#((and also about what an actual remake of patho classic would look like))

[9th-nueves]

I kept thinking "hmm im not sure im liking this more than classic..." from time to time while playing Pathologic 2 but then i loaded my haruspex save where i left off in patho classic and. yeah the narrative is cooler but i dont actually enjoy playing the game that much. it's tough.

[babybluebanshee]

Movies I Watched in 2023, Worst to Best

I watched 60 movies this year. Imma tell you about them. Also spoilers throughout, obviously.

60. Cats (2019): Genuinely the worst thing I’ve ever seen, and I paid to see Meet the Spartans in theaters. Very glad I drank heavily before viewing this. Can’t tell if it was worse because I’m a fan of the musical or not. I saw this movie and everything is worse now.

59. The Taking of Deborah Logan: Actually a really sound premise that goes off the rails and not in a good way. The lady who plays Deborah deserves an Oscar. Nothing worse to me than wasted potential, and this took a legit unnerving premise and made it a standard demon plot and I’m so very tired of that. Sorry @vaultsy

58. Red String and Blood Tea: This all means something, I just know it, but damned if I know what it is. I can’t really say anything that bad about it because stop motion is an intense labor of love and this clearly took a lot of time and effort, but it just didn’t leave much more of an impression on me.

57. Freddy vs. Jason: I wanted to like this movie really bad, and there were times when I did. But the 2000s stink was positively radiating off it - the slowed down footage, the nu metal blaring everywhere, the shitty costuming, it’s everywhere. Save yourself some time and just watch one of those YouTube videos where someone scrubs the whole movie for just Freddy and Jason’s bits.

56. Ladybug and Cat Noir: The Movie: Look, my girlfriend loves Miraculous. I couldn’t care less about it, but she really wanted me to see this movie and I love her very much. At least it’s very beautiful to look at and it did what it took the tv series a billion years to do.

55. Scrooge: A Christmas Carol: I’m gonna level with you - I watched this because gilf Scrooge intrigued me. Now that we have that out of the way, I can say aside from that, there’s nothing in this movie to really set it apart. A few arbitrary changes and making Scrooge more of an intentional asshole doesn’t set it apart from the millions of other adaptations of this story.

54. From Dusk Till Dawn: The line that separates the Tarantino aspects of this movie from the Rodriguez aspects of it is about as subtle as a brick to the head, but it’s there, and honestly? I wish we would have focused more on the Rodriguez parts. Call me a plebeian, but I never have been fond of Tarantino’s style, nor am I particularly interested in his barely concealed foot fetish. Remake this as two separate movies and I’ll watch the one with the rad ass vampires.

53. Beauty and the Beast (1946): Is this a horror movie? I think this was supposed to be a horror movie. I can’t really fathom how this is supposed to be romantic when there’s creepy living statues, human arm candelabras, and the Beast stealing his romantic rival’s face when he transforms into a human man.

52. Gaslight: Can be genuinely gripping in places, but also kind of boring in a plodding way. The acting is pretty great though - Charles Boyer is an amazingly effective villain and I wanted to give poor Ingrid Bergman a hug.

51. The Bob's Burgers Movie: Kevin Kline and Zach Galifinakis need chiropractors from carrying this movie on their backs. Like, it’s fine if you’re a big fan of Bob’s Burgers (and I was on a BB jag at the time), the songs are fun, and the animation is gorgeously bouncy, but it suffers from the same thing that most movies based on tv shows do - it just feels like a longer episode of the show.

50. The Addams Family: A classic for a reason, though maybe with a bit less pathos than I was anticipating. Still fun, just not as fun as the movie that would come after it.

49. Suspiria: Pretty to look at and goddamn that soundtrack. Not a favorite, but it’s such a cerebral experience that you almost don’t mind all that much.

48. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre: Kind of suffers from the same problems as Suspiria, with the leg-up of having an absolute banger of a third act. Also Franklin is the worst. Most of the problems in this movie could have been avoided if Franklin wasn’t around. The other ones could be solved by not trespassing on private property.

47. Paprika: Also a very cerebral film, and just as fun to look at. It’s slightly too charming to ever really be boring, but it’s still just kinda meh.

46. They Live: Fun alien designs and a neat idea. Has too many dead Keith Davids to get any higher on the list.

45. Wes Craven's New Nightmare: A fun spin on a dying franchise. I will never stop laughing at Freddy’s stupid trenchcoat and emo boots tho.

44. Nightmare on Elm Street: The Dream Warriors: More horror adventure than straight horror, but still fun and inventive. Probably has some of the most creative kills in the whole franchise (Freddy leading someone around by their exposed tendons, hello). My only complaint is that the absolute bitch doctor didn't get eviscerated.

43. But I'm a Cheerleader: The gays can have a silly high school rom com. As a treat. I also appreciate the movie adding in that the bible-thumping heteros tend to sexualize kids more than any queer person on this planet.

42. Psycho Goreman: I would like to congratulate PG on his coming out. Mimi was almost too annoying to be tolerable, but this is still a really fun movie with cool creatures and a lot of great humor.

41. Howard: Hi, catch me crying in the last fifteen minutes of this movie. Howard Ashman was an amazing talent and I’m forever depressed that we lost him far, far too early.

40. Little Shop of Horrors: Yeah, this is the first time I’ve ever seen the movie version of this. Gimme a break, I like the musical ending better. That being said, this movie is great camp fun and I love how much love and care was put into it. Also that Audrey II puppet will never fail to impress me.

39. Elvira, Mistress of the Dark: I would like to personally thank Cassandra Peterson for making this stupid, sexy, campy romp that made my life infinitely better.

38: Weird: The Al Yankovic Story: RIP Weird Al Yankovic, wish you could have seen the fabulous movie they made about you before you were gunned down by the cartels.

37. Dungeons and Dragons: Honor Among Thieves: Another movie I saw at my girlfriend’s request, but I also would have wanted to see it for those motherfuckin creature effects. Jarnathan is my husband and I love him dearly.

36. The Super Mario Bros. Movie: Chris Pratt wasn’t in this movie, what are you talking about? It was just Jack Black and Charlie Day having a good time and being extra adorable. That’s all there was. There is no Crisp Rat in my wonderful Mario movie.

35. Black Swan: I’ve heard this described as “live action Perfect Blue” and…yeah. Also I could write entire essays about how Nina’s mother may or may not exist, but we’re not getting into that today.

34. The Wolf House: On a purely technical level, this is a fucking masterpiece. It’s all stop motion (which as previously mentioned is not for the faint of heart), with creative camera work that makes it look like one, long, continuous shot. Add to that the stunningly creepy atmosphere and the framing device of this being a recruiting tool for a cult, and it’s a beautiful nightmare.

33. How to Survive a Plague: Another one that made me weep like an infant. I prefer the book, but this is still a gorgeous tribute to everyone we lost and how far we’ve come.

