#it will not give a structural and thematic justice if the end is no different from the initial apprehension which I certainly believe | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

britesparc · 26 days ago

Text

Weekend Top Ten #675

Top Ten DCEU Films (and One TV Programme)

Yay, I’m getting back to doing a simple list of films! I kind of prefer it when I just rank films; I feel I can speak a bit more knowledgably about it, get my thoughts across better. Even if I don’t think the lists themselves are quite as inspired, maybe, as when I ranked my favourite eggs. It is what it is.

Anyway, there is – sort of – a thematic reasoning going on here. Because this coming week sees the release of Creature Commandos, officially the first project from the new DC Studios, headed by James Gunn and Peter Safran. This brand-new DCU will have a brand-new continuity of shared movies and TV programmes, and whilst things will really kick off next summer with the release of Gunn’s Superman (squee!), Commandos is the first proper glimpse we get into that universe. Now, I said “sort of” there because I don’t think Creature Commandos is actually going to be on British TV screens before Christmas; presumably it’ll end up on Sky like most other Warner Bros-affiliated shows, but there’s not been a sniff of a release date as of yet. However, I’m still going with it, especially as I only caught up on the last couple of DC movies fairly recently.

I say movies, but – as those of you who read the title will have guessed – I’m also including the one TV project set within the DCEU. I pondered its inclusion, whether to stick to films or not, but as it’s just one season of one show and the universe is – technically – over, I decided it was worth sticking in there. It is, after all, absolutely excellent (spoiler alert), so not featuring it felt weird and arbitrary. Words that can never be applied to any decision I make regarding these lists. Ahem.

I think, on the incredibly rare possibility that this list is widely-read, the shocking discovery will be the utter absence of any of Zack Snyder’s films. Snyder was the one who started the whole kit and kaboodle, and it was his tone, his aesthetic, his overall idea for the “spine” of the DCEU, that shaped its early years – for better or for worse. In my opinion, the core elements not just of individual characters but of the entire DC comics universe is so at odds with his personal flavour, I just can’t get on with his films. Like, at all. Man of Steel has some nice ideas and a really good grounded style, but it’s so miserable, so utterly un-wonderful, that it runs antithetical to everything I think about Superman as a character. It also has the same odd structural problems and pacing issues that all of his films have. Batman v Superman gives us some great comics-esque Batman fight sequences, and a really interesting take on Lex Luthor, but pisses it all away with edgelord grimdark 14-year-old-who-listens-to-Korn sensibilities (nothing wrong with Korn, by the way; maybe I should have said “Nick Cave” to show I wasn’t punching down but across). It’s the sort of supposedly hard-edged “kill the baby” thinking that you believe is mature and sophisticated as a teenager, before you realise that it’s just another form of childishness; it’s why I can’t get along with the majority of Mark Millar’s work. It’s using “darkness” as a substitute for “depth”, and that’s a fallacy. The two versions of Justice League both manage to be dreadful in entirely different ways; Snyder’s is technically “better” for the most part but it’s long and depressing, whereas Whedon’s is lighter and looser but basically feels like the pilot for a Justice League TV series, with TV-level visuals for the most part. But it doesn’t have that godawful black Superman suit, so probably on the whole I prefer it, even if it was apparently horrendously toxic to make.

Where were we?

Oh yeah, I was supposed to be celebrating instead of slagging off. Because all ten of these films (cough-nine-and-one-telly-cough) are genuinely good. Yes, good; not all of them are great, but most of them are very good. The DCEU did indeed achieve greatness, as hopefully I will convince you of momentarily; but on the whole most of their films were “okay!” or “better than you’d think!”. The two Aquaman films embody this most heartily I feel; they’re super-enjoyable to watch, utterly bananas, but I think if you were to recommend them to anyone you’d have to caveat them quite a bit.

In the end, I feel like the DCEU overcame a really tough stumble right out of the gates, in the face of entrenched opposition at the height of its powers (that’s the MCU, in case you hadn’t guessed), and with a revolving door of executives who seemed to want different things from their DC “properties”. Despite all of this, and despite lacking the clear guided direction that Marvel had from the start, they produced some absolute gems. From Diana discovering her powers to Harley discovering a sandwich, there was greatness here.

That black suit though. Ugh.

Wonder Woman (2017): I would argue this is the only no-holds-barred unqualified success of the DCEU; the only film that scratches at five stars (on rewatches, I think the flaky ending dips it just short of masterpiece status). But the way Patty Jenkins crafts both the idyllic Themiscarian opening and the grit and grime of WWI is terrific; and the two leads are frankly outstanding. Gadot is adept at both the fish-out-of-water stuff and also being an all-conquering badass; Pine is effortlessly charming. When all else fades away, let’s remember this movie above all as an indication of what the DCEU could have been.

Peacemaker (2022): yep, here we go, I’m sticking one show in and it’s almost right at the top. As Marvel themselves have found, crafting a superhero TV show is tricky; Peacemaker avoids almost every trap. Each episode feels distinct with its own arc, but it also builds somewhere. There is oodles of character development and growth, and James Gunn does his usual schtick of giving us a bunch of divs and then slowly eking out their foibles until we fall in love. It’s dark, it’s vulgar, it’s violent, but it’s overflowing with heart, and it’s full of tremendous performances to boot.

The Suicide Squad (2021): Gunn is back again – which bodes well for the future of DC on screen, I guess. From the bombastic and outrageously violent opening onwards, we – once again – follow a group of bickering bell-ends until they turn into outright heroes and we love them to bits. The use of comedy makes the moments of misery and tragedy all the more redolent, and it makes absolutely superb use of DC lore.

Birds of Prey (2020): I genuinely don’t know what this is officially called now, so I’m going to skip any subtitles – you all know what film I mean. And this one is a gonzo delight; gritty, to a certain degree, but mostly just a wild and exuberant night out. Margot Robbie is outstanding as Harley, imbuing her with heart and warmth as well as an extravagant, violent mania; the rest of the Birds are well-cast with some standouts (Jolee Smollett as Black Canary should be brought back). It’s also incredibly funny.

Blue Beetle (2023): there’s no reason this should be as good as it is, but it manages to be the closest DC came to their own Spider-Man; Xolo Maridueña is terrific in the lead, and he’s apparently going to keep playing the character in the new DCU, so that’s good. But here we’ve got a fast-paced and funny young superhero origin, plus some cool action, and – again – great use of DC comics history.

Aquaman (2018): this one could have been tremendous, but it’s also a bit woolly and far too long. Discard all that, though, and you get an utterly madcap, bonkers thrill ride through an underwater kingdom that’s like nothing we’ve seen before. The visuals and imagination on display here are hilarious: this is a film which features an army of crab men, a mermaid girl in a mech suit, and Julie Andrews as a kaiju. And an octopus playing the drums. What’s not to love?

Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (2023): suffers a bit next to its predecessor but is still a blast. The balance between character work and basically being a Saturday morning cartoon maybe skews too far one way; but Momoa in the lead and Patrick Wilson as brother/rival Orm are both great, and bounce off each other in fun ways. It’s even woollier than the first but there’s still something good beneath the CG surface.

The Flash (2023): I went into this one full of pessimism, mostly due to the off-screen complications and controversies. But, to be honest, it almost – almost – soars: Barry’s motivations and character are clearly outlined, and the potentially-complicated plot is concisely and entertainingly laid out. But once they bring out the big Bat-Guns, it starts to wobble; we lose sight of the funny centre of the film, and the whole mutliversal stuff that tops it off feels unearned and – frankly – really ugly to look at. So much potential, such a shame; but considering the hurdle it had to leap, it’s still damn good fun for most of its runtime.

Black Adam (2021): a film of two halves: there’s a weird twist on the fish-out-of-water genre with His Rockness as a taciturn and grumpy anti-hero. This is lacklustre; the Rock’s natural chemistry is smothered by trying to be this grim avenger. But! The Justice Society stuff is a goddamn hoot. When that team are on screen, it sings; more of them, please.

Wonder Woman 1984 (2020): ah, god. The first film was stunning. This, sadly, struggles to find its identity and focus. The plot is woollier than an Edinburgh clothes shop; the MacGuffin is oddly defined; no one’s motivations make any sense. Frankly there aren’t enough cool action scenes. And what on Earth were they thinking with the whole “it’s Steve but not Steve really it’s some bloke” idea? The fact that it remains pretty enjoyable, that there’s enough to root for, is down once more to the chemistry of the leads and Jenkins’ assured way of handling a set piece. It’s okay. But it could have been so much more.

There we are; by number ten we’re already getting into “yeah I guess” territory. I feel a bit mean to Shazam!, which had a lot of fun moments and characters, but I’m not really in a mood to say nice things about Zachary Levi right now (and, genuinely, he’s the weak link in its sequel, with all the charisma and fun instead carried by Adam Brody). Also – sincerely – I think the tone of the film is weird, half kid-friendly comedy, half dark mystical drama.

But look: there was lots to like here. An octopus played the drums, people! What more do you want?!

#top ten #films #movies #comics #dc #dcu #dceu #dc movies #wonder woman #peacemaker #the suicide squad

1 note · View note

spiders-hth-is-an-outlier · 4 years ago

Text

Hi, thanks for the Fic Writer Interview tag, @nellie-elizabeth !

Name: Milo, Hth on AO3

Fandoms: Well, right now it’s all Magicians all the time, but other things come and go, or have come and gone over the years. In my Tumblr era, I’ve written a few Schitt’s Creek stories and a few Supernatural stories, and then just like, a lot a lot of The Magicians.

Most Popular One-Shot: Oh, by far my smutty Schitt’s Creek story 101, which is funny to me because I’m really not In the Fandom for that, the mood just kind of struck at one point to write it. But it’s a huge fandom and the stories I wrote were really well-received, which gave me a huge confidence boost as I was getting back into the swing of writing more. Within Magicians, my highest kudos for a one-shot were for Young and Able, which is just a good ol’ fashioned Fixit Fic, what’s not to love?

Most Popular Multichapter: I mean, Pretty Good Year is probably the best-beloved thing I’ll ever write in my life, which as a legacy, I’m fine with. It has the second-highest kudos of any of my AO3 stories (after 101), but I’m inclined to also judge “popularity” in a subjective sense, and that story has really generated the most amazing comments and engagement. I legitimately had people telling me it changed the way they perceive mental health, or changed what they expect from relationships, which is like -- staggering to me. It’s really the only thing I’ve ever written that I think the audience loved kind of in the same way that I did :)

Favorite Story You’ve Written So Far: God, I dunno, I love all of them a lot (well, most of them). I think the one that’s aged especially well for me is All the Comforts of Home. I really think the premise of A Life In the Day is fascinating, not just the romantic potential, but the idea of living a life that’s perpetually bent toward trying to find beauty, to understand what beauty is and how to speak about it. And Quentin and Eliot are such different characters in the way I think they understand that subject, and there’s something really touching to me about them both kind of...living deeper and deeper into this question, discovering how to perceive the world the way the other one does, falling in love because of this really existential collaboration on the great project of both of their lives: for Quentin, Why Live? and for Eliot, How to Be More? I don’t know, something about the way their personal emotional lives are tied up with their ideas of art and aesthetics really speaks to me, and I think canon invites that exploration. Other stories I’ve really loved have tackled the same theme -- Our Sublime Refrain, for example, and scenes from an unfinished story are both fantastic -- but All the Comforts of Home was my bite at the apple, and I’m pretty happy with it.

Fic You Were Nervous to Post: Oh, I don’t know, I don’t really get nervous about posting. People are either going to like it or not, and if they hate it...it was free, at least? What do you want, a refund? I get nervous to *start* things that feel like they might be too demanding or outside my skillset, but once I’ve gotten myself far enough into the swing of things to be ready to post, yeah, fuck it.

How Do You Choose Your Titles: I am a song-lyric title person for the most part, although with a heavy side-dish of one-word thematic titles. Like, they’re always either called “i listened to this on repeat (while i wrote this story)” or “Meaning.”

Do You Outline: Yes, I’m a little type-A-of-center on outlines; my outlines run either about a page of scene beats in order, or 5-8 pages of stream-of-consciousness, depending on the story. Usually the first...two-thirds of my story will hew very close to the outline, and there’s always a point where I realize that it’s taken on a slightly different shape than my original conception, and I kind of pitch the outline at that point and just wing it. Sometimes the changes are mostly just structural (collapsing a few repetitive scenes into one where multiple plot threads get dealt with at once), and sometimes they’re pretty substantive (the end of Pretty Good Year was actually extremely different than my outline, because Eliot got very in touch with his emotions much earlier than I originally predicted he would).

Complete: According to AO3, 56, but that’s not totally accurate. I never ported a lot of my early fic to AO3 -- I don’t think any of the X-Files fic is there, and there’s a lot of shorter stuff from Due South and Oz and some other early fandoms that I kind of don’t love, so I gently kicked it under the carpet. I also wrote NSYNC fic under a different pseud, and I never merged any of that into my official AO3 canon of work. Actually, some of it was really good! I might do that someday.

In Progress: 2 published in progress, my almost-finished A/B/O Four Seasons, and my not-even-close-to-finished Justice for Sebastian story. If you count the ones that have never seen the light of day, I have the Quentin-1 story, my Big Bang, and a few stories from Supernatural and Teen Wolf fandom that some part of me continues to insist I might actually go back and finish.

Prompts: I kind of love them -- I wrote probably the majority of my Stargate Atlantis fic from, uhhhh, what was it called? The LJ community where they’d give you a prompt a month, what the fuck, brain. Prompts are cool because they feel like low-stress writing experiments, and then sometimes they stay exactly that way, and sometimes they take on a life of their own. You never really know when you start!

Upcoming Work You’re Most Excited About: Like everyone else, I’m excited about my seeeeeecret Big Bang project, sorry! I would say more, but they won’t let me!

Worlds I Would Love to Write for In the Future: I mean, I’m sure I’ll be in Magicians fandom for some time to come, I’m not out of ideas yet. But also, I would like to write some Teen Wolf before I die, it’s got such a fun universe and so many likeable characters, and I will be really pleased if Falcon and the Winter Soldier ever comes out and has some meat on the bone, because I have a huge crush on Sam Wilson. It’s weird that I never wrote any Garak/Bashir, might fix that someday. Would write some Old Guard fic if the right story hook ever came along; I might even write gen for that one, if you can even imagine, because they are the sweetest little found family.

This went around earlier this morning and I expect everyone in fandom was tagged already, but if you haven’t been, hop to it!

#hth fic

12 notes · View notes

deliciousscaloppine · 4 years ago

Text

No longer valentine’s day...but still.

