritty of what made Indiana tick in this movie.  This version of Indiana was supposed to start at a place of 'If I can't have the Ark of the Covenant, nobody can!' and would have blown it sky high rather then let the Nazis have it.  He's just out for Fortune and Glory.  Over the course of the story he is supposed to grow into the more respectable archeologist from 'Raiders'.

There's a bit of a disconnect though, because young Indiana in 'Last Crusade' starts off as a literal boy-scout.  How do you go from "That belongs in a Museum!" to "Some say Dr. Jones is more Grave Robber than Archeologist..."  I suppose you could say the Indiana could have become disgruntled and bitter after losing the Cross of Coronado ("You lost today kid, but you don't have to like it.") and turned to the archeologist Dark Side.

In some ways 'Temple of Doom' gives us the most selfless version of Indiana.  Ironic, because they were trying to make him at his most roguish.  This Indiana is the father figure to Short Round, a young orphan boy who tried to rob him, and the protector of a woman he just met.  True, he more or less kidnapped Willie in the beginning for selfish reasons, but hey, she had the antidote when he was dying.  You'd do the same.


Then he comes to an impoverished village in need of a champion of justice while he's just passing through, and decides to help only after he hears about all of the children in the village who had been carried away as slaves.  Because he's just in it for the fortune and glory.  Right Indiana.

In all of the other movies his motivation revolves around a personal interest in how the adventure turns out.  True, he's recruited by the government in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' but the possibility of seeing his Ex girlfriend Marion Ravenwood again is a definite perk.  In 'The Last Crusade' he has no interest in finding the Holy Grail until he finds out that his estranged Father disappeared looking for it.  And then in 'Kingdom of the Crystal Skull' - yes I do consider 'Crystal Skull' cannon, I like that movie! - He's trying to protect his reputation when he's accused of being a Communist sympathizer.

All of those motives make sense.  It's not actually selfish to look out for people you care about or protect your reputation - I remember my Grandma saying that sometimes all you have is your good name.  But to try and help people you've just met?  That's an undeniably selfLESS act.  'Temple of Doom' plays out like an episode of 'The Lone Ranger!'  The Lone Ranger and Tonto ride into a new town, see that it's run by a corrupt mayor, or held hostage by a gang of outlaws, then they save the day and ride off with a "High Ho Silver!" leaving the good townsfolk to ask "Who was that masked man anyway?"

When they reach the titular temple of doom Indiana has an opportunity to grab the Sankara stones and scram.  He doesn't because he hears one of the slave children crying out in anguish.  Indiana investigates, and impulsively throws a rock at the Thugee guard whipping the boy.  Because this selfish rouge sticks up for the little guy.  This act - selfless though it may be - causes Indiana and the gang to be captured by the cultists.  Yep, our hero helps those in need regardless of the consequences.  That greedy selfish nature his character has is really shining through.  Indiana is forced to drink a potion that makes him an evil zombie cultist.  Short Round is forced to work in the mines with the other slaves.  And Willie?  She's about to be scarified to Kali.  Time out from the review for a second.


In the part where Indy and Short Round are rescuing Willie from the sacrifice Spielberg does something Spielberg does so well.  He has an action scene that is really intense and really funny.  Willie is being lowered into a flaming pit.  Our heroes come along, stop that bad guy lowering the cage, and start to pull her back up.  More bad guys attack Indiana, and the cage starts lowering again.  Repeat.  Several times.  And it's hilarious.

Spielberg does something similar in 'The Adventures of Tintin' with the sword-fight between Sir Francis Haddock and Red Rackham.  Haddock is trying to blow up the ship and all of the pirates on it.  He sets a really long fuse leading to all the ship's gunpowder.  Rackham discovers him and they get into a big swashbuckling fight.  Red Rackham stomps on the fuse.  Haddock finds a way to re-light it -breaking a lantern or something -  and they keep fighting.  They go through this several times, and each time Haddock re-lights the fuse you laugh as your heart rate increases.

So they have a big fight, free all the slaves, and then try to escape in the big mine car chase.  I think the movie actually has a bit of action fatigue by this point.  There's that part with the flooded tunnel that Lucas and Spielburg borrowed from the 1941 serial 'Jungle Girl' and then more fighting once they escape the tunnels.  There's a hilarious call back to 'Raiders' where Indiana is confronted by two swordsmen and reaches for his gun.  BUT HIS HOLSTER IS EMPTY.  He lost his trusty revolver in that car chase all the way back in the beginning of the movie.  We get a little bit of a taste of that planned sword-fight that they cut from 'Raiders'.

Then we have the famous bridge sequence.  Even though lots of jungle movies and serials from back in the day - 'Gunga Din' and 'Perils of Nyoka' come to mind - have a collapsing suspension bridge, if you try to do one now everybody will point and say "Temple of Doom! They got that from Temple of Doom!"

Here we have a scene that mirrors the ultimatum from 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' where Indy threatens to blow up the Ark of the Covenant and Rene Belloq calls his bluff.  Indiana first threatens to drop the stones into the river were they'll be lost again.  When his bluff is called by Mola Ram, he changes his approach.  Now he threatens to cut the bridge and take as many of the cultists with him as he can.  Big fight, he cuts the bridge, and he and Mola Ram fight over the Sankara stones.  Two are lost, but he manages to save the third for the villagers.


At this point in  the story Willie finally calls him out for pretending he isn't being selfless.  "So much for your Fortune and Glory!"

Wait a minute. Wait a minute. WAIT! A!! MINUTE!!!

I only just realized something after years of watching and re-watching this movie.  In the opening Indiana threatens to kill Willie unless Lao Che will give him a valuable diamond.  This is a reflection of the bridge scene but FLIPPED!  On the bridge Indy is bargaining with Mola Ram to let Willie and Short Round or he'll drop the stones into the river.  In the first scenario it's a life for the diamond, in the second it's the Sankara stones for a life.  I can't believe I never noticed that parallel.  So this movie DOES show us a good bit of character growth after all.

So there you have it.  'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom'.  A movie that shows us Indiana Jones at his worst and may just give us Indiana Jones at his best.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Perils of Nyoka (Fan Art)

It's been awhile since I've done any Fan Art (and all the old artwork I posted on this blog makes me cringe now). Since my blog description includes Fan Art I decided it was high time I did some.

Here's a digital drawing I made of Nyoka Gordon, the evil Queen Vultura, and Satan the Gorilla from the 1942 cliffhanger serial "Perils of Nyoka" aka "Nyoka and the Tigermen."


































You can expect a review of Perils of Nyoka sometime in the near future.  It the meantime, if you have any Fan Art Requests, leave them in the comments!