32. The Girl With All the Gifts: A fun take on the zombie mythos. Also, I for one welcome our new Hungry overlords.

31. Basket Case: Was initially very dubious about the supposed pathos of this film, only to be pleasantly surprised by how true that is. Yes, this movie is schlocky and sleazy (could have lived a long, happy life without ever seeing the Basket Case puppet hump a corpse), but it’s still a great little B-movie.

30. Belle: I’m always a slut for a Beauty and the Beast story, and this one is just hella gorgeous. I would have preferred an extra scene of Justin getting his ass obliterated, but what we did get was wonderful.

29. Nerdy Prudes Must Die: Not my favorite Hatchetfield musical (Black Friday my beloved), but Starkid never put out anything bad. Always a pleasure to see what the Lords in Black are up to.

28. The Sea Beast: I need Grandpa Crow yesterday. Other than that, this was a fun little adventure film that gave me my dose of found family juice. And also it made me realize that there aren’t a lot of straightforward pirate movies anymore? Like, POTC really burned everyone out on those for a while, huh?

27. King Kong (2005): I’ve heard this movie called bloated and boring, but I actually think I love it? Like…maybe it’s just because I’m a monster fucker, but the companionship between Ann and Kong is so beautiful and sad and I nearly burst into tears while she was trying to comfort his as he died. Just let the goddamn gorilla ice skate, you monsters!

26. The Celluloid Closet: Had the opposite of How to Survive a Plague happen - I read the book and wasn’t nearly as moved as I was watching the people actually involved in making these films or other queer icons talking about them. Maybe it was the lack of academic language that made it so much more effective, but while the book is still great for film scholars, the movie is a must-watch for literally everyone.

25. Nimona: We need more feral female characters in general. Also I would never in all my life believe Ballister was a bad guy, simply because he has the most innocent, watery eyes I’ve ever seen that weren’t attached to a small, damp mammal.

24. Citizen Kane: Yes, it took me this long to actually watch this movie for the first time. I was dubious at first, because I’ve seen so many movies that claim to be the best thing you’ve ever seen in your life, and then fall gloriously short of your expectations. This, however, did not do that. I can see why this is a classic. And now you can all be aghast at all the movies that I liked better!

23. Sing 2: Help, I’m crying over Bono the lion dilf! Also this movie is fun and beautiful to look at and the music is amazing. I’m also a proponent of the Shitty Crime Uncle Jimmy Crystal Domestication idea.

22. The People Under the Stairs: More movies should be about the power of community action and solidarity in the face of exploitative gentrification and also blowing up your landlord’s booby-trapped torture dungeon and freeing their kidnapped cannibalistic troll children into the wild.

21. Sense and Sensibility: I’ve never cared that much about Sense and Sensibility as a book - it was strictly middle tier. This movie has changed that. I actually like Edward now, because Hugh Grant just plays him like the autistic king he was always meant to be.

20. Shiny Happy People: No, I do not care that this was a miniseries, it's too good not to include. Watching this show will make you want to deck every evangelical asshat that crosses your path and also terrified of the amount of influence they have in the USA.

19. Black Christmas: Where Chainsaw was kinda boring with a great climax, Black Christmas hits the ground running and doesn't really stop. It's scary, tense, and cinematically gorgeous.

18. Mannequinn: Yes, I liked this movie better than Citizen Kane. No one should listen to my opinion about anything. But it doesn't matter because it's dumb, campy fun and I want Hollywood Montrose to be my auntie.

17. Wishmaster: Absolute ham-to-ham combat between Andrew Divoff, Robert Englund, Tony Todd, Tom Savini. Some amazing practical effects. I wanna kiss the djinn right on the mouth. Only complaint is that I wish the sex pest friend who kept pestering Sam for a date would have stayed dead.

16. From Beyond: This movie had three of my favorite things in the world - moistened puppets, my mommy Barbara Crampton dressing up in a sexy outfit (thank you, Ms. Crampton *blows kiss*), and Jeffrey Combs being a sad, wet kitten man.

15. Renfield: I like that we're making movies about scary vampires again. It's nice. Also Nic Cage is quickly going the way of Daniel Craig and Robert Pattinson - they need to be cast as weird little guys for enrichment purposes.

14. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem: Animation? Charming and daring. Characters? I'm adopted all of them, and loving that all the turtles are actually voiced by children. Superfly? Got me feeling a way. Shredder being teased at the end? Where'd my panties go? Also this movie got me to sixty, so everyone say thank you to Shae for nice, round numbers.

13. Paris Is Burning: It's a classic of LGBT film, if you haven't watched it just to get a taste of the glorious world of drag ball culture, you need to. Stop what you're doing and watch Paris Is Burning. Now. This is a not a request. I will report you.

12. It's a Wonderful Life: I've never seen this show all the way through, so I fixed that this year, and goddamn I always forget how much I like Jimmy Stewart until I see him in another good movie. This movie also got him investigated by the House Un-American Activities Committee for communist sentiments, so all my little anarchists should watch it.

11. Return of the Living Dead: I'd like everyone to meet my husband, Tar Man. He's gonna eat your brains, you'll love it.

10. Re-Animator: I'll never get tired of watching Herbert West being a sassy little cunt to everyone around him, including his co-dependent boyfriend whom he should kiss directly on the mouth. My only complaint is the...um...scene with Dr. Hill's head and Meg. That's all I'm gonna say about it. Because it makes me extremely uncomfy and I can't even enjoy Barbara Crampton's tits because of it.

9. Bride of Re-Animator: Herbert and Dan should have just taken their beautiful daughter to live out the rest of their happy lives at the seaside. Also the effects are fucking amazing. That'll happen when your special effects guys is credited as "Screamin' Mad George".

8. Transformers: Rise of the Beasts: Catch me shrieking like a possessed baboon throughout this entire movie. Everything about it made me happy, from Bumblebee being a bamf to Ron Perlman as Optimus Primal to literally everything about Peter Cullen's Optimus. I will never be over him having enough of Scourge's shit and ripping out his spine.

7. Puss in Boots: The Last Wish: Can't talk. Too blown away by the fact Dreamworks put out one of the most visually stunning and vibrant animated films they have in decades. They are back babey.

6. Glass Onion: I cannot wait to see what else we get from Benoit Blanc. He's the blorbo from my shows and I adore him. Also you know he called up Marta after he got home and was like "hey, there's this friend of mine I want you to meet, I think you guys will get along swimmingly" while fully intending to play matchmaker.

5. Everything Everywhere All At Once: "Nothing matters so being kind and compassionate is even more important" is genuinely such a beautiful thing for a film to say, and I'm glad I finally got a chance to see it in a movie where people fight with dildos and Jamie Lee Curtis' outfit was based on a stock photo.

4. Nope: Jordan Peele owns my soul at this point.

3. To Wong Foo, Thanks For Everything! Julie Newmar: I expected Priscilla but American, and was given a really heartfelt, sweet movie and I legit forgot several times that Patrick Swayze, Wesley Snipes, and John Leguizamo were cis men.

2. Barbie: I recommend Barbie to literally everyone who asks me about it. It's my religion now. Everything about it is delightful and

1. Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse: This movie is utter perfection. I would marry it if I could.