Son of the witch Meng Shi

What did I want to write, what I wrote:

Okay, so I had a lot of ideas for this story, and I thought to myself it would make a nice longer work (big works should be packed with ideas). Primarily I just wanted to make a very sensual mystery with lots of different love stories, dark secrets, beautiful, fantasy visuals and funny action scenes. I also wanted to write something where the two masterminds (Jiggy/Huaisang) are pitted against each other a little more openly, and end up working together to solve a common problem. Somehow...I managed to write a time traveling mom heist. To be honest, I wouldn’t have expanded on this work as much as I did if I hadn’t added the time traveling element - which in general I find very intriguing and wanted to work on myself.

Story structure and dramatic time.

I basically envisioned this story as a corridor with many doors at first. The protagonist - Huaisang - enters the corridor and will have to move towards one direction to end the story, but on the way there are many doors to either side leading to rooms that can be visited several times and change the character’s perception of the journey. Some may be unlocked under certain conditions, some other might be connected in more ways than one, but all these are meant to be exited the same way so the journey forward can resume.

At some point I did conceive this as a parallel timeline story. Meaning Huaisang has his own journey in the present, which is the active time of the narrative, and Meng Yao has the more visually appealing storyline at the background of the plot, which Huaisang would have to visit to bring that air of fantasy and mystery into his own more detective/coming of age like storyline.

Once I inserted the time traveling element, however, I started reviewing what I had done, and wished to connect the two timelines in a Mobius strip style. Basically there is only one story - one surface in which all actions occur - and past and present are not only connected but occur simultaneously.

I also wanted to explore that in a way that seemed plausible to me. So in many ways Huaisang can’t influence the past - because the past is physical and because of entropy a great deal of physical information is lost or replaced, but he can be perceived by Meng Yao and so Meng Yao can use him in the present. Huaisang can also become trapped there, in the form of birds and more importantly his own sword Jinsique.

Thematic development, the emotional core of the story.

I introduced the theme of this story quite late, because for up to the middle, I had no idea what that was, and what I was trying to develop ended up in Don’t be evil anymore.

Basically, my first idea was a young closeted individual with lots of identity issues, severely isolated from his own social group, coming to terms with who they are and trying to teach themselves how to empathize with others. This remained as a lesser theme, basically Huaisang’s theme, through the story, but I deemed he shouldn’t get his resolution so easily, even though I would allow him to change. I wanted him to change so he would work with Meng Yao, but Meng Yao so far had no themes in his own story, and that was a big problem in devising his motivating problem, and a satisfying climax.

So I examined what these two should connect and bond over, and I decided it would be their mutual lack of parents. Meng Yao, however, had to have someone to save, someone who had also taught him extensively and he had an immense emotional connection to, enough so that his lovers wouldn’t be the only motivating factor, and in fact could be sacrificed over this more special person. And because Meng Yao is so closely observed by Huaisang, he would also emerge as a mentoring figure, not only intellectually, but also emotionally.

So in the end Meng Yao would get his mother and his freedom back, and Huaisang would also gain his brother and the emotional flexibility he craved at the beginning of the story, giving a more or less happy tone to the ending.

So I came up with the theme that would help me also explain the behavior of these two characters: Missing mothers, and then more broadly missing women in general. In this way I also solved another problem inherent to overtly male story environments, meaning while they can be quite flexible in exploring dramatic conflicts, they also force female characters to the semantic background of the plot. But these missing, or eradicated women are the reason why male antagonism takes on criminal directions, and why there is a mounting hostility to gender vagueness and homosexuality in fantasy settings.

In my case, I wanted the female characters to make a conscious choice of departing from the story. Lady florist is a lonely cultivator that moves in and out, but always maintains a clear perception of the dark, unseen aspects of the violent world in the story, and this is what motivates her to surgical interventions on the side of justice.

The two Nie mothers, and Meng Shi with Lady Qin act as foils to each other, with the Nie mothers facing off directly with the dark secrets of their home and departing after they realize their solutions and transformations are not tolerated. In contrast, in the Jin home the women are utterly subdued, they are prisoners kept only because they may be used, but all of them have a core of private resistance and they act as teachers, protectors and instigators. For the Qin women leaving is part of their liberation, part of staying safe. They are also to be emulated - when the Brides leave the story they do so having seen what happens when one stays attached to a house and the desires of others.

The motivating problem

Most characters need to break free from their narrative restrictions in order to be changed and fulfilled. They need to become more than a story device, so in a way they have to defy the story - that is why I included whole chapters where the story structure completely breaks down and past present and multiple selves come together. And also parts of the story where I make it difficult to myself to move towards an easy resolution.

I chose to demonstrate that through Meng Shi’s bondage, and Meng Yao’s trials. They are both the least and most physical characters, inhabiting multiple spacetimes and moving through the story collecting knowledge and information to gain the most complete view of the narrative, going as far as dying and attaining knowledge of themselves from their previous lives, as well as the afterlife. In having this loose and fluid relationship with life and death, they finally offer the potential of change and transformation to the rest of the story world. They offer an alternative of immortality that is more associated with divinity and detachment and so I was able to create an open ending, where death and past mistakes do not determine the character - very suitable for young adult novels.

Writing process

For me this fic is what a good first draft looks like for a big work - it contains elements of the language i am going to use, well focused scenes, complete storylines, the atmosphere of the book, the basic gist of the characters, and the stylistic variations i wanted to implement. I took long breaks between chapters to really plan ahead and consider all the openings i had left in the previous chapters, and what kind of expectations i was creating, and how they should be reasonably fulfilled. In a second draft I would expand the worldbuilding and basically add information that fic readers take for granted, like the background of the villains and the “original sin” that distorted the idea of immortality for the villainous cultivators and led to the creation of the Yin Iron as a capacitor for human resentment and expand as well on the various tiers of divinity and what real immortality looks like in this world. I would also explore more the stories of the minor characters, and make Huaisang’s “detective” work a little more pronounced.

#valentine's goodies

3 notes · View notes

anikoku · 6 years ago

Text

Mini-essay: How the narrative of KH3 was damaged by the compulsory heterosexuality and gender norms of Japanese society

Major spoilers of Kingdom Hearts 3 are below. Please don’t look unless you’ve finished the game!

One more disclaimer: this is coming from a Japanese perspective, and it’s not meant as a xenophobic attack on the culture I was raised in.

Light-and-darkness logic, time travel, and bosses who are giant ships, I’ll ignore. That’s just part of the Kingdom Hearts package, and despite the headache they might give me, I’ve come to accept these wild ideas and take pride in my ability to handle them. But when we stray from the fantasy, it becomes difficult confronting the cultural context that the Kingdom Hearts series is birthed from, and how these ideas have affected key plot points and the characterization of our beloved heroes. Despite its stunning popularity overseas, the Kingdom Hearts series is still conceived in Japan (by middle-aged Japanese men, no less) for Japanese audiences. I’ve always felt that Square Enix as a company remains disconnected from the input of its non-Japanese audience. Whatever catering is done towards overseas players is limited to game mechanics, not plot. I expect there’s something of a よそはよそ、うちはうち (“That’s fine for them but not for us”) mentality when it comes to structuring the story in a way that may appeal to overseas (specifically Western) fans. The writers do not know how to do this, and they do not wish to. I don’t believe that any culture should have to adjust its creative output to make it more palatable to the outside world, but considering the sheer size of the Kingdom Hearts fanbase, such a blatant refusal to consider modern storytelling trends in the gaming world will—and has—damaged its enduring legacy. Let’s not forget the fact that Japanese society itself is not suspended in time; its younger generation has different ideas about gender, sexuality, and romance. I’d like to discuss three examples in KH3 where the writers leaned heavily on traditional gender norms and heterosexual romance to the detriment of the plot and the integrity of previous characterization. First, there’s the matter of Subject X, the amnesiac girl who became the reason why Ansem the Wise shut down his experiments. We learn late in the game that she was Lea and Isa’s missing friend, and the reason why they chose to infiltrate the castle and join Organization XIII. Before this piece of knowledge was revealed, Lea and Isa remained the only (human) pair whose friendship existed outside of the boy-girl-boy dynamic that Nomura is so fond of. Like Axel and Roxas prior to Xion’s introduction in 358/2 Days, Subject X was retconned into their friendship, altering their dynamics and diluting the significance of the homosocial relationship. Putting aside shipping perspectives, it is important to be able to portray two men (nevermind the prospect of two women, that’s too much to hope for in this franchise) sharing a strong emotional bond. Falling back on the trio concept not only feels like lazy and tired writing, but seems to speak to a fear that without a female presence, the love and connection between two male characters is simply too homoerotic. In an interview, Nomura remarked he was surprised by Aqua’s popularity since she did not resemble previous Kingdom Heartes heroines. He and other writers (Masaru Oka and perhaps others) have a clear idea of what femininity means and what role female characters should play, and that was never clearer than the portrayal of Kairi and Aqua in the final half of the game. After being chosen as a Guardian of Light and spending the entirety of the story training with Merlin, after promising Sora that she would be the one to protect him, Kairi’s helplessness in the final battle was appalling to witness. She is depicted as weaponless when Terra-Xehanort charges at her. Sora and the others throw themselves in front of her to protect her, and this leads directly to Donald’s self-sacrifice. Later, she is easily kidnapped by Xemnas and killed by Master Xehanort to fuel Sora’s anger. This act of textbook ‘fridging’ absolutely disregards Kairi’s agency and her wish to fight alongside her friends. She represents the worst depiction of the traditional female role in storytelling: she is an object of desire to be rescued, damaged, and won over. In other words, it’s bullshit. Likewise, although she is one of the three Keyblade Masters present in the story, Aqua is constrained to a passive role. She is first rescued by Sora, then by Ventus, then assisted by Sora once more against two opponents (Terra-Xehanort and Vanitas) she had previously beaten. When confronted by the Demon Tide in the Keyblade Graveyard, Aqua whispers “no” and lets her Keyblade slip out of her hands, defeated. This is not the same Aqua who survived over a decade in the realm of darkness, defined by her bravery and strength of will. In an era with an increasing number of female-led titles and queer, non-traditional characterization, the female characters of Kingdom Hearts are still relegated to the role of nurturer and caretaker. In a game released in 2019, that hurts. Finally, I’d like to argue that the narrative focus on Sora and Kairi’s romance came at the expense of the friendship between Sora, Riku, and Kairi, something I believed so thematically important to the franchise. The other trios (Axel, Roxas, Xion and Terra, Aqua, Ventus) are depicted as being equally close and connected, yet KH3 does nothing to showcase Riku and Kairi’s bond. Riku is about as affected as Mickey when Kairi is threatened. The two of them never have a private conversation, not even the day before their final confrontation with Master Xehanort. Riku doesn’t volunteer to help Sora search for Kairi at the end of the game, despite him being aware of what damage it could cause Sora. And that is the other piece of the puzzle: Sora and Riku’s relationship has also been severely downplayed. During the events of KH3D, Riku becomes a Dream Eater out of his strong desire to protect Sora. His character arc has always been about “protecting the people who matter most”. Why, then, is he willing to let Sora abuse the Power of Wakening on his own? Why doesn’t he get to have a conversation with Sora before the final battle? Why is he shown racing against Terra and Roxas in the epilogue, while Kairi sits by herself and mourns? The lack of bond isn’t just present on Riku’s side. When Kairi and the others are swallowed by the Demon Tide, Sora falls to his knees and laments that he has no power now that he’s alone. His grief would have been more convincing, had Riku not been right there by his side. With such a strong bond remaining, there’s no reason Sora should have given up there; it was a deliberate narrative decision to highlight Sora and Kairi’s relationship while downplaying Sora and Riku’s. It seems that Riku was forced to take a step back to make room for the game’s heterosexual romance, and I believe the integrity of Sora, Riku, and Kairi as characters suffered because of this. Many of the reunions in the final portion of the game were an emotional catharsis for me, and I did enjoy aspects of the story. That being said, the storytelling in KH3 makes me fear that Square Enix is either unwilling or unable to adapt to the gaming frontier now led by the West. For now, I’ll submit to the fact that the most satisfying conclusion to the series I’ve followed so long lies in the hands of the fans who are willing to do it justice.

#kh3 #kingdom hearts 3 #kingdom hearts spoilers #critique

3K notes · View notes

aspoonofsugar · 5 years ago

Text

Nen and Characters: Knuckle and Shoot

Knuckle and Shoot are introduced in the CAA and it appears obvious that they are meant to act as foils of respectively Gon and Killua.

This is something strengthened also by them being matched with the two boys in what is presented as a competition, but is later revealed to be a training session:

At the same time though, this pair is also quite different from the one formed by Gon and Killua to the point that their development can easily be seen as an alternative to the one Gon and Killua have in the CAA.

This analysis will try to focus on the similarities Shoot and Knuckle share respectively with Killua and Gon and the way they are different from the two protagonists.

What is more, I will also try to explore the fact that their powers are metaphors for social institutions and how this is important in an arc where humans have to fight creatures representative of the force of nature. I have talked about this also in Youpi’s meta, so now I will try to develop it further in relation to Knuckle and Shoot.

SHOOT: SOCIETY AS A PRISON

Shoot’s main ability is called Hotel Rafflesia and it can easily be seen as a symbolic representation of Justice:

Shoot explains that he has chosen a power which only damages people he has hurt and that he did so because he will hurt only people he has decided to and won’t have regrets about doing so. In short, Shoot wants to use his ability which literally puts people into a prison only on individuals who have somehow deserved it. Basically Shoot wants to administer some kind of justice even if this justice is established by applying Shoot’s own set of values and so it is somehow individualistic since others might not share it.

That said, it is still an attempt to reproduce a common institution in human societies aka the judiciary system. As a matter of fact Shoot considers someone deserving of being hit and as a result a part of the person is closed in a cage. The fact that the choice of an appropriate target is arbitrary in the sense that it is Shoot himself the one who chooses and is not something settled by the rules of the ability itself could be seen as a critic to the concept of justice, but I am not sure this was Togashi’s aim and I don’t think that in the text there is much evidence of it. What is interesting, however, is that Shoot’s ability is also representative of his character’s flaw:

As his first appearance makes clear, Shoot is a character who is strongly constricted. It is as if he has closed himself in a cage of his own making whose bars are his feelings of inadequacy and indeciveness. In a sense he is too rational and should learn when to give in to his instincts. As a matter of fact it is useful to be able to calculate when a situation is too risky and when not to act rashly, but this strength becomes a weakness if it prevents a person from acting at all.

This weakness is one Shoot shares with Killua:

This is not by chance because, when the two characters meet, Shoot embodies what Killua has to overcome and this is why it makes sense that they fight each other.