[elizadoolittlethings]

Mark Gatiss on the Unquiet Dead

June 4, 2016

We were delighted when Mark Gatiss recently agreed to take time out of his incredibly busy schedule to look back on his very first episode of Doctor Who. Mark’s episode, The Unquiet Dead, was the third episode of Series One of the relaunched series. It caused a number of complaints about Doctor Who being too scary for children. Hurrah!

WhoSFX: What was the original brief from RTD?

Mark: Russell emailed an outline for the series. I’m sure it’s been reproduced now but what I remember best were the (sort of) remake of Spearhead from Space kicking things off, the farting aliens, Captain Jaxx (as he was then called) and that episode three was labelled ‘The name’s Dickens. Charles Dickens!’ Dickens in Cardiff, seances and gas creatures living in the walls. I crossed my fingers that that was the one he wanted me to do!

WhoSFX: Being a Victorian ghost story, surely RTD had you in mind for this one from the start?

Mark: Russell and I met at the BAFTAs in 2000 when The League of Gentlemen won. I suppose he knew where my tastes lay but, of course, when the series was announced as returning, who knew which writers would be asked? I’d just had a series (The Ministry of Time) turned down and I remember the email from Jane Tranter, saying no,  ended with ‘Perhaps Mark could write for the new Doctor Who? That would be exciting!’ So I was very hopeful.

WhoSFX: If you’d been given a blank sheet of paper would we still have had a Victorian ghost story?

Mark: The blank sheet of paper is what writers fear most. It’s almost always nicer to have a least something to go on. A bit of grit to make the (hopeful) pearl!  But I suppose I’d have gone for something in the same area, yes. I’ve always loved historical settings, Victoriana and ghost stories are my favourite things of all so I suppose it might have been similar in tone. But RTD effectively invented the ‘celebrity historical’ for Doctor Who (hardly touched before except for Marco Polo and…um…Timelash!) I was wary of the Dickens element at first but A Christmas Carol is one of my favourite stories and I fell in love with the idea of making it a Dickens story about Dickens.

WhoSFX: Was this like the story you’d had in your mind for 30 years?

Mark: I knew I wanted it to be scary. That was very important. And I remember at the first meeting I had about it with RTD, Julie and Phil I waxed lyrical about the (to me) magical idea of time travel. That’s where the footprint in the snow came from and the ‘hundred thousand sunsets’ line. I’ve always found the notion of time travel so spine-tinglingly wonderful. But was it the story I’d had in mind for 30 years? Probably not. Elements of it, certainly. But the Dickens framework that Russell gave me let me play with all the sorts of things I love best!

WhoSFX: As it was your first episode, and the first series, was this the hardest of your Doctor Who scripts to write?

Mark: I suppose so in the sense that an awful lot had to be unlearnt. It seems so natural now (as I write my ninth episode – ten if you count the un-produced one!) but the forty five minute format took some getting used to. Growing up with four and six parters and cliffhanger endings was how Doctor Who worked so that was a challenge. Also just the sheer speed of a new episode. I remember in an early draft I had the Doctor and Rose coming out of the TARDIS and then going back in again for several scenes. Russell said ‘why do they do that?” And the answer was, because that’s what used to happen! There was a lot more time to fill in the old days. I do recall thinking that what might be sacrificed for speed was suspense but it rapidly became clear that this new pace of storytelling would breathe fantastic new life into the format. And that the pre-titles would essentially be the old ‘part one’ in condensed form. There’s your cliffhanger – before the titles!

WhoSFX: Was it hard not being fully ‘in control’?

Mark: Yes it was but I believed very strongly that the reason the show might work was that Russell was doing it his way. The BBC trusted his vision and the results are obvious to this day. Doing The League of Gentlemen and now running Sherlock with Steven Moffat makes you realise the importance of a ‘vision’ for a show. There were disagreements about the tone or the odd line but it was all very friendly and I was hugely happy with the end result.  Now the show is a proven phenomenon again, it’s easy to forget what a risk it all was. But everyone was so determined to help Russell reinvent the show. It was a very heady and very exciting time.

WhoSFX:How did you balance the lighter elements with the incredibly dark themes?

Mark: Well, I suppose that’s my speciality. The League of Gentlemen always had a great deal of pathos amidst the grosser or darker elements and ‘bitter sweet’ is my favourite form in comedy and drama. I’ve always been obsessed with the paraphernalia of death and find the world of fake mediums and funeral parlours intrinsically funny! The idea of aliens ‘occupying’ corpses is very grim as is the Doctor’s insistence that it’s a viable idea. I found that very interesting to explore.

WhoSFX: Did you want it be classic ‘behind-the-sofa’ material?

Mark: Oh very much so! I went on Radio 4’s ‘PM’ after it went out as there’d been a lot of complaints. Eddie Mair asked me how I felt about terrifying the nation’s children and I said ‘I’m thrilled!’ That, to me, was always so much of Doctor Who‘s appeal. It scared the life out of me when I was a kid but in a delightful way.  Like being on a rollercoaster. ‘The Daemons’ scared the pants off me (especially Bok the gargoyle) but the Doctor’s presence reassured me.  I was over the moon about the ‘sting’ into the titles with the zombified Mrs Peace walking into the camera. Those eyes! That face! That awful groan. It was genuinely scary.

WhoSFX: Could it have been darker or were you told to rein it in a little?

Mark: I remember discussing at the tone meeting what kind of zombies they’d be and there was a consensus that we needed to err on the side of ‘family friendly’. But, as ever, Doctor Whopushes the envelope! I think the themes were sufficiently dark and I certainly had no interest in trying to push the new show into overtly horrific areas. As I say, children love to be scared but you have to aware of the parameters of the time slot, of the tone of the show, of your audience’s expectations.

WhoSFX: Were you given much guidance about budget and how ‘big’ the episode could be?

Mark: Something happened which has never happened to me before or since in TV. I was asked to spend more money!! I think with my producer’s hat on I was trying to make the episode very ‘do-able’ and the early drafts were very much confined to the house. The team then asked me to do a big ‘Victorian Cardiff’ scene to really establish the thrill of time travel and add some scale.

WhoSFX: What did you think when Christopher Eccleston was cast?

I thought it was a very exciting and interesting choice, not the obvious one at all. I’d worked with Chris on the third series of The League of Gentlemen and remember him saying ‘Thanks for asking me to do this. Everyone thinks I’m a miserable bastard!’ So I suppose I wasn’t surprised that he wanted to do something so different and outside his comfort zone. His casting also sent a very clear message that the new show meant business. I think he was a wonderful Doctor.

WhoSFX: What point in the writing process did the casting take place, and did you make any changes because of it?

Mark: I can’t actually remember. I’m pretty sure I wrote at least the first draft (it was called The Crippingwell Horror originally) without a Doctor cast, based on Russell’s thoughts on what kind of person the new man might be. After that, I do what i always do which is to try and get the actor’s speech patterns and mannerisms in my head. Chris’ ‘bluntness’ and his northernness were the immediate obvious differences as was Russell’s insistence that the new Doctor not be ‘a posh boy’!