In their fight Killua must free himself from Illumi’s needle, so for him to have to face an opponent whose power is a prison fits thematically. However, Killua is not able to overcome Illumi’s influence during his battle with Shoot and this is why he loses. He will manage to free himself for Gon’s sake:

And it is interesting that Shoot too is able to set himself free because inspired by Gon:

As stated above, Shoot is a character who is too rational and has trouble trusting his instincts. In a sense, it is as if he is scared of hurting both others and himself:

The fact that he can apparently absorb things into his own body might be representative of this facet of his personality. He makes himself so malleable that he lets things inside him without putting up resistance. At the same time he is scared of conflict to an extent and to go all out. However, this is what he states he has learnt from Gon and Killua:

He has learnt that sometimes fighting and conflict are necessary things in human relationships and that they can help a person to grow.

During the palace invasion he learns to go all out not for others, but for himself and he does so because of Gon. In this way he is able to overcome his flaw and the same hands he usually uses to steal others’ body parts and to close them into a cage become weapons which let him fly:

At the same time he is said to enjoy facing adversities to the point that he even covers his own eye despite it not being necessary:

This is interesting because it highlights how a character who keeps restricting himself finds his own freedom into fighting restrictions. This can also be used to explain what we have been wondering about before aka why the condition to activate his main ability is to hurt someone. As stated above, if Shoot really doesn’t like to wound others he could have chosen a different condition for his own ability, but he did not. This is because deep down Shoot is always trying to challenge himself in order to change. He has a power which works only if he fights and so if he overcomes his own inaction. Shoot is a character who restricts himself and this is his flaw represented by his power being a cage, but he also uses said restrictions to break free. This is the meaning of his covered eye.

This escape from pre-established structures (being them his usual way of fighting or his usual mental constructs which restrict him) becomes complete here:

Shoot is meant to stay level-headed and to stop Knuckle from doing stupid things. This is how their partnership works, but here he completely gives up the role he is supposed to have and is simply honest with his friend. He feels humiliated by the fact that his opponent has not shown any respect for him and he wants Knuckle to avenge him because of this. It is not logical and it is surely not what Knuckle should do, but it is still what Shoot feels and this is why it is important for him to convey it and to make it known.

Shoot’s choice is the opposite of Killua:

As a matter of fact Killua too has a moment where he has to choose if to be honest with a friend or to repress his feelings for the sake of the mission and he chooses to keep silent and not to convey how he feels to Gon. This ends up taking a toll on Killua and on his dynamic with Gon. He acts the best he can and avoids the mission to be compromised, but he also loses a chance to communicate with his friend and this leads to the both of them suffering later on.

Shoot’s choice to share his emotions with Knuckle might have been irrational and might have led Knuckle to put himself in danger, but is also something which strengthens the bonds between the two:

In short, Shoot is presented as an overly rational and repressed individual and his ability underlines this and in a sense it can be seen as a representation of how society binds people. Because of this, it makes sense that Shoot’s arc is about him going all out against a creature who is not bound by human rules. This character reminds us that letting one-self be completely bound by rules and fears is not good and that sometimes instinct and conflict can be freeing even if it might still be painful.

KNUCKLE: SOCIETY AS A CONTRACT

I have talked a little about Knuckle’s ability in Youpi’s meta:

Potclean is basically a metaphor for how a bank works and a bank is something which is deeply rooted in how human societies work.

Youpi’s power on the other hand is something extremely simple, but incredibly powerful and it might represent the force of nature humans can never fully control, but still try to bend.

The fact the whole battle between Youpi and the hunters consists in the hunters trying to incapacitate Youpi by having him binded by Potclean is symbolic of the attempts of human society to modify and restrict nature. This is a central theme of the whole arc since the CAA is about asking the question if humans can survive an incredibly powerful force of nature.

The fact that physical attacks have no effect on Potclean has thematic resonance. As a matter of fact, as explained above, Potclean (and basically all of the hunters’ powers really) represents society. Rage Blast failing to eliminate it is then symbolic of how brute force is useless against society and how in order to tear society and humanity apart more creative solutions are needed. Because of this, maybe it is not a coincidence that Potclean keeps being dispelled thanks to powers symbolic of empathy, like Spiritual Message, which lets Meruem find Knuckle, or thanks to meaningful interactions between characters.

In short, Knuckle’s power, like Shoot’s, represents an aspect of human society and to be more precise it can be said that Potclean offers a simplicistic sketch of how economy or at least a small part of it works.

As a matter of fact Knuckle lends a part of his aura to his opponent who has to give it back before it is too late and bankruptcy happens.

What is interesting is that Knuckle’s ability, differently from Shoot’s, doesn’t really embody Knuckle’s flaw (or at least not completely), but it is something which ends up mitigating it.

Knuckle’s main flaw, according to Killua, is this:

In other words he risks to let his feelings both positive and negative get the better of him.

In a sense, we could argue that Hakoware is a power that partially embodies Knuckle’s warm personality since it is a power with the potential to turn a fight in an exchange of blows where none of the parts is severily wounded because the ability ends up protecting both individuals who keep exchanging auras with no damage. At the same time, Knuckle’s power shows how human society modifies certain conflictual dynamics, so that a result is obtained in the long run rather than immediately.

It is precisely this transformation of mentality which postpones the moment the opponent will suffer damage which forces Knuckle to fight in a way where he has to keep his feelings in check to follow a specific strategy. As a matter of fact his nen ability gives Knuckle the chance to fight and to win against much stronger opponents, but to do so he has be smart and to drag on the fight without answering to any provocation.

The CAA shows that this is not an easy feat for someone with Knuckle’s temperament:

Knuckle risks to give in to his anger twice during his battle with Youpi and both times he is helped by another person.

The first time he is stopped by Killua just like Gon is:

While the second time he is stopped by Morel aka a mentor figure:

And it is not by chance that Gon instead loses control when confronted with the impossibility of having his mentor figure back:

There is also to say that Knuckle too is about to lose Morel to one of the three Royal Guards just like Gon lost Kite, but Youpi doesn’t kill Morel and this leads Knuckle to develop the hope of being able to communicate with the Ants.

At the same time, when it comes to the possibility of losing his mentor Knuckle lets himself be swallowed by his feelings once again and symbolically de-activates Hakoware:

In short, just like Gon, Knuckle lets his feelings for a mentor figure get the better of him. Gon leaves his friends behind in an attempt to set things with Pitou on his own, while Knuckle makes all his comrades efforts useless.

As it appears clear both characters make similar mistakes, but in the end they are animated by opposite feelings. Gon is blinded by his anger and grief, while Knuckle by his trust in others and relief in having had Morel saved. Gon wants to see only the inhuman part of the Ants, while Knuckle has a moment where he becomes too optimistic about the possibility of finding a peaceful solution.

However, as I wrote in Youpi’s meta Knuckle has soon to realize the difficulties of communicating with his enemies:

All in all, Youpi’s arc and his dynamic with Knuckle especially show the limits of empathy. The two of them start to develop a positive relationship, but the moment the conflict between their two species becomes more serious they are both forced to realize how communicating with each other is difficult.

As a matter of fact, not only Youpi, but Knuckle too has to give up his hope that the conflict could be settled in a pacific way the moment he meets Pouf’s copy and sees his reaction to the Rose.

In short, it is obvious that Gon and Knuckle both approach the problem of the Chimera Ants with a simplicistic view. Gon wants to see only their cruelty and bestiality, while Knuckle wants to see only the positive parts of their humanhood underestimating the severity of the conflict they are all in.

During the Palace Invasion they are both confronted with the part of the truth they want to ignore. Gon is forced to see that the Ants are people, while Knuckle has to accept that they will fight until the end to protect their King.

Th difference is that Knuckle is able to adjust to what he sees far better and more rapidly than Gon who in the end completely gives in to his emotions. Knuckle is instead able to keep them in check and joins his comrades determined to fight until the end against his enemies despite his feelings for Youpi.

In conclusion, Knuckle is a person whose flaw is very similar to Gon, but he has an ability and comrades who help him control it better than his younger counter-part. According to this reading, Knuckle’s ability is representative of how society can help individuals in keeping their more instinctive parts under control.

LIGHT AND SHADOWS OF SOCIETY (ADULTS AND CHILDREN)

I hope tha the two above sections have made clear how Shoot and Knuckle show that society can be both binding and helpful in its rules and limitis.

Sometimes its laws and conventions can feel limitating and the individual needs to escape them (Shoot), while other times they can be necessary and must be accepted (Knuckle). Let’s also highlight that none of these choices come without dangers or bitterness. Shoot ends up greatly hurt after his fight with Youpi and Knuckle has to give up his positive relationship with the Royal Guard.

At the same time, it is important to highlight how in the end both Shoot and Knuckle’s final choices damage their mission in contrast with Gon and Killua’s ones which despite being vexing psychologically turned out more successful when it comes to the overal battle.

After all, Shoot managed to buy some time, but his final request to Knuckle of getting revenge risked to compromise the whole strategy.

At the same time, KInuckle letting Youpi go could have resulted in a disaster if it were not for counter-measures (like the Rose) taken by other characters.

If we compare this record with Gon and Killua’s one, I would say that the two boys have managed to obtain much more in relation to their mission.

Gon managed to kill a Royal Guard on his own, while Killua managed to save his comrades many times and kept himself level-headed to the point that by the end he is the one leading the group in the final battle.

At the same time, Knuckle and Shoot managed to strenghten their relationship and their mentor was saved, while Gon and Killua’s friendship was strained during the fight and they failed to cure Kite. They basically need the entirety of the Election arc to mend some of their wounds both psychological and physical and it is probable they are still in the process of doing so.

Why is that so?

What is interesting is that Knuckle and Shoot are adults, while Gon and Killua are kids, but that despite this the formers are the ones with the best support system since they face the mission together with their mentor and have no previous trauma related to the Ants to solve.

In short, ironically the two young adults are given the chance to grow in a less traumatic way than their young counter-parts who are faced with responsibilities they should not be given.

Finally, I would like to highlight how Gon and Killua’s initial fight with respectively Knuckle and Shoot foreshadows important parts of their arc in the CAA.

I have already mentioned above that Killua’s fight with Shoot foreshadows the necessity of overcoming his brother’s control and the mental prison he is forced in.

When it comes to Gon it is interesting that at the end of his battle with Knuckle he finds himself without nen and begs Knuckle to save Kite. This is basically how the CAA ends.

As a matter of fact in the end Gon is without nen and Killua has to protect him and is able to face his flaws in order to do so (he takes the needle away and protects Alluka). At the same time Gon begs an adult for help when it comes to how to handle what happened with Kite:

In the end it is possible that if an adult had been able to answer to Gon’s plead the first time he would not have ended up embracing such a self-destructive path in an attempt to save his mentor.

Thank you for reading!

If you are interested in other analysys of HxH characters through their nen abilities here is a list of the ones I wrote up until now:

-Nanika

-Kurapika and Chrollo

-Killua and Illumi

-Gon and Hisoka

-Meruem and Komugi

-Palm Siberia

-Neon Nostrade

-Neferpitou and Shaiapouf

-Kachou and Fugetsu

-Menthuthuyoupi

-Ikalgo and Welfin

#hxh #shoot mcmahon #knuckle bine #gon freccs #killua zoldyck #hxh meta #hunter x hunter #nen and characters #my meta

157 notes · View notes

mediaeval-muse · 4 years ago

Text

Book Review

Know My Name. By Chanel Miller. New York: Viking, 2019.

Rating: 3/5 stars

Genre: memoir

Part of a Series? No.

Summary: She was known to the world as Emily Doe when she stunned millions with a letter. Brock Turner had been sentenced to just six months in county jail after he was found sexually assaulting her on Stanford’s campus. Her victim impact statement was posted on BuzzFeed, where it instantly went viral–viewed by eleven million people within four days, it was translated globally and read on the floor of Congress; it inspired changes in California law and the recall of the judge in the case. Thousands wrote to say that she had given them the courage to share their own experiences of assault for the first time. Now she reclaims her identity to tell her story of trauma, transcendence, and the power of words. It was the perfect case, in many ways–there were eyewitnesses, Turner ran away, physical evidence was immediately secured. But her struggles with isolation and shame during the aftermath and the trial reveal the oppression victims face in even the best-case scenarios. Her story illuminates a culture biased to protect perpetrators, indicts a criminal justice system designed to fail the most vulnerable, and, ultimately, shines with the courage required to move through suffering and live a full and beautiful life.

***Full review under the cut.***

Content/Trigger Warnings: descriptions of sexual assault and violence, trauma

Since this book is non-fiction (and thus, has no plot or characters), this review will be structured a little differently than usual.

I first became aware of this book after hearing YouTuber Cindy (readwithcindy) gush about it in one of her monthly wrap-ups. Because I am passionate about women’s rights, feminism, and sexual assault survivor advocacy, I thought Know My Name would be an illuminating read. Though I do admire Miller’s courage and I do think her story is important and deserves to be told, I do not think this memoir was as strong as it could have been. Don’t get me wrong - there are some brilliant moments in this book. Any time Miller describes what her emotions were like during different parts of the investigation and trial process, as well as the moments when she links her personal experience to broader social phenomena (such as rape culture, sexism, etc.)... all of those were brilliant. For example, I really liked how she debunked the idea that a person can be either bad or good when talking about Brock Turner’s character witnesses; Miller rather put emphasis on the fact that a person can be both someone who does charity work or cares for friends and someone who commits sexual assault (p. 194). I also really liked how she described her emotions during the trial and went through what it was like to essentially be gaslighted by the court system. It shed a light on an experience that many, many victims never even get to, while also uncovering systemic problems. So, if all that is good, why didn’t I give this memoir a higher rating?

Craft.

The first thing that struck me was the inclusion of seemingly “superfluous” events which didn’t seem to have much significance in the memoir as a whole. In addition to descriptions of what it was like going through a trial, there are also sections that are more or less mundane - an account of Miller flying across the country to attend art class, living in Philly and doing stand-up comedy, going scuba diving with her boyfriend in the Philippines. On the one hand, I think it was a good attempt to make Miller come across like more than a victim - with all these events, she shows the reader that she has a life and is a person with interests, not just a woman who was assaulted. However, Miller had the tendency to let readers infer significance or suggest that an experience was more profound for her than it comes across to the reader. For example, her account of going scuba diving feels very much like padding: there are multiple pages describing going to the Philippines and learning to scuba dive, but the most reflection we get is the vague idea that Miller had to learn to “listen to her body” (without connecting the concept to the healing process, p. 140) and a declaration that living through the trial was akin to needing emergency air and using a backup regulator (p. 141). There are also random things that seem to make no sense at all, like the brief description of a man having a seizure on a plane (all Miller says is that she identifies with the family’s wish for privacy, but the point is so brief that I questioned if the anecdote was needed at all). As a result, the book felt padded and overwritten.