WhoSFX: Were the Gelth part of RTD’s original brief?

Mark: I think it mentioned ‘gas monsters being drawn out of he walls by a machine’ but I’ve always had a thing about possession and ‘non-corproeal’ aliens so that’s what they became! I remember well sitting down and thinking ‘This is it. I’m naming a Doctor Who monster!’ Happily, as with Terry Nation, the name just sorted of ‘rolled off the laptop’! I wanted them to appear pathetic and rather sad but then turn when the true nature of their plan was revealed. Are there any ‘Pity the Gelth’ T shirts? There should be!

WhoSFX: Where did your inspiration come from for the creatures? Were the Gelth on screen how you envisaged them?

Mark: I wanted them to be classically ghostly in form but also (reflecting their gaseousness) sort of formless and intangible. The ‘turn’ into evil Gelth is obviously knicked from Raiders of the Lost Ark but, you know, always steal from the best! I was thrilled by the final result. I think everyone was taken aback by the slickness and impact of the FX. The one thing I remember being very specific about was that the Gelth should briefly ‘occupy’ a lion ‘s head door knocker a la Jacob Marley in A Christmas Carol.

WhoSFX: What was it like when you attended the recording of your episode?

Mark: It was a dream come true, of course. I couldn’t quite believe it was happening. And, of course, none of us knew that the show would take off like it did. That might have been the first and last new season! So I was determined to lap up every minute. It was where I first met Simon Callow (a good friend to this day) and the wonderful Alan David (whose casting was my suggestion. I’d loved him since The Squirrels!) Euros Lynn did a brilliant job and I found him an immensely sympathetic and inventive director.

Thank you Mark Gatiss.

[guy-fawkes-fox]

My Idea for a Haunted Carousel Remake

Before there was Shattered Medallion, before there was White Wolf of Endless Chores Creek, before the repetitive blandness of Trail of the Twister and Secret of the Old Clock... there was my original Nancy Drew Pet Hate: The Haunted Carousel. 

It has a lot of flaws: the main one, that it's too short; the corrollary ones, that 50% of runtime is playing awful flash games in the arcade and that there are hardly any areas to explore, many of which you really WANT to explore because they sound creepy and amazing. However, despite that, this game has a heart of gold faintly beating beneath its lamely-executed exterior. Many of the story elements are amazing; they just needed more time! The cheesy premise of the mystery is that a stolen carousel horse is causing the carousel to become haunted and somewhat animate in revenge and that things are going wrong all over the park. I love this. It gets right back to Nancy Drew's mystery roots. Yes, I enjoy when Nancy gets her hands dirty solving an Actual Crime such as murder, but originally, the source material is books for small children that follow a kind of silly Scooby Doo logic of crime. A haunted carousel is so perfectly suited to this genre. 

There are also real moments of pathos in the game coupled with a delicious magical realism, specifically, with Joy's rediscovery of her buried feelings for her mom via bizarre robot riddles therapy. Also, the tragic backstory of Joy's dad being the classic dreamer artist with 0 business sense, and don't forget about the romantically frustrated and quixotic carousel horse artist. 

So, all that, coupled with the inherently wonderful and spooky atmosphere of a haunted theme park, means there's a lot to work with here. A lot of people have suggested salvaging this game by just switching the setting to night time to make it creepier. This is a good start, but not enough. 

First, let's just take out the hotel. I am 100% for having a home base and I love generic Nancy hotels, but I think to focus the creepiness of this game, you have to contain Nancy in the park; Nancy never being able to escape creepy locations ratchets up the tension in many of the best games. 

Nancy starts the game in the theme park in the evening. It's still light out, but moodily dusky, with midway lights popping on and everything looking magical and fun. And the park is *filled* with people. (Remember I said unlimited budget? Lol.) As Nancy, you can go around and do things while the park is still open. Maybe you can go order a cotton candy and give it to Joy to get her to open up to you. Maybe you can even talk ot some of the park visitors, to get a feel for what they like about the park, or get a hint about local legends with the jewelry heist mentioned in the original game. Nancy can go around, picking up on important clues, pieces to puzzles, etc. and learning the history of the theme park by reading plaques and discussing things with the suspects. Once you've completed everything you need to do while the rides/food stands/park is still open, there is a cut scene and a major incident happens in the park (maybe the roller coaster malfunction referenced in the original game, maybe something else). No one dies, but it's scary AF, and there's people shrieking, and we have a cut where the police come and go, and it turns to solid black night with the park being empty, creepy, and closed.

Now the real creepiness begins; we have the original mystery, but with more puzzles, maybe some more sinister ways to game over than getting splinters in your eye and forgetting about your hotel iron. Also, we can take out Nancy being extremely rude and mean to a suspect for being an ex-con. Although, we can keep all of the classic Nancy probing a little too far and being tactless in general ;) The haunted house becomes a major environment, with all of the insanity the game designers put into the Labyrinth of Lies underground sets coming out and shining here. There are secret passages. There is some kind of puzzle or actual relevance to the old uses of the buildings to really let the history sink in (you know, more than "hey, this used to be a ballroom!" you could have a ballroom-dance-themed puzzle). We can keep some arcade games in, but avoid them becoming a major focus. They've managed to do it before; it's not like pachniko is overwhelming in Shadow at the Water's Edge. 

Ultimately, I think this game could be very good and very creepy, especially if you put Nancy at the scene of an incident in the park rather than just having her accidentally ask to watch a tape of a carousel silently going around a bunch of times. Setting the game at dusk and then night allows for a real sense of building tension and creepiness. Fleshing out the locations is key, allowing for the eccentric backdrop of weird characters (including Joy's dad and the Rolfe carousel designer guy) to serve as a justification for trademark weird Nancy Puzzles (of course there's a bizarre mechanism embedded in this wall that leads to a secret passage! it's ~artistic~). Oh, and make Joy older when her mom died, it would be way more psychologically compelling and tragic if her repressed memories weren't from when she was just, like, 4, when most people don't *have* many memories to begin with. And it would make her anger and destruction of her mom's photos make way more sense as a reaction. When 4 year olds destroy things, it's almost a random act of nature ;) an older Joy acting out would be way more realistic. This game has a ton of potential and anyway, that's my dream remake of it!

[smokeybrand]

High-concept Hack

I don't like Michael Bay as a film creator. I think the movies he makes are lowest common denominator and do not understand how or why he's so popular. Don't misunderstand, this isn't coming from a place of hate. I'm not a “hater” as Bay would say. I have seen almost his entire catalog, most of them in theaters where they are meant to be seen. Admittedly, I even enjoyed his first few outings. Bad Boys and The Rock hold a special place in my heart but then you have sh*t like Armageddon and Pearl Harbor. F*cking, why? I don't understand how these movies can make billions or how he can just point to that gross as proof he's “good” at his job. Being a great film maker and a successful one are two different things. It's dope to be both but, more often than not, you're one or the other. Look at Edgar Wright. None of his movies do gangbusters but I can say, without reservation, every movie he's ever made is better than anything Michael Bay has crapped out. Another great director that comes to mind is Wes Anderson. A lot of his films bomb by profit standards but they are all excellent, beautiful, pieces of art. F*cking Luc Besson is the poster child for that sh*t. His entire catalog is full of eccentric, heady, character driven films that make absolutely no money. Leon the Professional is a f*cking classic. Compare that to anything Bay has ever made and my point is clear. So why is Michael Bay such a bad filmmaker. Why does he consistently make so much money with his sh*tty films? Before I get into all of that, credit is given where it's do.