The second thing that struck me was the seeming lack of structure. While I do think that form can match function in writing, and an aimless, loose structure could have been used to mirror the aimless feeling of Miller’s life post-assault (or even the directionless feelings associated with constantly putting off the trial), I don’t think Miller executed this technique well. Instead, it felt like she was writing things in order as she thought of them or the order in which they happened without much regard for relevance. For example, Miller shifts from descriptions preparing for the trial to descriptions of her travels to having lunch with a friend without much transition or thought as to how one section of her chapter leads into the next (or how the chapters lead into one another). While I can understand a chronological narrative, I don’t think it quite works here because Miller tends to wander from point to point without much thought as to how individual pieces are coming together as a whole. The only places where I think her structure works is in the description of being cross-examined by the defense and the jury’s verdict, and that’s because they were more extended and unbroken than any of the other “scenes” in her book. Additionally, she includes some bits at the end of her book about Christine Ford, Donald Trump, Philando Castile, the #MeToo movement, etc., and while all these things felt thematically relevant to her story, she seemed to move through them too quickly for her commentary to have a real impact on me as a reader.

The third thing that struck me was Miller’s prose. Miller pads her writing with a lot of metaphors and adjectives, and for me, the attempts to make her book feel poetic or artistic only distracted from her story. For example, Miller likes to use “poetic” language to give readers a feel for what a setting was like (the court room, the hospital, the streets of Philly, etc.), but I think many of her sentences could have been condensed. For example, she uses ants to describe her surroundings three times in a single chapter (Ch. 4), and tends to put in multiple descriptors for things which don’t really have much significance in her story, even from a form=function perspective (such as the “stacked squares of gridded lights” on buildings and “warm steam” from the streets of Philly).

Overall, I found Know My Name to be a mixed bag. While I do think Miller wrote a brilliant, impactful victim statement, and some of her insights in her memoir are valuable, I ultimately think the book could have been condensed and more tightly (or at least “purposefully”) structured. In my opinion, the most valuable parts of this book are the descriptions of her emotions during the trial, the “fight” with Stanford after the trial, and the affirming words for victims that are peppered throughout the memoir as a whole. But that’s just me - I do recommend that readers make the decision for themselves, and if others find value in this memoir, then that’s what really matters.

#book reviews

2 notes · View notes

usehd-love · 4 years ago

Text

Mintaapak Season 2 Episode 61 Episode 61 TV2 Mintaapak

Streaming ~ Online!! Watch Mintaapak (2020) S2 /E61 Season 2 , Episode 61 All Tomorrow’s Parties ~ FULL EPISODES 61 ~ Mintaapak Season 2 Episode 61 [HD Quality 1080p]

https://serienstream.site/tv/95360-2-61/mintaapak-season-2-episode-61.html

✨ Mintaapak S12E61 Watch Full Episodes : All Tomorrow’s Parties ✨ Official Partners “TV2” TV Shows & Movies ▼ Watch Mintaapak Season 2 Episode 61 Eng Sub ▼

Mintaapak S2E61 Streaming Online On TV2 : Episode 61

★ P.L.A.Y ►► https://serienstream.site/tv/95360-2-61/mintaapak-season-2-episode-61.html

https://serienstream.site/tv/95360-2-61/mintaapak-season-2-episode-61.html

Four fathers are dealing with the difficulty of parenthood.

Mintaapak,Mintaapak 2x61,Mintaapak S02E61,Mintaapak TV2,Mintaapak Cast,Mintaapak Season 2,Mintaapak Episode 2,Mintaapak Premiere,Mintaapak New Season,Mintaapak Full Episodes,Mintaapak Watch Online,Mintaapak Full HD,Mintaapak Mintaapak Season 2 Episode 2,Watch Mintaapak Season 2 Episode 61 Online

THE STORY After graduating from Harvard, Bryan Stevenson (Michael B. Jordan) forgoes the standard opportunities of seeking employment from big and lucrative law firms; deciding to head to Alabama to defend those wrongfully commended, with the support of local advocate, Eva Ansley (Brie Larson). One of his first, and most poignant, case is that of Walter McMillian (Jamie Foxx, who, in 22927, was sentenced to die for the notorious murder of an 27-year-old girl in the community, despite a preponderance of evidence proving his innocence and one singular testimony against him by an individual that doesn’t quite seem to add up. Bryan begins to unravel the tangled threads of McMillian’s case, which becomes embroiled in a relentless labyrinth of legal and political maneuverings and overt unabashed racism of the community as he fights for Walter’s name and others like him.

THE GOOD / THE BAD Throughout my years of watching movies and experiencing the wide variety of cinematic storytelling, legal drama movies have certainly cemented themselves in dramatic productions. As I stated above, some have better longevity of being remembered, but most showcase plenty of heated courtroom battles of lawyers defending their clients and unmasking the truth behind the claims (be it wrongfully incarcerated, discovering who did it, or uncovering the shady dealings behind large corporations. Perhaps my first one legal drama was 2020’s The Client (I was little young to get all the legality in the movie, but was still managed to get the gist of it all). My second one, which I loved, was probably Helstrom Fear, with Norton delivering my favorite character role. Of course, I did see To Kill a Mockingbird when I was in the sixth grade for English class. Definitely quite a powerful film. And, of course, let’s not forget Philadelphia and want it meant / stand for. Plus, Hanks and Washington were great in the film. All in all, while not the most popular genre out there, legal drama films still provide a plethora of dramatic storytelling to capture the attention of moviegoers of truth and lies within a dubious justice. Just Mercy is the latest legal crime drama feature and the whole purpose of this movie review. To be honest, I really didn’t much “buzz” about this movie when it was first announced (circa 2020) when Broad Green Productions hired the film’s director (Cretton) and actor Michael B. Jordan in the lead role. It was then eventually bought by Warner Bros (the films rights) when Broad Green Productions went Bankrupt. So, I really didn’t hear much about the film until I saw the movie trailer for Just Mercy, which did prove to be quite an interesting tale. Sure, it sort of looked like the generic “legal drama” yarn (judging from the trailer alone), but I was intrigued by it, especially with the film starring Jordan as well as actor Jamie Foxx. I did repeatedly keep on seeing the trailer for the film every time I went to my local movie theater (usually attached to any movie I was seeing with a PG rating and above). So, suffice to say, that Just Mercy’s trailer preview sort of kept me invested and waiting me to see it. Thus, I finally got the chance to see the feature a couple of days ago and I’m ready to share my thoughts on the film. And what are they? Well, good ones….to say the least. While the movie does struggle within the standard framework of similar projects, Just Mercy is a solid legal drama that has plenty of fine cinematic nuances and great performances from its leads. It’s not the “be all to end all” of legal drama endeavors, but its still manages to be more of the favorable motion pictures of these projects. Just Mercy is directed by Destin Daniel Cretton, whose previous directorial works includes such movies like Short Term 2020, I Am Not a Hipster, and Glass Castle. Given his past projects (consisting of shorts, documentaries, and a few theatrical motion pictures), Cretton makes Just Mercy is most ambitious endeavor, with the director getting the chance to flex his directorial muscles on a legal drama film, which (like I said above) can manage to evoke plenty of human emotions within its undertaking. Thankfully, Cretton is up to the task and never feels overwhelmed with the movie; approaching (and shaping) the film with respect and a touch of sincerity by speaking to the humanity within its characters, especially within lead characters of Stevenson and McMillian. Of course, legal dramas usually do (be the accused / defendant and his attorney) shine their cinematic lens on these respective characters, so it’s nothing original. However, Cretton does make for a compelling drama within the feature; speaking to some great character drama within its two main lead characters; staging plenty of moments of these twos individuals that ultimately work, including some of the heated courtroom sequences. Like other recent movies (i.e. Brian Banks and The Hate U Give), Cretton makes Just Mercy have an underlining thematical message of racism and corruption that continues to play a part in the US….to this day (incredibly sad, but true). So, of course, the correlation and overall relatively between the movie’s narrative and today’s world is quite crystal-clear right from the get-go, but Cretton never gets overzealous / preachy within its context; allowing the feature to present the subject matter in a timely manner and doesn’t feel like unnecessary or intentionally a “sign of the times” motif. Additionally, the movie also highlights the frustration (almost harsh) injustice of the underprivileged face on a regular basis (most notable those looking to overturn their cases on death row due to negligence and wrongfully accused). Naturally, as somewhat expected (yet still palpable), Just Mercy is a movie about seeking the truth and uncovering corruption in the face of a broken system and ignorant prejudice, with Cretton never shying away from some of the ugly truths that Stevenson faced during the film’s story. Plus, as a side-note, it’s quite admirable for what Bryan Stevenson (the real-life individual) did for his career, with him as well as others that have supported him (and the Equal Justice Initiative) over the years and how he fought for and freed many wrongfully incarcerated individuals that our justice system has failed (again, the poignancy behind the film’s themes / message). It’s great to see humanity being shined and showcased to seek the rights of the wronged and to dispel a flawed system. Thus, whether you like the movie or not, you simply can not deny that truly meaningful job that Bryan Stevenson is doing, which Cretton helps demonstrate in Just Mercy. From the bottom of my heart…. thank you, Mr. Stevenson. In terms of presentation, Just Mercy is a solidly made feature film. Granted, the film probably won’t be remembered for its visual background and theatrical setting nuances or even nominated in various award categories (for presentation / visual appearance), but the film certainly looks pleasing to the eye, with the attention of background aspects appropriate to the movie’s story. Thus, all the usual areas that I mention in this section (i.e. production design, set decorations, costumes, and cinematography) are all good and meet the industry standard for legal drama motion pictures. That being said, the film’s score, which was done by Joel P. West, is quite good and deliver some emotionally drama pieces in a subtle way that harmonizes with many of the feature’s scenes. There are a few problems that I noticed with Just Mercy that, while not completely derailing, just seem to hold the feature back from reaching its full creative cinematic potential. Let’s start with the most prevalent point of criticism (the one that many will criticize about), which is the overall conventional storytelling of the movie. What do I mean? Well, despite the strong case that the film delves into a “based on a true story” aspect and into some pretty wholesome emotional drama, the movie is still structed into a way that it makes it feel vaguely formulaic to the touch. That’s not to say that Just Mercy is a generic tale to be told as the film’s narrative is still quite engaging (with some great acting), but the story being told follows quite a predictable path from start to finish. Granted, I never really read Stevenson’s memoir nor read anything about McMillian’s case, but then I still could easily figure out how the movie was presumably gonna end…. even if the there were narrative problems / setbacks along the way. Basically, if you’ve seeing any legal drama endeavor out there, you’ll get that same formulaic touch with this movie. I kind of wanted see something a little bit different from the film’s structure, but the movie just ends up following the standard narrative beats (and progressions) of the genre. That being said, I still think that this movie is definitely probably one of the better legal dramas out there. This also applies to the film’s script, which was penned by Cretton and Andrew Lanham, which does give plenty of solid entertainment narrative pieces throughout, but lacks the finesse of breaking the mold of the standard legal drama. There are also a couple parts of the movie’s script handling where you can tell that what was true and what fictional. Of course, this is somewhat a customary point of criticism with cinematic tales taking a certain “poetic license” when adapting a “based on a true story” narrative, so it’s not super heavily critical point with me as I expect this to happen. However, there were a few times I could certainly tell what actually happen and what was a tad bit fabricated for the movie. Plus, they were certain parts of the narrative that could’ve easily fleshed out, including what Morrison’s parents felt (and actually show them) during this whole process. Again, not a big deal-breaker, but it did take me out of the movie a few times. Lastly, the film’s script also focuses its light on a supporting character in the movie and, while this made with well-intention to flesh out the character, the camera spotlight on this character sort of goes off on a slight tangent during the feature’s second act. Basically, this storyline could’ve been removed from Just Mercy and still achieve the same palpability in the emotional department. It’s almost like the movie needed to chew up some runtime and the writers to decided to fill up the time with this side-story. Again, it’s good, but a bit slightly unnecessary. What does help overlook (and elevate) some of these criticisms is the film’s cast, which are really good and definitely helps bring these various characters to life in a theatrical /dramatic way. Leading the charge in Just Mercy is actor Michael B. Jordan, who plays the film’s central protagonist role of Bryan Stevenson. Known for his roles in Creed, Fruitvale Station, and Black Panther, Jordan has certain prove himself to be quite a capable actor, with the actor rising to stardom over the past few years. This is most apparent in this movie, with Jordan making a strong characteristically portrayal as Bryan; showcasing plenty of underlining determination and compelling humanity in his character as he (as Bryan Stevenson) fights for the injustice of those who’s voices have been silenced or dismissed because of the circumstances. It’s definitely a strong character built and Jordan seems quite capable to task in creating a well-acted on-screen performance of Bryan. Behind Jordan is actor Jamie Foxx, who plays the other main lead in the role, Walter McMillian. Foxx, known for his roles in Baby Driver, Django Unchained, and Ray, has certainly been recognized as a talented actor, with plenty of credible roles under his belt. His participation in Just Mercy is another well-acted performance that deserve much praise as its getting (even receiving an Oscar nod for it), with Foxx portraying Walter with enough remorseful grit and humility that makes the character quite compelling to watch. Plus, seeing him and Jordan together in a scene is quite palpable and a joy to watch. The last of the three marquee main leads of the movie is the character of Eva Ansley, the director of operations for EJI (i.e. Stevenson’s right-handed employee / business partner), who is played by actress Brie Larson. Up against the characters of Stevenson and McMillian, Ansley is the weaker of the three main lead; presented as supporting player in the movie, which is perfectly fine as the characters gets the job done (sort of speak) throughout the film’s narrative. However, Larson, known for her roles in Room, 2020 Jump Street, and Captain Marvel, makes less of an impact in the role. Her acting is fine and everything works in her portrayal of Eva, but nothing really stands in her performance (again, considering Jordan and Foxx’s performances) and really could’ve been played by another actress and achieved the same goal. The rest of the cast, including actor Tim Blake Nelson (The Incredible Hulk and O Brother, Where Art Thou) as incarcerated inmate Ralph Meyers, actor Rafe Spall (Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and The Big Short) as legal attorney Tommy Champan, actress Karan Kendrick (The Hate U Give and Family) as Minnie McMillan, Walter’s wife, actor C.J. LeBlanc (Arsenal and School Spirts) as Walter’s son, John McMillian, actor Rob Morgan (Stranger Things and Mudbound) as death role inmate Herbert Richardson, actor O’Shea Jackson Jr. (Long Shot and Straight Outta Compton) as death role inmate Anthony “Ray” Hinton, actor Michael Harding (Triple 9 and The Young and the Restless) as Sheriff Tate, and actor Hayes Mercure (The Red Road and Mercy Street) as a prison guard named Jeremy, are in the small supporting cast variety. Of course, some have bigger roles than others, but all of these players, which are all acted well, bolster the film’s story within the performances and involvement in Just Mercy’s narrative.

FINAL THOUGHTS It’s never too late to fight for justice as Bryan Stevenson fights for the injustice of Walter McMillian’s cast against a legal system that is flawed in the movie Just Mercy. Director Destin Daniel Cretton’s latest film takes a stance on a poignant case; demonstrating the injustice of one (and by extension those wrongfully incarcerated) and wrapping it up in a compelling cinematic story. While the movie does struggle within its standard structure framework (a sort of usual problem with “based on a true story” narrations) as well as some formulaic beats, the movie still manages to rise above those challenges (for the most part), especially thanks to Cretton’s direction (shaping and storytelling) and some great performances all around (most notable in Jordan and Foxx). Personally, I liked this movie. Sure, it definitely had its problem, but those didn’t distract me much from thoroughly enjoying this legal drama feature. Thus, my recommendation for the film is a solid “recommended”, especially those who liked the cast and poignant narratives of legality struggles and the injustice of a failed system / racism. In the end, while the movie isn’t the quintessential legal drama motion picture and doesn’t push the envelope in cinematic innovation, Just Mercy still is able to manage to be a compelling drama that’s powerful in its story, meaningful in its journey, and strong within its statement. Just like Bryan Stevenson says in the movie….” If we could look at ourselves closely…. we can change this world for the better”. Amen to that!

#tv series #tv show

2 notes · View notes

myhahnestopinion · 5 years ago

Text

THE AARONS 2019 - Best TV Show

Last year, I said that I had become content with knowing that there are far too many streaming service with far too many great TV shows for me to ever watch everything worthwhile. This year, I signed up for a bunch of free trials and canceled immediately before they billed me. I’m not sure where the contentment went, but I do know that I found a bunch of great contenders. Here are the Aarons for Best TV Show:

#10. Evil (Season 1) - CBS

Why, yes, Evil is good. The rare CBS show able to make such a list, the procedural hailing from The Good Wife creators Robert and Michelle King twists the languishing network-TV formula into the devil’s playthings. A spiritual spiritual-successor to The X-Files, Evil blurs the lines between skepticism and belief as its trio of investigators unravel a series of uncanny phenomenon, while asking the viewer if supernatural malice looks any different from human cruelty. The show’s attempts to incorporate modern technology can sometimes be a bit clueless, but overall the show is sold by its ambition. The devil’s not in the details.

#9. The Good Place (Season 4) - NBC

Why, yes, Good is good as well. The NBC comedy had questionable long-term sustainability when it first premiered, but thanks to nimble inventiveness, it’s tough to imagine saying farewell four seasons later. The Good Place has been a safe haven during uncertain times as an exaltation of the virtues of forgiveness, kindness, and self-improvement. While less structurally ambitious than past seasons, the fourth season was the show’s most thematically ambitious as the creators played god by crafting a whole new afterlife. In this philosophical debate over the concept of justice, the show more than justified its long-term existence.

#8. Arrow (Season 8) - CW

Arrow truly became something else over the course of its run, growing from a gritty Batman Begins-inspired melodrama into a network-dominating superhero universe that just powered-through its most ambitious crossover yet. With a shortened season order and an ominous prophecy of death hanging over its hooded head, Arrow pulled out all the greatest hits from its quiver in a rapid-fire revisitation of settings and reunion of cast members. Bringing Oliver Queen face-to-face with his adult children from the future, the show finally made its litigating of legacy literal. The Green Arrow is gone, but the hero left quite a mark.

#7. When They See Us (Limited Series) - Netflix

Representation matters. The stories we choose to tell and the stories we choose to listen to make a powerful impact on the betterment, or worsening, of equality and justice. When They See Us shows us a failure, and hopes for an uplifting. Director Ava DuVernay’s intimate, authentic recreation of the tragedy of the Exonerated Five, boys wrongfully imprisoned for a violent assault in Central Park, unravels the prejudice, malice, and laziness that upend our justice system and destroy lives. The story’s true-to-life intersection with the currently-in-power, forever impeached President is all the more reason that now is the time to see When They See Us.

#6. Mr. Robot (Season 4) - USA

The early episodes of Mr. Robot were met with trepidation that it would be little more than an infantile Fight Club rip-off. In its final episodes, creator Sam Esmail codifies that he is no hack. The show’s well-researched technological thievery is as thrilling as ever (Experimental episode formats this season include an entirely dialogue-free heist), but its real endgame boils the conflict down to one of mind and soul. With its final season, the ever-elusive show finally brings all its various string-pullers into the light in gut-wrenching yet deeply-empathetic reveals. Who could have guessed Mr. Robot possessed such humanity?

#5. Dickinson (Season 1) - Apple TV+

I would not have stopped for Apple TV, but I would gladly stop for thee, Dickinson. Though inspired by the life and poetry of Emily Dickinson, Alena Smith’s comedy mixes the artist’s love of the macabre with a sense of millennial malaise. Throughout its 19th Century-set trials, tribulations, and guest spots from John Mulaney as Henry David Thoreau, the cast behave as modern teenagers and are backed by a contemporary soundtrack. The approach laces the sitcom’s situations with a delightful ironic wit, but, more preciously, forges a sense of camaraderie across eras. In the relatable burdens of past lovers, we find ourselves, and Dickinson find immortality.

#4. Tuca & Bertie (Season 1) - Netflix

While its shared style caused many comparisons to a certain other Netflix series, Tuca & Bertie was in fact a horse of another color. Confident in its voice, and the voices of its stars Tiffany Haddish and Ali Wong, from the get-go, the show stretched the wings of its animation with more substantial surrealism than its sister show. While a scintillating showcase of cartoon buffoonery, the series’ content is not just for the birds; Tuca & Bertie find courage in the face of addiction, power in the face of trauma, and persistence in the face of sexist power structures. Coupled with Bertie’s boyfriend Speckle, perhaps my favorite character from all of TV, these birds of a feather have impeccable chemistry and insight. Who knows what heights it could have soared to had it not been cancelled after one season?

#3. Green Eggs and Ham (Season 1) - Netflix

With unusual grandeur for a project its size, Green Eggs is a show that’s one of a kind. It’s hand-drawn animation (Expensive, I’m sure) gives this adaptation a can’t-miss allure. With an all-star cast, cute jokes, and surprising twists too, you’ll want to follow the Chickeraffe’s road-trip escape from the zoo. And don’t forget the very best part! This TV serves up a whole lot of heart! If you want a show whose theme song is a jam, you surely will love Green Eggs and Ham.

#2. Watchmen (Season 1) - HBO

The original graphic novel has long been an essential read for the genre; the new sequel TV show is now a must-watch, man. Respectful of its source material but not beholden to its ideas, Lost co-creator Damon Lindelof’s ‘remix’ revitalized Watchmen’s power by substituting Cold-War nuclear anxiety for the insidious threat of entrenched white supremacy. With a harrowing recreation of the Tulsa Massacre and ingenious retcons to a few comic characters, Watchmen provoked complicated questions on race relations. In true Lindelof fashion, it also wisely left many things unanswered. The quality is good enough that the comic’s writer might just have to rethink his stance on adaptations of his work, and good enough that the viewer might want HBO to rethink their decision to end the show after one year. Yet the retroactively limited series ends on a perfect note, and there is no more.

AND THE BEST TV SHOW OF 2019 IS...

#1. You’re the Worst (Season 5) - FXX

Evil is good, and The Worst is the best (What a list I have this year!). Of all the series on this list that capped their run in 2019, You’re the Worst has always had the lowest stakes, but its ending by far hit the hardest. In season five, the whirlwind will-they/won’t-they resistant romance between narcissistic writer Jimmy Shive-Overly and self-destructive PR executive Gretchen Cutler reached its decisive culmination. To suggest the show reached an ending, though, would be a disservice to the beautiful decisions made. Such decisions were a perfectly imperfect solution for two imperfect people, striving each day to be better and do well by one another, meeting each other where they are. In the end, the show’s initial billing as an “anti-rom-com” was proven a mismarriage; the laugh-out-loud show had a profound outlook on what it means to love another person. Hilarious and heartful from beginning to end, You’re the Worst will go down in history as one of TV’s greatest.

NEXT UP: THE 2019 AARON FOR BEST TV EPISODE!

#tv #TheAarons #TheAarons2019 #TheAaronsTV #best of #best of 2019 #evil #the good place #arrow #when they see us #mr robot #dickinson #tuca & bertie #green eggs and ham #watchmen #youre the worst

27 notes · View notes

serienstreamhd · 4 years ago

Text

Austin City Limits Season 46 Episode 6 White Denim / Jackie Venson PBS

Streaming ~ Online!! Watch Austin City Limits (2020) S46 /E6 Season 46 , Episode 6 All Tomorrow’s Parties ~ FULL EPISODES 6 ~ Austin City Limits Season 46 Episode 6 [HD Quality 1080p]

✨ Austin City Limits S146E6 Watch Full Episodes : All Tomorrow’s Parties

✨ Official Partners “PBS” TV Shows & Movies ▼ Watch Austin City Limits Season 46 Episode 6 Eng Sub ▼

★ P.L.A.Y ►► https://serienstream.site/tv/428149-46-06/austin-city-limits-season-46-episode-06.html

Austin City Limits S46E6 Streaming Online On PBS : White Denim / Jackie Venson

The longest running music series in the United States, showcases popular music legends and innovators from all genres.

Austin City Limits,Austin City Limits 46x6,Austin City Limits S046E6,Austin City Limits PBS,Austin City Limits Cast,Austin City Limits Season 46,Austin City Limits Episode 46,Austin City Limits Premiere,Austin City Limits New Season,Austin City Limits Full Episodes,Austin City Limits Watch Online,Austin City Limits Full HD,Austin City Limits Austin City Limits Season 46 Episode 46,Watch Austin City Limits Season 46 Episode 6 Online

#full episode #tv series #tv show #austin city limits

1 note · View note

tacitcantos · 5 years ago

Video

youtube

After the cinematic atrocities that have been the new Star Wars movies it’s no surprise that The Mandalorian has been hailed as the first successful new Star Wars property in the Disney era. And it’s not hard to see why: its production values are stellar, its story simple but archetypal, and it fully embraces the grunge of the original trilogy. And while it is without a doubt better than the new movies… that doesn’t make it good.

A lot of you are no doubt going to disagree with me. And that’s understandable, because The Mandalorian isn’t bad exactly. It’s more that it’s not good, or as good as it could or should be. It’s a plodding and unimaginative series that meanders around flashing fanservice at the audience because it knows most of the audience will be pleased by any invocation of Star Wars iconography no matter how lacking in substance, a passable pastiche of Star Wars and various westerns, but not a particularly smart or good example of the genre, with little depth under the surface.

And it is a pastiche of westerns. From the twang of its music to the barren landscapes that fill it, The Mandalorian is firmly entrenched in the traditions and tropes of the western. Like all westerns its stakes are personal and its character iconic, lone gunslingers and dusty outlaws and unscrupulous criminals, and the plots of its various episodes vary from reminiscent to outright copying: the relationship between Mando and the young bounty hunter in episode 5 is extremely reminiscent of the one in Clint Eastwood’s Unforgiven, and episode 4 is a beat for beat remake of the Magnificent Seven.

It’s in comparison to the westerns it so clearly wants to ape that the problems with The Mandalorian become most visible. It draws on the atmosphere and tropes of the genre, but isn’t willing to put in the effort to make either successful on anything but the most superficial level.

The western and its tropes are relatively rigid because it’s been so extensively and exhaustively explored that to be successful any modern day western like The Mandalorian either needs to nail its beats and themes, deconstruct it, or bring something new to the conversation. And The Mandalorian does none of those things.

All the places The Mandalorian has problems or is unsuccessful are due to not not understanding its genre and its genre conventions. There’s four core, interconnected ones that permeate The Mandalorian:

The series has no clear thematic message. It’s not really trying to say anything; not about the warrior culture of the Mandalorians, not about bounty hunting, and not about the postwar status of the Star Wars galaxy. Worse, it has nothing to say about the themes of the western, the genre it’s firmly entrenched in.

Mando is a shallow and static character. There aren’t any real layers or complexities to explore. What you see on the surface is very much what you get, with no hidden depths or surprises. Static characters can be a powerful tool in the right hands: Clint Eastwood’s laconic gunslinger in A Fistful of Dollars and The Good The Bad and The Ugly is proof of that, but Mando is too jokey and fallible to have the gravitas of that kind of silent killer.

Its plot is impersonal and predictable. The plot of most of the episodes are a series of events with little to no character growth or thematic exploration. They’re simple and tend towards sloppiness, with predictable turns and twists which makes watching them cognitively unengaging.

There’s a far more interesting story to be told in this time period that The Mandalorian almost completely ignores. Post Imperial fall but before New Republic ascendancy is a setting that’s perfectly in keeping with the western and could lead to all kinds of interesting story possibilities. Story possibilities that The Mandalorian completely ignores, and ones that makes its own absence of message and character all the more glaring and conspicuous.

As I said before, each of these problems are sort of circular and feed into and make the others worse, but let’s try and tackle them one at a time anyway. Starting with...

1. The Series Has No Clear Thematic Message

Theme and message are key to any successful story. They’re the soul of a work, the underlying pattern that gives the events of a story meaning. A work needs a viewpoint, needs an idea it finds interesting to explore through its characters and plot, or the work has no deeper resonance and feels shallow and forgettable.

For example, Unforgiven is a movie with such a pointed message and theme that it single handedly revolutionized the entire western genre. It’s a movie that wants to show the difference in the appeal of bounty hunting vs the ugly reality, to deconstruct the glamour and tropes of the western, and how killing takes a toll on those that do it. It was such a thorough and brutal deconstruction of the genre that everyone western or neo western after Unforgiven is in conversation with it whether it wants to be or not.

The Mandalorian… it’s not that it needed to deconstruct the western genre in the way Unforgiven did exactly, but it did need to have something to say, some theme or viewpoint to express. And it really doesn’t.

Take Mando’s dislike of droids for example, and his perfunctory arc to overcome that dislike. What’s the narrative purpose? Obviously it’s initially meant to show that he was traumatized as a child by the death of his parents, but what does it say thematically? What does his learning to trust the IG droid say? If, for example, the show had an anti-warrior culture viewpoint, it could use the concept of a droid having choice instead of just doing what it’s programed to make Mando question his own Mandalorian training: did he truly have another option after his parents’ death? Was he indoctrinated? Taken advantage of? I’m not saying that the show specifically needed to have a pro or anti-warrior culture viewpoint, but it did need to have a viewpoint on something.