Michael Bay is very good at creating a visually dynamic scene.

Bayhem is fun to watch. I just want to put that out there. Michael Bay is very, very, good at blocking out dynamic set pieces. He makes action far more grandiose than it ever has any right to me. You can watch any of the Transformers films to see that sh*t. Those things are gorgeous. Lifeless, mindless, flaccid, gorgeous.

Michael Bay is very good at the technical aspect of film.

There's a scene in Transformers, toward the end of the movie, where a certain shot was needed that no one really knew how to do. Bay built a camera on a go-cart specifically to get this shot. That's James Cameron levels of ingenuity. He also built a rig for something in Dark of the Moon, I think, for another very specific shot. It takes an acute awareness of how a scene is framed, how to build a scene, in order to know exactly what tools are needed to capture that vision. I commend Bay for sh*t like that. You'll never hear me say his movies lack flair.

His films do make a lot of money.

Bayhem makes a ton of money. Dude is very good a staying on budget and delivering a marketable film, even is it's devoid of anything that makes a movie, a movie. Dude gets that product placement, even is it's mad heavy handed, and his corporate benefactors are always pleased. I can't be mad a t a guy that checks all of the boxes that the front office throws his way.

Okay. That's me being nice. That's me getting the things Michael Bay does well out of the way. Now, here's all the reason why I hate his movies so goddamn much.

Michael Bay is a terrible f*cking storyteller.

At it's core, film is a visual representation of storytelling. There is a world you want to create or a character you want to bring to life. That's why books are great for adaptions. That's why comic films are so popular. That's why people gravitate toward lore heavy games and literature. Final Fantasy VII Remake just dropped and it's doing gangbusters. No one bought that game because of the gameplay. Everyone bought that game because of it's place in the cultural zeitgeist. Everyone knows who Tifa, Cloud, and Sephiroth are. Everyone knows the story of Midgar, The Ancients, and Meteor. Everyone wants to experience Gaia with the current gen tech. It's gorgeous, sue, but that's a bonus. We all want to experience the story in a far more cinematic way. Every story Michael Bay has ever told, takes a backseat to the shiny baubles and ludicrous explosions that he peppers within his films. He can't tell a story for sh*t. He thinks racist and lazy stereotypes are the same thing as characterization. He thinks special effects is the same thing as plot. Dutch angles nd camera pans are replacement for witty dialogue and emotional pathos. F*ck, dude, even when he's making a movie that is already based on actual events, the narrative STILL sucks! How is that possible? Pain and Gain happened. That sh*t is documented. Why is it still bad??

Michael Bay is a sexist prick.

You see the way Megan Fox is shot in all of her Transformers appearances? That sh*t is gross, moreso, when you take into account that she is supposed to be sixteen f*cking years old in the first one. It's wild because, if you pay attention, she's the only one that has a character arc. She's actually the most capable character in that entire film and she's relegated to being sexualized eye-candy for the throngs to teenage boys to salivate over. You know how I know that's a thing? Because, in Dark of the moon, the character of Carly was supposed to be Mikaela before Fox got fired. When you frame everything Carly did in the movie through that lens, it makes sense. Sticking Rosie Huntington-Whitely in there, and shooting her like a porn star, seems like maybe Fox was right to quit over her perceived disrespect. I mean, the first shot of Carly a POV, following her throughout her apartment, right up against her pants-less ass. Why?? and don't get me started on that chick from Age of Extinction. That whole situation is the grossest sh*t ever.

Dude is mad lazy with product integration.

When By first started making films, it was hard to see all the product placement riddled throughout. I was watching The Rock a few days ago and completely zoned out with all of the brands onscreen. Fast forward to Age of Extinction and we have entire shots of Bud Lite all over the ground for minutes at a time. F*cking why? What is the point of that other than to sell beer? The only reason that truck exploded was specifically to have that dope shot of Bud Light all over the ground. Again, Bay is great at framing scenes. That beer commercial in the middle of my Transformers movie was shot dope. Why the f*ck is it so haphazardly pasted in the middle of an action set piece during my giant space robot war movie??

All of his plots are paper thin framing devices for explosions.

One of my favorite mangakas is Tite Kubo. He's the creator and principal artist of BLEACH. He's gone on record saying he just like to draw cool sh*t. When he can't, his creativity is stifled and he phones stuff in. The end of BLEACH is a perfect example of that. I suspect Michael Bay feels the same because he create dope looking sh*t but has no respect for the script around that dope sh*t. He doesn't care is nothing makes sense. He doesn't care is there are glaring plotholes that even his principal actors pint out. As long as it looks dope, he's doing it. That's f*cking stupid. On the set of Armageddon, a movie about drilling a whole in a KT event level meteor still in space, in order to blow it up so it splits in half and flies by earth on either side, Ben Affleck asked Bay why they didn't just train Astronauts to drill instead of drillers to be astronauts because that seems to be both easier and quicker. Michael Bay's reply? Shut the f*ck up. That's on the commentary for Armageddon. Ben Affleck literally recorded that and put it on the special features of the f*cking movie! Guess how Armageddon ends? With a big ass f*cking explosion. Also, the meteor screams. A meteor. Screams. In space.

There is no subtlety in any of his movies.

There's a terribly haunting scene in Jojo Rabbit where jojo returns home and is standing next to his mother's hanged corpse. The shot is frames about waist high on Jojo, his mother's shoes literally at eye level. He turns, sees her shoes, and breaks down. He recovers long enough to tied the one with loose strings and the scene ends. I think it cuts to him returning home but it's been a while since I saw the film so i'm a little hazy on what happened next. That entire scene has no music. It's still. It's a medium shot with no weir dutch angles or anything. It's quiet. It's haunting. It's f*cking heartbreaking. Michael Bay never made a scene as emotional, thematically impactful, or quietly powerful in any of his goddamn movies, ever. It is impossible for Michael Bay to create a scene without some sort of dynamic nonsense or kinetic shenanigan. He doesn't do subtle intent or quiet zeal. He's not interested in letting the quiet speak loud. He needs everything to be in your face and yelling at all times because he's bad at movies.

Michael Bay lacks vision.

Someone said that bay is an auteur director like Hitchcock or Kubrick. In the strictest sense of that definition, sure. I can see that. In reality, in actual execution, f*ck no. Look, auteur directors have a vision. They are saturated in every ounce of production. They have a vision and a plan to execute in order to achieve that vision. Michael Bay has a good eye for action. He can frame the hell out of a scene. Of course he can. dude got his start in music videos and commercials. You have to make sh*t look good in that field. What commercials and music videos don't have is plot, narrative, storytelling, and stakes. Someone give you  list of shots and you got and gt them. That's it. Bay is good at that. Bay is not good at creating worlds. Look at Christopher Nolan. His entire catalog is filled with that sh*t. Inception, Dunkirk, Intersetellar, Memento; These are films that entail a clear understanding of what and how a story needs to be told. The draw isn't the explosions, it's the actual characters and journey they go on. Look at the Dark Knight trilogy. Every one of those movies is better than anything Michael Bay has ever made. Each one has a very specific theme and direction. Michael Bay makes the same goddamn movie over and over again. He ignores sh*t from movie to movie, even if it contradicts the rules of his own goddamn universe. Transformers is a great example of that sh*t. In the first movie, Megatron was the first transformer to fall to earth. That happened maybe a century ago. In The Last Knight, these motherf*ckers had been since f*cking King Arthur times. They literally fought along side King Arthur! Stanley Tucci was f*cking Merlin! In Dark of the Moon, Sentinel Prime summoned a piece of Cybertron into the earth's orbit. Where the f*ck did it go in Age of Extinction?? Michael Bay created and entire cinematic franchise and just gave up on telling coherent stories true to the rules he set, immediately after setting them. What?? How the f*ck do you not plan out your franchise? How do you not have an exit strategy? How the f*ck can you not connect your own films, one to another? I have thirteen novels based around certain, recurring, characters and themes. There is a plethora of material I have written out just to keep all of that sh*t straight. I'm not a multi-million dollar director charged with building an entertaining and competent movie franchise. Why the f*ck aren't you doing the same sh*t i'm doing when you're supposed to be the professional???

His movies are boring and lazy.

Look, I can forgive a lot of this sh*t. I hate the Fast franchise for a lot of the same reasons I hate Michael Bay films but I adore 2Fast 2Furious and that is unanimously the worst of the bunch. I can totally turn my brain off and enjoy popcorn nonsense. Independence Day is one of my favorite movies. I rather liked Hobbs and Shaw. The Mask is f*cking hilarious but an extremely simple and flawed film. That sh*t is made by Carrey's performance and the visual effects. Con Air is my sh*t. I adore Euro Trip and Old School and Road Trip. I get it. I'm not so high brow that I can't appreciate a good, superficial, puddle deep, facsimile of a film. Again, I like The Rock. I like Bad Boys. I like the first Transformers. The thing is, those three films are the only films Michael Bay makes. Everything he's ever created, is the derivative of those three films. He's even reused shots from his films in other ones. The Island was terrible but had a dope freeway scene. He threw that sh*t in the middle of Dark of the Moon, added some CG Redshirt Decepticons, called it a day. Armageddon has the same pace as Pearl Harbor. Revenge of the Fallen is the same f*cking movie as The Rock. Every Transformers movie starts and ends with some stupid mcguffin. Pain and Gain is Bad Boys but the leads are actually bad boys. Dude recycles themes, cannibalizes his own films, and never creates outside of his comfort zone. He has no idea how to build a creative narrative. He only knows how to film-by-numbers and that makes a lot of his movies boring as sh*t to watch. They are entertaining, it's hard not to be awed by some of the sh*t he pulls off, but that explosion or cool camera pan is all there is in his movies. That's all there is in his film making because he's bad at the fundamentals of movies. It's f*cking ridiculous.

I don't like Michael Bay's way of making movies.

They're not movies. They're set pieces with bare-bones framing devices. They're commercials with three-hour runtimes. He distracts from his utter lack of substance with crazy stunts, technically astute effects, roaming shots, the most brilliant of star power, and uncomfortably overt sexism. None of his films have a plot deeper than a puddle. Not one of his films have characters who you ever really care about. Maybe Lowrey and Burnett but that's mostly because we've been with them for so long and Will Smith is real hard not to love. He got that Tom Cruise charisma but with everyone and not just Karens. Michael Bay has never written anything in his entire f*cking life. I am thoroughly convinced he has no understanding of even the basest aspects of literary storytelling which means he doesn't know how to tell a story. How can you be a visual story teller, if you do not understand the fundamental structure of story telling?? they say bay is a high-concept film director. That's a cop out. It's a nice way of saying he likes making dope looking sh*t with no f*cking plot. It's a nice way of saying he's a quack storyteller but will construct real good looking bullsh*t to watch.

He's on record saying that he makes movies for thirteen-year-olds. That's fine. You know what else is a film for thirteen-year-olds? All of the goddamn MCU! F*cking Infinity War is made for thirteen-year-olds and it's a cinematic masterpiece! How is that an excuse?? How is making movies for thirteen-year-olds somehow a panacea for Bay's sh*t storytelling and pedestrian plotting? How is that a sale for being a terrible f*cking storyteller? Iron Man is made for teenagers. The Dark Knight. Winter Soldier. Skyfall. Mission Impossible: Fallout. The goddamn Hunger Games. Harry f*cking Potter! You can't say your movies suck because they're for kids, when there are films made for kids that sh*t on your entire filmography. Avengers: Endgame has made more money than any movie in history and it's the most superficial film in all of the MCU. Do you know why it made that much money and is beloved even with it's very blatant cinematic flaws? Because it tells a f*cking story! Endgame is a whole ass film. It's a  resolution to an entire narrative arc. The characters are well written and we learned to care for them over the course of that MCU ride. People f*cking hate Sam Witwicky. They hate him! The POV character in you multi-billion dollar franchise, is hated throughout the entire fandom, from the begging to the end. Same is never redeemed. He's never given anything more to do than screaming “Optimus”, running around a battlefield, or getting exploded. This is a kid who finds out his car is a giant, alien, robot and that his great grandpa found space Satan while on an expedition in the antarctic, a hundred years ago or some sh*t. How do you not make that character interesting? How is Sam, after seeing all the sh*t he's seen in his life after meeting the Autobots, the same motherf*cker at he end of Dark of the Moon,as he was in the beginning of Transformers? How do you f*ck that up so bad?

Hell, the Fast franchise does the exact same thing Michael Bay does, only much, much, better. Those things have characters and pathos and emotion and subtlety and resolution. There's a narrative and a theme that runs through the entire nine film franchise. Those movies are high-concept, superficial fluff, but there is a heart to them all. There is an emotional anchor that ties each of those movies together. Vin Diesel does Bayhem better than Michael Bay and that sh*t is ridiculous to me. Michel Bay is an objectively bad film maker. He's great at framing a shot or building a set piece, but there is so much more to films than that and I don't think Bay cares. I think he knows he can get away with nonsense if he fills the screen with explosions and titties. Maybe not though. His last Transformers movie severely under performed, getting shredded by everyone, audience and critics, alike. He bailed on the franchise and we got Travis Knight's Bumblebee; Easily the best Transformers film since the old cartoon movie. If 6Underground is any kind of barometer for Bay's career trajectory, going straight to Netflix might be problematic. That means major studios have lost faith in is ability to put butts in seats. Maybe people are wising up to the fact he's a hack. Maybe people are voting with their wallets and voting down his cookie-cutter schlock. Maybe this will make Bay grow as a director and actually direct a story. Or maybe we'll get The Island II, now with more push-ins on barely legal girl-butt and explosions we can see from the f*cking moon. Because Michael Bay makes movies for thirteen-year-olds.