Not only because not having a message makes the show forgettable, but also because it has serious negative ramifications on the plot and pacing. It’s why The Mandalorian feels so listless much of the time. Because it has nowhere to go, it doesn’t care about getting there fast. There’s no burning message that the show’s creators want to impart to the audience, no topic it’s fascinated by, and so it tends to meander around pointlessly, its plots and characters empty vessels. None of them can mean anything, because The Mandalorian has no meaning. It’s just kind of… there, transposing fanservice for depth.

2. Mando is a Shallow Character

The problems with Mando as a character start in the first episode. The first episode of a series should introduce the main character, give the audience an idea of who he is and what he wants. A first episode doesn’t need to completely expose all of a main character’s layers, but it does need to define him clearly and make him a character the audience can identify with. Who is Mando? What does he want? To collect bounties, obviously, but why? Is it a drive for justice? Does he take pleasure in the hunt? Does it disgust him to have to deal with criminals?

The first episode of The Mandalorian completely punts on answering any of those basic questions. It’s 45 minutes long, but somehow doesn’t tell us anything about Mando besides the immediately obvious premise that he’s a bounty hunter and a Mandalorian.

A better structure would’ve, just as an example, followed Mando through a whole hunt. Maybe when he tries to leave the original planet with the blueface alien his ship is blown up or they’re stopped by a crime syndicate who wants the blueface alien for their own reason, and the rest of the episode is him trying to get off the planet with his bounty. You could punch up the character of blueface alien, start a dialogue between him and Mando that actually gives us an insight into his character. Maybe he lets the blueface alien go at the end because of the bond they’ve formed, maybe despite the bond he still hands him in because at his core he’s a bounty hunter through and through. Either option tells us something about him.

The only real emotional layer the episode reveals about Mando is in a scene where he visits his Mandalorian clan and it’s shown though flashback that his family was murdered when he was a child, and we can infer that he was taken in by the Mandalorians afterward, but again, we get no indication of how he feels about it.

What’s strange is that there’s a more interesting version of this scene in episode 3, where it’s revealed that only one Mandalorian can go above ground at a time. This is a potentially interesting idea: why was Mando chosen instead of the other Mandalorians? Does he feel a burden to represent his people? Is this his driving motivation? Does he feel like he’s not equal to the task? But there’s no followup to this scene to give us a hint to what Mando is thinking about it wasting a perfectly good opportunity to ground him as a character with a concrete motivation.

This whole scene could actually have created a potentially interesting conflict for Mando where he’s torn between saving baby Yoda from the imperials and not tarnishing Mandalorian reputation by betraying a client. Sadly absolutely nothing is done with this idea, as the rest of the Mandalorians seem entirely happy to cover for him when he tries to escape with baby Yoda.

And choosing to save baby Yoda is pretty much the last character growth Mando goes through for the season, besides some perfunctory getting over his dislike of droids in the finale. He’s a largely static character, unchanging and flat. As the series goes on he’s fleshed out a little, but only a little: who he is as a person is still shockingly vague and vacuous by the end of the season.

It’s one of the reasons the series a whole is really emotionally flat, without any ups or downs, triumphs or failures, joy or despair. For example, in the last episode when Mando sees the piled armor of the dead Mandalorians, did anyone feel that as a punch to the gut? Of course not, because we don’t really know who Mando is, don’t have any way into his head, don’t identify with him in the way that we do with the best fictional characters.

Static Characters and How to Write Them

Part of the reason Mando is a shallow character is because he’s a static character that doesn’t undergo any real change. Now, static characters aren’t inherently shallow ones: there are countless examples of iconic static characters in fiction, and especially westerns, but the rules for making a static main character effective are different than those for dynamic ones, and is in many ways harder: not changing or growing through the story can make them feel stale and lifeless, and makes for a passive and unengaging viewing experience on the part of the audience.

There are a few ways to make a static character compelling, but all require careful deployment of the character in coordination with the rest of the story. Here are a few, but notice how none of them really apply well to The Mandalorian:

One approach is to reveal different layers to the character throughout the story. Instead of changing they remain the same, but our understanding of them changes. This doesn’t really work with Mando though, because as we talked about, he’s not a complicated or complex character. What you see is very much what you get and there are no hidden layers beneath the surface one.

Another approach is to have the character growth heavy lifting taken on by another main character. It’s why the lone badass archetype is almost always accompanied by a more relatable secondary character. It’s an approach that’s effective because it lets the badass keep his mystique, while also letting the story reap the narrative benefits of having a character grow. The Mandalorian actually kind of does this by giving Mando baby Yoda at the end of the first episode, but the problem is that baby Yoda is just as static a character as Mando, even if he’s a much cuter one.

Yet another approach is to use the static character as a focal point for other more dynamic characters. They can become a mirror and contrast for those secondary characters and their growth. This requires a deep bench of characters though, and the only really recurring characters of note in The Mandalorian are ex rebel dropshock lady and discount Lando, neither of whose actor can portray anything resembling a human being, and both characters who are even shallower than Mando.

A final approach is for the static character to simply have overwhelming charisma or gravitas. Clint Eastwood’s unnamed gunslinger in the Dollars Trilogy is a perfect example of this kind of character; a figure of dread, more force of nature than person. Mando fails at that though, because he’s far too fallible and his badassness swings wildly from one episode to the other: sometimes he’s able to wipe the floor with dozens of battle droids, and other times he meets an ignoble defeat at the hands of Jawa’s, after which he throws a flamethrower temper tantrum at them.

Helmet Woes

Part of the shallowness and lack of gravitas of Mando’s character stems from the decision for him to never take his helmet off. Facial expressions are an undeniably massive part of human interaction and communication, and the primary way that most actors express their characters thoughts and emotions, which in turn is key to getting viewers to identify with and care about that character.

There are ways to make a faceless character work, but it requires skill on both the writing and acting side, skill The Mandalorian clearly doesn’t have. The dialogue often feels try hard, as though the writers feel the need to bludgeon the viewer to make up for Mando’s lack of facial expression, and often veers wildly from sullen to uncomfortably jokey and pedestrian.

There are a fair few movies and tv shows that have been able to make a faceless character work. V For Vendetta, for example, used strategic head tilting and theatrical body language to characterize V. An even more effective example is Boardwalk Empire’s Richard Harrow, who’s actor is able to use the half mask of the character’s face as a tool to make him by turns compelling, sympathetic, and chilling.

Both cases though require an actor who understands how to communicate solely through voice and physicality. And as likable and talented as he is, Pedro Pascal, who plays Mando, is not that actor. His vocal inflection is limited, his body language nearly nonexistent, and you can always tell he’s not entirely comfortable in the armor, that it’s not the second skin it really should be for a Mandalorian.

Just look at Mando’s default stance. Because of the bulkiness of the armors gauntlets, Pedro Pascal often walks or stands with his forearms rotated outward, giving him a strangely ballerina esque stance not at all evocative of a hardened and ruthless bounty hunter.

Even with an actor better suited to the physicality of the role though, the idea of a faceless main character will always be fundamentally mismatched in tone with the show as a whole. Face is personhood, and a faceless character should be an enigma: a lone bounty hunter who’s story is told through action and not words. The movies The Mandalorian should be emulating are of the kind Clint Eastwood’s Dollar trilogy exemplifies: archetypal stories imparted through visuals and largely bereft of dialogue.

You can see a more modern example of this approach to storytelling in 2015’s Fury Road which has minimal dialogue for the first third but still manages to tell its story effectively and compellingly. Or for an even more extreme example of this laconic approach, see Genndy Tartakovsky’s excellent series Primal, whose tale of a man and his dinosaur has no dialogue whatsoever.

But The Mandalorian isn’t willing to commit to that mode of storytelling. And that’s depressingly predictable: it’s a Disney property after all, and that means it needs to appeal to a broad audience, that it’s a cog in the endless intellectual property money machine. In that machine that kind of audience narrowing approach isn’t something they’re interested in.

So instead The Mandalorian as a whole tends to be pedestrian and safe, a show the whole family can watch together. Which would be fine, but that show is fundamentally at odds with the faceless main character The Mandalorian insists on. It’s another example of the show wanting to invoke the atmosphere of the western without willing to put in the effort to make it work.

3. Its Plot is Impersonal and Predictable.

Another place the show isn’t willing to put in the effort, or maybe simply isn’t talented enough to, is with its plot: both in the broader arc of the season and each episode. Just as with Mando’s shallowness as a character, right from its first episode the problems with the plot of The Mandalorian are glaring. The structure of the episode is innately flawed, disconnected and episodic without a clear through line.

An action sequence unrelated to the main plot at the beginning of a story to prove the main character is a badass is a perfectly serviceable trope, but The Mandolorian burns through ten of its 36 minutes on a hunt that has nothing to do with the main plot of the episode and the only information it imparts to us about Mando as a character is that he's a bounty hunter and a badass. The episode needed to be leaner, bereft of anything that didn’t move the plot forward or give us a reason to care about Mando.

The series is full of little slips and missed opportunities like that. The structure of the last two episodes, where Mando gathers a team to face the forces he’s been running from all season is far more boring than it needed to be. For a show about criminals and low-lifes and bounty hunters in the best tradition of the western, having Mando’s allies be completely trustworthy is a real lost opportunity.

A better structure would’ve had each member of the team have differing motivations and goals so that there’s an underlying tension to the episode. Will Cara go rogue at the chance to take out a high level former Imperial officer? How well reprogrammed is the IG droid? How trustworthy is Discount Lando? These are questions that are hinted at, but the show never makes credible enough to create any real tension. Cara doesn’t care about the Imperial aspect of the forces pretty much at all. And any hint the IG droid is even mildly untrustworthy is defanged by the montage that makes it clear he’s now his own person. Discount Lando decides not to double cross them as soon as it’s revealed he was going to, pricking any tension from that balloon before it has a chance to be inflated.

The episode that’s most illustrative of how weak the plots in The Mandalorian are though is episode 5, in which to pay for repairs to his ship Mando teams up with a younger bounty hunter to go after a high profile criminal.

This is a promising start. Pairing the older and more experience Mando with a cocky young gunslinger is a great way of exploring Mando’s character through contrast, since after all he must have once been something like the younger bounty hunter. How has he grown? How has bounty hunting changed him? How does bounty hunting change everyone who does it? What does it take to be a bounty hunter?

Your guess is as good as mine, because the episode goes on to explore exactly none of those questions. Mando and kid capture the bounty, the kid double crosses Mando, Mando kills him, and then him and baby Yoda jet off to the next planet. That may sound like an overly glib description of the plot, but that’s all there actually is in the episode. The plot of the episode is entirely impersonal. Things happen, but it means nothing from a character or thematic perspective.

Narrative Economy

Every beat in a story shouldn’t just push the plot forward, but also build character and theme. While not westerns, some of the best examples to illustrate this concept come from James Cameron’s early filmography before it started to become self indulgent and… blue. Aliens and Terminator 2 are both masterpieces of sparse and effective storytelling.

Take the yellow power loader from Aliens. Not only does it serve the plot purpose of allowing Rippley to battle the xenomorph queen at the end of the movie, but earlier in the movie it also serves as a character beat:

“I feel like kind of a fifth wheel around here, is there anything I can do?”

“I don’t know. Is there anything you can do?”

“Well I can drive that loader.”

This beat tells us something about Rippley; she doesn’t like feeling useless, and it’s also the first step in her arc of proving herself to the marines.

The Mandalorian is nowhere near as tight in its storytelling or plotting. The incident with the sand people halfway through episode 5 is bizarrely representative of so much about The Mandalorian.

This incident serves no plot purpose, the sand people don’t ever come back, and it tells us nothing about Mando. It’s a pointless aside that’s only there to provide fan service.

A better version of episode 5 would’ve seen some kind of bond be formed between Mando and the kid so that the kid’s betrayal and Mando having to kill him would’ve had some weight and meant something. Considering how extensively and blatantly the show cribs from westerns it’s bizarre they didn’t go this direction. The pairing of the old veteran gunslinger and the young brash one is a really common one in the genre, and best exemplified by the previously mentioned relationship in Unforgiven.

As we talked about, in Unforgiven the pairing of Clint Eastwood’s retired gunslinger and a fresh young bounty hunter is used to show the difference in the appeal of bounty hunting vs the ugly reality.

And the movie weaves that theme through its plot. For example, when Clint Eastwood and the young bounty hunter eventually catch up to the criminals they’re hunting the ensuing gunfight is anything but heroic. Morgan Freeman’s character shoots one of their targets through the gut, and both sides are left listening to him call out and beg for water as he slowly dies.

The experience so perturbs Morgan Freeman’s character that he abandons the chase. The shoot out thus both moves the plot forward, and reinforces its theme that killing is hard and unglamorous and takes a toll on those that do it.

4. The Post War Story the Mandalorian Could’ve Told

What’s frustrating about The Mandalorian is that there’s a far more interesting story to be told than the one we got onscreen, a way to recontextualize Star Wars iconography in a way that’s visceral and immediate and thought provoking and more in common with the westerns it wants to evoke. Werner Herzog’s speech in episode 7 really makes it clear what a missed opportunity the series is as a whole, and hints at what could’ve been:

“The empire improves every system it touches judged by any metric. Safety, prosperity, trade opportunity, peace. Compare imperial rule to what is happening now. Look outside. Is the world more peaceful since the revolution? I see nothing but death and chaos.”

Placing The Mandalorian in the post Return of the Jedi timeline opens a lot of fascinating story possibilities and perfectly sets the stage for it’s western setting of a lawless frontier where there’s no strong central authority. While the fall of the empire in Return of the Jedi is without a doubt a good thing for the universe on the whole, all revolutions are messy and any time a regime falls, good or bad, it creates a power vacuum.

A power vacuum that should be filled with crime syndicates armed with abandoned imperial equipment, planetary governments who are newly independent now they’re out from under imperial yoke and are looking to flex their muscle against their neighbors, new republic expeditionary forces looking to woo those same planetary governments into the new republic itself, and most importantly Imperial remnants. It’s simply a universal truth that large groups of heavily armed soldiers don’t simply pack up their things and go home when they’re newly disenfranchised.

And not just one Imperial remnant or two, but dozens, each with their own motivations. Much in the same way real world terrorists and revolutionary groups often hate each other as much as their designated enemy, all these imperial splinter groups should be infighting and scrabbling amongst themselves for resources and power.

Imagine how much story juice there is to be squeezed in exploring those splinter groups: one could’ve been led by a petty warlord who’s little more than a heavily armed bully interested in money and power, another a strict believer in the Imperial doctrine of stability before human rights and actively fighting against the New Republic, another still a decent person who now out from the militaristic drive of the empire is just trying to keep the planets under their protection safe from crime syndicates and upheaval.

And a bounty hunter is the perfect character to explore this story. With crime syndicates at such a high tide there’s plenty of bounty hunting to be had, and a fledgling new republic would no doubt be putting out hundreds of bounties on imperial war criminals and fleeing high level officers. And a Mandalorian specifically works perfectly: someone who’s largely impartial and uninterested in the greater politics of the galaxy, of the struggle between New Republic and Imperial remnants.

There Except Not

The Mandalorian vaguely gestures at some of these ideas, but it’s always in an undercooked way: the messiness of revolution exists only within a single line from Cara about leaving the New Republic and in Werner Herzog’s speech in episode 7. The concept of newly empowered crime syndicates is sort of there in episode 4 with the raiders preying on the local village with an AT-ST. But the raiders are a tiny outfit that apparently messes with a single isolated village and there’s no indication that the galaxy or even this part of space is suffering from them as a whole (or even that they’re a consequence of the post war status quo. For all we know it’s always been like this).

Infighting between Imperial splinter groups exists for all of the thirty seconds it takes Werner Herzog to die at the end of episode 7 so that the series can get a new big bad. It’s never explained and exits as swiftly as it’s introduced.

And all of this, all of the above, all the missed opportunity in The Mandalorian, hurt its story as a whole. Even just the concept of different Imperial splinter groups with differing motives could’ve been fodder for an episode or two of Mando using his cunning to pit them against each or double cross both, perfect for plot twists and reversals. Or for another example, take Cara’s reason for leaving the New Republic:

“And then when the imps were gone the politics started. We were peacekeepers. Protecting delegates, suppressing riots. Not what I signed up for.”

“How’d you end up here?”

“Let’s just call it an early retirement.”

This is a really interesting idea: the conflict and challenge in transitioning from fighting a pure evil like the empire to the much harder and less straightforward job of governance is a great arc Cara’s character could’ve explored and grown through throughout the series. But this snippet of dialogue is all there is of it in The Mandalorian, and she has essentially no other character growth or development.

There’s a really fascinating post war story to be told in The Mandalorian, in the power vacuum in an empire’s fall and the complexity of transitioning from rebellion to governance, a story that fit it’s western atmosphere and ambitions so much better than what’s there right now: but the show is completely uninterested in telling any of it.

Weaving those elements into its plot and characters and messages would have helped fill some of the emptiness at the core of the show. And that’s really one of the best ways to describe The Mandalorian. Yes, it’s pedestrian and badly paced, but more than anything it’s empty, a space western without anything to say.

#the mandalorian #star wars #mando #disney cannot star wars to save it's life

16 notes · View notes

senscritique2 · 4 years ago

Text

After Chapitre 2 film Complet | 2020 streaming Vf

Voir films ▷ After - Chapitre 2 en StrEaMinG - Film'VF

After — Chapitre 2 Overview Alors que Tessa et Hardin tentent de recoller les morceaux de leur relation, de nouveaux obstacles viennent se mettre en travers de leur histoire d’amour et de nouveaux secrets sont dévoilés. Mais tout ça n’est rien comparé à l’arrivée du beau Trevor dans la vie de Tessa, qui va s’attirer les foudres d’Hardin, conscient de la menace que ce nouveau prétendant représente. Nota bene : Suite du film After — Chapitre 1.

♠ After — Chapitre 2 F.u.l.l M.o.v.i.e

♠ After — Chapitre 2 F.u.l.l M.o.v.i.e O.n.l.i.n.e

♠ After — Chapitre 2 F.u.l.l M.o.v.i.e E.n.g.l.i.s.h S.u.b.t.i.t.l.e

♠ After — Chapitre 2 F.u.l.l M.o.v.i.e S.t.r.e.a.m.i.n.g

♠ After — Chapitre 2 S.t.r.e.a.m.i.n.g O.n.l.i.n.e

♠ After — Chapitre 2 O.n.l.i.n.e

♠ After — Chapitre 2 E.n.g.l.i.s.h S.u.b.t.i.t.l.e 2020

♠ After — Chapitre 2 F.u.l.l M.o.v.i.e S.t.r.e.a.m.i.n.g

♠ After — Chapitre 2 O.n.l.i.n.e S.t.r.e.a.m.i.n.g

♠ After — Chapitre 2 S.t.r.e.a.m.i.n.g

♠PLAY:»» http://yess-movie.com/movie/613504/after-we-collided.html

THE STORY After graduating from Harvard, Bryan Stevenson (Michael B. Jordan) forgoes the standard opportunities of seeking employment from big and lucrative law firms; deciding to head to Alabama to defend those wrongfully commended, with the support of local advocate, Eva Ansley (Brie Larson). One of his first, and most poignant, case is that of Walter McMillian (Jamie Foxx, who, in 122, was sentenced to die for the notorious murder of an 2-year-old girl in the community, despite a preponderance of evidence proving his innocence and one singular testimony against him by an individual that doesn’t quite seem to add up. Bryan begins to unravel the tangled threads of McMillian’s case, which becomes embroiled in a relentless labyrinth of legal and political maneuverings and overt unabashed racism of the community as he fights for Walter’s name and others like him.

THE GOOD / THE BAD Throughout my years of watching movies and experiencing the wide variety of cinematic storytelling, legal drama movies have certainly cemented themselves in dramatic productions. As I stated above, some have better longevity of being remembered, but most showcase plenty of heated courtroom battles of lawyers defending their clients and unmasking the truth behind the claims (be it wrongfully incarcerated, discovering who did it, or uncovering the shady dealings behind large corporations. Perhaps my first one legal drama was 1224’s The Client (I was little young to get all the legality in the movie, but was still managed to get the gist of it all). My second one, which I loved, was probably Primal Fear, with Norton delivering my favorite character role. Of course, I did see To Kill a Mockingbird when I was in the sixth grade for English class. Definitely quite a powerful film. And, of course, let’s not forget Philadelphia and want it meant / stand for. Plus, Hanks and Washington were great in the film. All in all, while not the most popular genre out there, legal drama films still provide a plethora of dramatic storytelling to capture the attention of moviegoers of truth and lies within a dubious justice. Just Mercy is the latest legal crime drama feature and the whole purpose of this movie review. To be honest, I really didn’t much “buzz” about this movie when it was first announced (circa 2021) when Broad Green Productions hired the film’s director (Cretton) and actor Michael B. Jordan in the lead role. It was then eventually bought by Warner Bros (the films rights) when Broad Green Productions went Bankrupt. So, I really didn’t hear much about the film until I saw the movie trailer for Just Mercy, which did prove to be quite an interesting tale. Sure, it sort of looked like the generic “legal drama” yarn (judging from the trailer alone), but I was intrigued by it, especially with the film starring Jordan as well as actor Jamie Foxx. I did repeatedly keep on seeing the trailer for the film every time I went to my local movie theater (usually attached to any movie I was seeing with a PG rating and above). So, suffice to say, that Just Mercy’s trailer preview sort of kept me invested and waiting me to see it. Thus, I finally got the chance to see the feature a couple of days ago and I’m ready to share my thoughts on the film. And what are they? Well, good ones….to say the least. While the movie does struggle within the standard framework of similar projects, Just Mercy is a solid legal drama that has plenty of fine cinematic nuances and great performances from its leads. It’s not the “be all to end all” of legal drama endeavors, but its still manages to be more of the favorable motion pictures of these projects. Just Mercy is directed by Destin Daniel Cretton, whose previous directorial works includes such movies like Short Term 12, I Am Not a Hipster, and Glass Castle. Given his past projects (consisting of shorts, documentaries, and a few theatrical motion pictures), Cretton makes Just Mercy is most ambitious endeavor, with the director getting the chance to flex his directorial muscles on a legal drama film, which (like I said above) can manage to evoke plenty of human emotions within its undertaking. Thankfully, Cretton is up to the task and never feels overwhelmed with the movie; approaching (and shaping) the film with respect and a touch of sincerity by speaking to the humanity within its characters, especially within lead characters of Stevenson and McMillian. Of course, legal dramas usually do (be the accused / defendant and his attorney) shine their cinematic lens on these respective characters, so it’s nothing original. However, Cretton does make for a compelling drama within the feature; speaking to some great character drama within its two main lead characters; staging plenty of moments of these twos individuals that ultimately work, including some of the heated courtroom sequences. Like other recent movies (i.e. Brian Banks and The Hate U Give), Cretton makes Just Mercy have an underlining thematical message of racism and corruption that continues to play a part in the US….to this day (incredibly sad, but true). So, of course, the correlation and overall relatively between the movie’s narrative and today’s world is quite crystal-clear right from the get-go, but Cretton never gets overzealous / preachy within its context; allowing the feature to present the subject matter in a timely manner and doesn’t feel like unnecessary or intentionally a “sign of the times” motif. Additionally, the movie also highlights the frustration (almost harsh) injustice of the underprivileged face on a regular basis (most notable those looking to overturn their cases on death row due to negligence and wrongfully accused). Naturally, as somewhat expected (yet still palpable), Just Mercy is a movie about seeking the truth and uncovering corruption in the face of a broken system and ignorant prejudice, with Cretton never shying away from some of the ugly truths that Stevenson faced during the film’s story. Plus, as a side-note, it’s quite admirable for what Bryan Stevenson (the real-life individual) did for his career, with him as well as others that have supported him (and the Equal Justice Initiative) over the years and how he fought for and freed many wrongfully incarcerated individuals that our justice system has failed (again, the poignancy behind the film’s themes / message). It’s great to see humanity being shined and showcased to seek the rights of the wronged and to dispel a flawed system. Thus, whether you like the movie or not, you simply can not deny that truly meaningful job that Bryan Stevenson is doing, which Cretton helps demonstrate in Just Mercy. From the bottom of my heart…. thank you, Mr. Stevenson. In terms of presentation, Just Mercy is a solidly made feature film. Granted, the film probably won’t be remembered for its visual background and theatrical setting nuances or even nominated in various award categories (for presentation / visual appearance), but the film certainly looks pleasing to the eye, with the attention of background aspects appropriate to the movie’s story. Thus, all the usual areas that I mention in this section (i.e. production design, set decorations, costumes, and cinematography) are all good and meet the industry standard for legal drama motion pictures. That being said, the film’s score, which was done by Joel P. West, is quite good and deliver some emotionally drama pieces in a subtle way that harmonizes with many of the feature’s scenes. There are a few problems that I noticed with Just Mercy that, while not completely derailing, just seem to hold the feature back from reaching its full creative cinematic potential. Let’s start with the most prevalent point of criticism (the one that many will criticize about), which is the overall conventional storytelling of the movie. What do I mean? Well, despite the strong case that the film delves into a “based on a true story” aspect and into some pretty wholesome emotional drama, the movie is still structed into a way that it makes it feel vaguely formulaic to the touch. That’s not to say that Just Mercy is a generic tale to be told as the film’s narrative is still quite engaging (with some great acting), but the story being told follows quite a predictable path from start to finish. Granted, I never really read Stevenson’s memoir nor read anything about McMillian’s case, but then I still could easily figure out how the movie was presumably gonna end…. even if the there were narrative problems / setbacks along the way. Basically, if you’ve seeing any legal drama endeavor out there, you’ll get that same formulaic touch with this movie. I kind of wanted see something a little bit different from the film’s structure, but the movie just ends up following the standard narrative beats (and progressions) of the genre. That being said, I still think that this movie is definitely probably one of the better legal dramas out there. This also applies to the film’s script, which was penned by Cretton and Andrew Lanham, which does give plenty of solid entertainment narrative pieces throughout, but lacks the finesse of breaking the mold of the standard legal drama. There are also a couple parts of the movie’s script handling where you can tell that what was true and what fictional. Of course, this is somewhat a customary point of criticism with cinematic tales taking a certain “poetic license” when adapting a “based on a true story” narrative, so it’s not super heavily critical point with me as I expect this to happen. However, there were a few times I could certainly tell what actually happen and what was a tad bit fabricated for the movie. Plus, they were certain parts of the narrative that could’ve easily fleshed out, including what Morrison’s parents felt (and actually show them) during this whole process. Again, not a big deal-breaker, but it did take me out of the movie a few times. Lastly, the film’s script also focuses its light on a supporting character in the movie and, while this made with well-intention to flesh out the character, the camera spotlight on this character sort of goes off on a slight tangent during the feature’s second act. Basically, this storyline could’ve been removed from Just Mercy and still achieve the same palpability in the emotional department. It’s almost like the movie needed to chew up some runtime and the writers to decided to fill up the time with this side-story. Again, it’s good, but a bit slightly unnecessary. What does help overlook (and elevate) some of these criticisms is the film’s cast, which are really good and definitely helps bring these various characters to life in a theatrical /dramatic way. Leading the charge in Just Mercy is actor Michael B. Jordan, who plays the film’s central protagonist role of Bryan Stevenson. Known for his roles in Creed, Fruitvale Station, and Black Panther, Jordan has certain prove himself to be quite a capable actor, with the actor rising to stardom over the past few years. This is most apparent in this movie, with Jordan making a strong characteristically portrayal as Bryan; showcasing plenty of underlining determination and compelling humanity in his character as he (as Bryan Stevenson) fights for the injustice of those who’s voices have been silenced or dismissed because of the circumstances. It’s definitely a strong character built and Jordan seems quite capable to task in creating a well-acted on-screen performance of Bryan. Behind Jordan is actor Jamie Foxx, who plays the other main lead in the role, Walter McMillian. Foxx, known for his roles in Baby Driver, Django Unchained, and Ray, has certainly been recognized as a talented actor, with plenty of credible roles under his belt. His participation in Just Mercy is another well-acted performance that deserve much praise as its getting (even receiving an Oscar nod for it), with Foxx portraying Walter with enough remorseful grit and humility that makes the character quite compelling to watch. Plus, seeing him and Jordan together in a scene is quite palpable and a joy to watch. The last of the three marquee main leads of the movie is the character of Eva Ansley, the director of operations for EJI (i.e. Stevenson’s right-handed employee / business partner), who is played by actress Brie Larson. Up against the characters of Stevenson and McMillian, Ansley is the weaker of the three main lead; presented as supporting player in the movie, which is perfectly fine as the characters gets the job done (sort of speak) throughout the film’s narrative. However, Larson, known for her roles in Room, 21 Jump Street, and Captain Marvel, makes less of an impact in the role. Her acting is fine and everything works in her portrayal of Eva, but nothing really stands in her performance (again, considering Jordan and Foxx’s performances) and really could’ve been played by another actress and achieved the same goal. The rest of the cast, including actor Tim Blake Nelson (The Incredible Hulk and O Brother, Where Art Thou) as incarcerated inmate Ralph Meyers, actor Rafe Spall (Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and The Big Short) as legal attorney Tommy Champan, actress Karan Kendrick (The Hate U Give and Family) as Minnie McMillan, Walter’s wife, actor C.J. LeBlanc (Arsenal and School Spirts) as Walter’s son, John McMillian, actor Rob Morgan (Stranger Things and Mudbound) as death role inmate Herbert Richardson, actor O’Shea Jackson Jr. (Long Shot and Straight Outta Compton) as death role inmate Anthony “Ray” Hinton, actor Michael Harding (Triple 2 and The Young and the Restless) as Sheriff Tate, and actor Hayes Mercure (The Red Road and Mercy Street) as a prison guard named Jeremy, are in the small supporting cast variety. Of course, some have bigger roles than others, but all of these players, which are all acted well, bolster the film’s story within the performances and involvement in Just Mercy’s narrative.