[nettvnow-blog]

All For One Has Something For Everyone

All For One is yet another Canadian web series. I’m mostly very sick of them, and most of them are bad. Luckily, this one is not. Produced by Cherrydale Productions, distributed by KindaTV, and written by Sarah Shelson  and RJ Lackie (Inhuman Condition), All For One invites inevitable comparison to Kinda’s most famous property by manifesting as a queer-tinted modern-day remake of a classic literary work captured entirely by webcam. I originally planned to write this review without acknowledging that comparison, partly because doing so would be a pain in the ass, but moreso because A4O does not have the same problem with being compared to Carmilla most other web series might: it doesn’t pale in comparison. It’s not really fair to either show to say one is better than the other (A4O has one season, Carmilla has three), but for those of you who keep fandom power rankings, I’d take A4O’s first season over Carm’s, which is the only apples-to-apples comparison to be made. Inevitable comparison over with, let’s talk about the actual show now. It’s The Three Musketeers, but about sororities and super queer. You wanna know more about the plot than that, go watch the damn thing; this is a review, not a summary. Structurally, the show revolves around nominal main character Dorothy’s webcam, with her never-seen-except-as-IMs crew of internet besties (“the Inseparables”) serving as a modern day Greek chorus, chirping away in the margins. This is a very smart creative decision for a few reasons*. First, it allows the writers to manipulate tone and pace on the fly by injecting comic relief, self-awareness, and/or cheap pathos whenever the fuck they feel like it without eating up that most precious of web series resources: screentime. Second, it allows them to multi-task; one plot line may be advancing on-screen while a second plays out quietly among the Inseparables (occasionally joined by whichever lead characters aren’t appearing in a given episode). Third, it gives the writing team (Lackie/Shelson) an easy counter to one of Lackie’s writerly crutches; almost all of Lackie’s characters are prone to bouts of plot-centric myopia, and in the past his shows have allowed, if not downright enabled, them to get away it, but with an ever-present jury firing off incisive running commentary, characters are generally (and effectively) called out when they start to go down that road. Not all of them course correct, but once the issue’s been dragged into the narrative, that becomes a feature, not a bug. Speaking of writing…

*Worth noting is that many, maybe even all, of the Inseparables are characters from other shows. I only caught two of them myself, but I’m assured that there are others. One is from Carmilla, making me feel better about giving in to the cheap comparison above, and the best of the bunch is from Lackie’s older web series, Santiago. It’s likewise worth noting that neither Lackie nor Shelson has (to my knowledge) ever admitted to either of those, but I’m not an idiot and hopefully neither are you, dear reader, so let’s call a cameo a cameo and move on with the review.

A4O is an excellently written show, and not just by the admittedly low bar set by web series. I haven’t seen any of Shelson’s other work, so I can’t speak to how the partnership affects her, but what I can say is that she seems to have a knack for allowing Lackie to be Lackie (which, my own pot shots at his previous monomaniacal characters non-withstanding, is a very good thing) while subtly steering him away from his bad habits and injecting her own high-energy voice and full-auto black market machine-gun pacing. A4O does an exceptional job of serving a way over-sized cast (five main characters, at least three major supporting roles, a few off-screen-but-still-developed side characters, plus the Inseparables) in a relatively brisk three hours or so; not only does every major player in the show have an arc (or several, in some cases), even the off-screen ghosts and most of the text-only Inseparables are gifted with pathos, progression, and payoff. It’s an absolute masterclass in using every available bit of narrative real-estate to build your characters and tell your story*. *Bringing up the vampiric elephant in the room one (hopefully) last time, this is something that even Carmilla never totally figured out in its three seasons, largely punting on giving its supporting players any real meat in exchange for more time with its leads. That was probably the right play for that specific show (they were really great leads), but it’s refreshing to see a web series have its cakes and eat it too in a kitchen where most of its peers, far from either having or eating cake, accidentally added salt instead of sugar to the batter and have long-since retreated to the vomitorium. For that matter, even most twenty-minute TV sitcoms with more than five or six characters generally can’t serve them all nearly as consistently/artfully as A4O**, either. ** Footnote to a footnote! Brooklyn Nine-Nine is probably the current show that comes the closest, with seven principles, two consistently present supporting players, and a large tertiary library who usually get strong, character-driven notes to play, though of course Brooklyn has roughly quadruple the screentime to work with that A4O does.  

Beyond that big-picture high-concept goodness, Lackie/Shelson also have a strong ear for banter (though both clearly watched way too much Buffy in highschool); A4O has a comedic batting average that hangs with all but the strongest of its TV brethren. They may be shorter on A+ knock-you-off-the-couch laugh grenades, but they’re firing off laugh bullets near-constantly and score at least a glancing blow with most of them. Their dramatic beats also mostly land, and they generally obey one the most oft-broken cardinal rules of good writing: thou shalt not sell-out thy characters* for either plot convenience or lazy comic beats. The writing isn’t perfect—as great as the overall pacing is, there are a couple conversations that overstay their welcome long past the point of narrative utility (occasionally to the point of undercutting what had up till then been a home-run scene), and Shelson/Lackie have never written a conversation they felt couldn’t be improved by an awkward pause or seven—but I can count on my thumbs the number of web series pilot seasons that get closer. *There’s one major exception to this, and I’ll bitch about it later when I get to the part of the review where I’m hateful jerk who ruins things I like.

Given the size of the cast, I don’t have the ink to spill to cover everybody individually, either as a character or an actor, but top-to-bottom the cast is stellar, and every single one of them should be proud of the work they did. The worst performance in the show is probably still in the B+ to A- range. Gun to my head, I’d shout out Alejandra Simmons (Alex) as the MVP of the leads and Denise Yuen (Treville) as the top dog among the supporting players, but sincerely, I’ve got nothing bad to say about the cast as a whole in twenty-nine out of thirty episodes*. *We’re almost there, pessimists. I have nothing terribly interesting to say about the direction. The cast act in front of a stationary webcam. The blocking is functional. They mostly use the setup to their advantage, cutting off scenes that work just fine implied (except as noted above). Solid, functional work that does the job, but doesn’t exactly leave you racing to the director’s IMDB. Alright, before I get into the higher-concept thematic stuff, let’s get the part where I piss all over something I really like out of the way (we all knew this was coming and when I do alone we’ll all understand why).

The show does have two major warts, and one begets the other. The first is the live episode, coming in right around the 2/3s mark of the season. It’s by far the show’s longest episode, and neither the writers nor the actors are up to the sudden formula shift, the unscripted environment, or the awkward necessity of combining what probably should have been three or four separate major sequences into one clunky stationary set-piece. One conceit of this…look, I like the cast and crew a lot here, but calling this episode anything kinder than a tire fire is being a disingenuous reviewer so… one conceit of this tire fire is that, as it aired, fans were able to masquerade as Inseparables and ask the cast live questions in-character. I’m sure it was great fun for the fans involved, but the fans involved had nothing interesting to say, and the actresses were stuck and-yessing responses without either the help of the writing staff or the freedom to really riff (as I assume the rest of the season was already pretty thoroughly structured or maybe even filmed and they couldn’t risk contradicting or redirecting anything with a careless opinion or anecdote). Oh, also, the single-set-for-twenty-minutes-and-also-they-all-need-to-get-their-turn-talking-to-the-fans setup necessitates a whole lot of contrived entering, exiting, and maneuvering that does nothing for the story and everything to remind you that you’re watching a manufactured production, and could only feel less authentic if accompanied by flashing text to the effect of “fuck your suspension of disbelief, loser.”

The episode is an amazing technical achievement in that they did it at all, but to paraphrase one of the least annoying iterations of Jeff Goldblum, they were so excited to see if they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should. While I’m sure the episode was effective as a gimmick to goose the fanbase, removed from the context of the twenty minutes where it was accomplishing that goal, it mostly just saps the narrative momentum of the show right as it was cresting, takes its actresses away from doing what they do best, and introduces the single biggest creative misstep (in this not-so-humble reviewers estimation, anyhow) of the season in Alex’s sudden, dramatic, and inorganic character shift.

…which brings us to wart number two, wherein the show’s strongest character, fed up with being the responsible one, suddenly morphs from nuanced character into a party-girl pastiche that seems more at home on MadTV than KindaTV. While the idea behind the change is a decent one (Alex lashes out against her role as “Mom”) it scans totally false for the character we’ve been given, doesn’t fit the tone of the show, and doesn’t serve much narrative purpose beyond forcing one of the other leads into the leadership role (there were better ways to get there), and letting actress Simmons show off her comic chops (which, granted, are sharp). It’s also completely devoid of the nuance and verisimilitude that otherwise permeates not only Simmons’ work but the show’s character-writing in general. In a world where every other character is consistently, painfully, beautifully themselves at their own expense, turning the best of the bunch into a cartoonish punchline for three episodes or so fucks up the emotional feng shui something fierce. I suspect the writers might even agree with me, as the gimmick is quietly dropped a few episodes later with no lasting consequences.

Now, that was a negative couple paragraphs, but let’s put it all in perspective: ultimately, A4O has one bad episode out of thirty. Show me another show with a better batting average and I’ll show you Banshee, which I’ve previously described as “the best show on television*”. *And as “The Ballad of Sheriff Punch,” though that’s neither here nor there. Beyond that, the show’s only real creative misfire happens to its best character and isn’t bad enough to keep her from staying its best character. I’m picking nits here, and I’m using some very precise tweezers and a microscope to pick them. I’m also done doing it. Onto the abstraction! One of the most incredible things about A4O is how many hats it manages to wear. It’s a comedy and a drama, sure, but it’s also a character study… scratch that, six or seven character studies. It’s also The Three Musketeers and sometimes it’s Animal House. It’s a virtuoso performance of an increasingly well-traveled formula, but thanks to its Inseparable gimmickry, it’s also the only show of its kind. It’s about persistence, and friendship, and admitting when you’re wrong, but it’s also about ambition, and narrative, and perspective, and bikini fund-raisers that end when one of the show’s stronger supporting players marches in cheerfully proclaiming “Hi. I’m here to ruin everything.” This is a show that tries to do about three-hundred* more things than any other web series out there**, and somehow feels less rushed, crowded, or inept than any of its competitors. * Estimated. I’m not a math person, I swear on my thirteenth finger. ** Well, beside Next Time On Lonny, I guess, but the whole point of that show was that it did everything. All that narrative ambition and versatility feeds back into the show’s characters, allowing them to exist in more dimensions than their screentime ought to allow. Pay attention to Yuen’s Treville, and note how much we learn about her simply from the things she owns or the way her eyes react to a certain name or an unexpected offer. I doubt she’s on-screen more than seven or eight minutes in the whole show, but she’s got more depth and nuance than anyone outside of the two leads on that apparently inescapable point of comparison*. This is something Lackie’s shown before in flashes (the bodyguard from Inhuman Condition is arguably its most interesting character and might not have ten lines), but here its displayed consistently. Almost all of the Inseparables have at least two or three layers to them, and that’s without the benefit of an performer to embody them or any capacity to meaningfully interact with the A-plot. *Last time, I swear. For the record, I do *really* like Carmilla, and it’s because I like it so much (and because it’s so much better than web series have any right to be**) that it’s such a useful measuring stick to show exactly how impressive A4O is at its best. ** I’ve previously compared its second season favorably and mostly sincerely to Shakespeare.

That’s not to say the leads are underdeveloped, either; in contrast to, say, Parks and Rec, where every character seems to exist solely to populate the Parks Department, all of A4Os feel lived in, with rich personal histories and plenty of implicit relationships and interests we don’t need to see or even hear about to take as read. Shelson & Lackie do an excellent job of letting the things they do reveal or spend time on imply a thousand more they don’t, and it’s the sort of expansive and elegant world-building you never get from web series* and rarely get from anything.  *Credit where its due, Inhuman Condition was similarly economical at building its world, but not nearly as adept at bread-crumbing the personal histories of its principles. More than all that, though, at the end of the day, A4O is just fucking fun. The heroes have Sepinwall’s oft-discussed but rarely attained “I don’t even care if they’re not being funny right now, I like them and I just wanna hang out with them,” vibe, the villains are enthusiastic and memorable without succumbing to camp, and even the damn theme music is smiley. The emotional moments (mostly) feel earned and make you feel feelings, and they’re paced properly to do it without burning you out or risking diminishing returns.

Since it’s nominally a KindaTV show and I didn’t spend any time on the gender politics, I’ll awkwardly pause here to quickly note that A4O is pleasantly open-minded and inclusive. These people care about telling these stories respectfully and for as many people as possible, and it shows.

End of day, A4O is television in microcosm. It’s funny and cute and sad and angry and it’s still got time for both nerf gun duels and planted meth. It’s got close friends and bitter rivals, will-they-won’t-they’s and wish-they-wouldn’ts. It’s a pleasant place to escape to when you’re feeling shitty, and it’s a great neighborhood to show your friends around when you’re feeling good. It’s inventive and ambitious and yet familiar and comfortable. It’s great actresses (and actors) giving strong performances of sharp lines equally charged with uniquely subtle character biases and peppy Lackie-banter, all done at Shelson’s bullet-train pace that somehow never feels rushed and always gets you to exactly where you need to be. It’s fearless but rarely reckless, smart but never condescending, and sweet without ever veering into twee-town. It’s got all your favorite things from classic literature and modern television, and yet it’s something you’ve never quite seen before. It’s one of a kind, for now, and that’s a shame. Incidentally, it’s also currently fundraising to make another season. How’s that old Musketeer mantra go again?  All for one and whatever amount you feel comfortable donating for All For One…  

Written by Nick Feldman.