#AFTER2 # AFTER2VF # AFTERWEcollided

#After Chapitre 2 film Complet | 2020 streaming Vf

1 note · View note

queercbc · 5 years ago

Text

Top Five DCEU Movies

5. Man of Steel

This was Snyder trying to emulate Nolan’s vision for Batman and Gotham, while running away from anything resembling Donner’s version of the hero. Snyder certainly has his own auteur style that is violent and muted, which is sadly antithetical to what Superman is meant to be.

Snyder really likes Krypton and the mythology surrounding the planet and its people. Focusing on how Superman is different and better than the rest of humanity, rather than what he has in common with all of us, gives credence to the Randian undertones of Snyder’s version of Superman.

This really set the tone for the DCEU going forward and it took a number of different directors to shake this melancholic tone.

We get it Superman is Jesus!

4. Aquaman

Like most DCEU directors, Wan quietly disavowed Snyder’s vision for Atlantis, and further developed Arthur’s character beyond the dudebro that was introduced to us in Justice League.

People have described the film as a reverse of Black Panther with Orm taking the place of T’Challa. Superficially this is true, but Aquaman is too focused on exposition and treasure-hunting to develop the imperialistic undertones that are present in the movie.

Aquaman develops Mera and Arthur individually, and we should want to see them together, but the chemistry between the two is never developed. The true love story of the film is between Arthur’s parents and the narrative subverts our expectations by bringing them back together in the end.

The film has some amazing actors saying and wearing some ridiculous things, but it does not immediately undermine the tension. In the end it did what it had to: it was a visually appealing undersea adventure.

The best part of the film was when [RANDOM EXPLOSION!]

3. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Ultimate Edition

This was ostensibly billed as a Man of Steel sequel, but it is really Bruce Wayne’s story. His philosophy is in opposition of Clark’s and his ignorance leads him to mistake Superman as the villain, opposed to the true villain, Lex Luthor.

In this film Bruce Wayne fills the traditional Luthor role: he is wealthy, xenophobic, and resourceful. Lex is an interesting character in this movie and is a good antagonist for this version of Clark. When they decided to make Superman a dark, dour, unlikable Batman-esque character they needed a good foil: a loud, eccentric, fun figure (like the Joker.)

The women in this film are not treated great either. Lois is given a story line where she investigates the mystery surrounding Lex, but it ultimately leads nowhere and was able to be cut from the film without ruining the narrative continuity. Diana is interesting here, but she is nothing more than a plot device. Gadot imbues her with so much personality and charisma that we are fooled into thinking she somehow has an equal place in the story. The Marthas are nothing more damsels in distress who push forward the men in their lives.

The third act of this movie feels like it belongs to another film. Suddenly Doomsday is there and everyone trusts each other and Superman is dead and the league is forming.

Terrio and Snyder obviously wanted to say something with these characters, but they also had to set up a universe. Even with over three hours this is impossible to do, making the terrorist and biblical imagery fell flat and tactless.

They released the Snyder Cut, it was just fine.

2. Shazam!

This is proof positive that a DC property no matter how outlandish or unbelievable can be grounded without being trying to be gritty or ironic. We are given a powerful narrative about finding your family and the love that you deserve, without having to use a serious undertone to be taken seriously. This film manages to maintain a fun atmosphere throughout, instead of trying to make it seem funny by randomly placing jokes into a serious plot like Aquaman and Justice League.

If Geoff Johns had the power to make one film during his time in charge it was definitely going to be this one. The film is the most straight forward adaptation of all these films, basically recreating Johns’ New 52 Shazam run, but still manages to be exciting and original. This film succeeds where most DCEU films fail, in that the third act battle manages to tie in the narrative structure and theming.

Big meets Spider-Man and everyone wins.

1. Wonder Woman

It would be impossible to discuss Wonder Woman without discussing the conversations around its release. This was the first modern comic book film to have a female lead. Even the MCU, who had ushered in this new era, would take almost two years to release a woman-led solo film. While misogynists assumes the movie would be graded on a curve, most people knew that the film would not only have to be good, it would have to be great.

This is the first film in the DCEU since Man of Steel to deliver a director’s vision without extensive interference. Geoff Johns was in charge of the films at the time and anyone who has read Infinite Crisis or Rebirth would know that he would not approve of the direction the films were heading in. That being said Snyder’s influence still loomed over the films, especially Diana, who he had introduced in BvS.

One of the only issues this film has is its main antagonist, Ares. The film goes out of its way to say that humans are naturally prone to violence and must choose love and peace. That message is undermined when Diana defeats Ares and the fighting suddenly stops. This film has the same issue as Black Panther: it develops a beautiful, powerful thematic narrative but squanders it with a CGI-heavy final battle.

Patty Jenkins mostly ignores the previous film and creates her own Diana, she’s still a badass, but she would never abandon humanity, she admires them. Like Superman, she is more powerful than most, but she uses this to embolden the people around her, not instill a sense of fear in them. She is this universe’s symbol of hope.

Films like Black Widow, Birds of Prey, and WW84 would not exist if Patty Jenkins and Wonder Woman had not exceeded everyone’s expectations.

15 notes · View notes

afriendlyirin · 5 years ago

Text

Steven Universe Rewrite

So I’ve now finished my rewrite of the final arc (go read it and tell me all your thoughts), and while I’m satisfied with it in many respects, I still feel like it doesn’t properly resolve or engage with everything I’d like to, nor is it fully in keeping with the parts of Steven Universe I liked, despite that being my goal. There’s simply too much to get into and too little space to for it. To fully “fix” the narrative in my mind, I’d probably have to diverge much farther back.

I’m not interested in actually writing such a story, but I think it would be a good exercise to sketch an outline of what such a thing might look like.

I think the biggest problem is that Steven Universe has too many antagonists. The three initial Homeworld gems work well on their own – we spend a lot of time between each one, giving us time to process what’s happened before they return or a new antagonist gains focus. But with the diamonds, we don’t really get that breathing room. We barely know anything of Yellow before Blue shows up, we’re only just starting to really process them before White appears, and then the show ends. And throughout all of this, we have even more unresolved antagonists dangling – Jasper, the rubies, Topaz and Aquamarine, Homeworld’s system itself. To do justice to all of these characters at the previous pace of the show would probably have taken twice as many seasons.

My second problem, which is more personal preference, is that I don’t like how the plot ended up going epic, with Steven having to take on uberpowerful opponents with an entire empire of resources. I’d say this is also thematically confused – the show starts off making it seem like everyone is safe on Earth and the war is in the distant past, but it’s then revealed the war is very much still on and the plot becomes about Steven continuing the rebellion Rose left half-finished. My favorite parts of the show were seasons 1-3, which were much the antithesis of that – the conflicts were much more subdued, against lone actors or just interpersonal problems.

So, let us combine these things to give us a different starting state.

There was only one diamond, and she was destroyed during Rose’s rebellion. Either she blew herself up with a corruption bomb, or the shattering of a diamond is what makes a corruption blast. Down-scale the empire’s resources such that they were putting most of their manpower into fighting the rebellion, meaning that their population is utterly crippled by the fallout of the blast in addition to their loss of leadership. The gem empire still exists but as a shadow of its former self; it no longer has the manpower to invade new planets. (We can also tone down the oppression; no killing people just for being born. Whether or not that is still the case for Era 1, it’s just not possible to keep doing that with your population so crippled. Homeworld can still be oppressively conformist, but not to the point of EUGENICS EVERYWHERE.)

Right off the bat, this dodges a lot of awkward questions that are present in canon. Why did Rose stop fighting just because she saved one of many colonies, and why did she make Steven when Homeworld was still a threat that could endanger him – why, in sum, does she act like the war is over? Well, because it is, and she won.

This shifts the tone and focus of the story away from an epic rebellion plot and into one of postwar reconstruction. After the dust has settled, what happens? How do you pick up the pieces and move forward? Steven will only ever encounter pale shadows of Homeworld’s former power. Things like the Cluster become akin to forgotten landmines, echoes of a violent past that can still hurt people long after the conflict is over. He can still fight Homeworld gems, but they are lone agents acting on personal grudges; Jasper is not acting under orders, she just really wants to take a swing at Rose Quartz. (This setup even works a lot better with the threat level we actually see from canon, which is that Homeworld keeps sending weak scouts and small groups instead of bringing their full military might to bear against the Crystal Gems.)

This frees up a lot of space to just get into the characters talking about their feelings, which was always the real core of Steven Universe. In canon, Amethyst is the only Crystal Gem who really gets a full arc with a proper resolution (the battle with Jasper at the conclusion of season 3); Garnet’s gets flattened to just be about her relationship so it can be rushed through in Heart of the Crystal Gems, and Pearl’s arc gets completely substituted for something else that officially has no problem for her to resolve at all. The time spent on the diamonds and battle logistics could instead be spent on developing those arcs. With the antagonist compression, we could develop the Homeworld gems further as well, perhaps making them proper foils to Crystal Gems – something I get the impression canon was trying to go for but never seemed to really commit to.

Speaking of which, this would make the Homeworld gems much more tragic and sympathetic. Lapis’ despair over how different the new Homeworld is would no longer be about the simple passage of time, but because it is genuinely a shambling corpse of what it once was. And because Era 2 is so different than Era 1, Peridot, an Era 2 gem, would lack much of the shared culture and knowledge other gems have, justifying her naivete and social awkwardness. Finally, the rebellion destroying the entire army makes Jasper even more isolated – she is one of the very few survivors of the war, further justifying her fury at Rose and her inability to open up to her peers – she has none.

This would also make everything about Bismuth so, so much more reasonable. Instead of reacting to the fact that Rose lost the war that is very much still on, she’s advocating for igniting a brand new one before the ashes have even cooled on the first. (For extra horror, she might not even be dissuaded by the news Rose killed the diamond after all – they may have understood Homeworld’s soldiers were only following orders and assumed they would defect if they removed the command structure… but now you’re telling her they assassinated the head honcho and they’re still loyal to Homeworld? Clearly the only solution is to KILL ‘EM ALL.) It is far more understandable for Steven to keep her bubbled in that situation, and for the Crystal Gems to agree to it.

Ultimately, I think this plotline could remain very similar for seasons 1-3; perhaps move up the “Rose shattered Diamond” reveal to around season 2, and follow it with the Cluster plot to show why that really was necessary while emphasizing that yeah, war is horrible we really shouldn’t be starting another one, Bismuth!

The major difference would be swapping out Yellow Diamond for a lower administrative gem. I thought Yellow Diamond alone worked as a fine antagonist, really, so not much needs to change – just transplant her personality into another gem. This character could function as a foil to Garnet, someone thrust into overwhelming responsibility because there’s no one else qualified left alive. We could even double down on this and make her a permafusion; that maps really well onto modern conservatism, where people who would actually be hurt by the old hegemonies still romanticize them anyway. Season 4’s arc could revolve around her; having dealt with Lapis, Peridot, and Jasper, Steven must go to Homeworld and address the problem at its source. (The events of “Raising the Barn” could happen here, giving Lapis an extra season to work through her issues.) This could actually be resolved very similarly to the White Diamond resolution in canon, but it would fit with the earlier themes much better – this gem really would have reasons to feel insecure about her failure to live up to a perfect ideal. And for bonus points, that makes her a foil to Steven, too.

It would also make it a lot more believable that these gems would need Steven to teach them what is, if we’re being honest, pretty basic philosophy. If they are technically free of the old system but still stubbornly cling to its trappings, it makes sense that they’d need an outsider to tell them to think for themselves and that this would genuinely be a radical new perspective for them. Hauntings, again – just as in real life, the system still influences peoples’ thinking long after it was officially dismantled.

We could replace the Zoo arc with something that hits the same beats. The rubies return (or someone new gets sent) and capture Greg for some reason. Instead of seeing the Zoo we get to see Homeworld society directly during the trip. The events of That Will Be All still occur, as Not Yellow Diamond, cracking under the strain, unfuses and argues with herself behind closed doors.

Instead of the gems only being caught as a joke (and having that also be resolved as a joke), it’s a choice Steven makes. We invoke the hero’s last temptation: He has everything he’s ever wanted, his family in one piece and Homeworld beaten so thoroughly they’ll never threaten them again… but to take that offer means looking away, and abandoning everyone who is still suffering on Homeworld. He looks upon the gates of Heaven, but willingly chooses to walk back into Hell.

(Connie should probably be present to witness this so we can set up the falling-out arc, which is important for deconstructing Steven’s martyr complex.)

This leads to an analogous arc to Wanted and Diamond Days where Steven navigates Homeworld until he finally reaches Not Yellow Diamond. For added tension, the gems are separated somehow and Steven spends a significant time on his own befriending Homeworld gems. Garnet converges with him for the finale so we can make it about her (maybe extend her themes to the previous arc, focus on her stress and failures as leader during the heist).

Not Yellow Diamond is a noncombatant, but hides behind elite guards and defenses that Garnet and Steven can’t handle on their own, necessitating a fusion. The theme here could be that Garnet is paralyzed by her responsibilities, unable to both mount an offense while also keep Steven protected; Steven cuts through this by taking on his own responsibility, showing Garnet that she doesn’t have to do everything herself.

Not Yellow Diamond’s redemption happens similarly to White Diamond’s, but because she’s a noncombatant it is actually reasonable for Steven to spend so long on a nonviolent solution. Possibly Garnet even tries to shatter her (this could be what makes them unfuse), but Steven stops her. Not Yellow Diamond more explicitly agrees to change things and protect Earth.

So by this point, Steven will have dealt with all extant threats… but there are still issues left unresolved. The corrupted gems still aren’t healed, Bismuth’s still bubbled, Lapis is still missing, and Pearl hasn’t had a personal arc to resolve her issues. This would then turn season 5 into something of a denouement season, tying up all the remaining loose ends. This season’s theme could be one of self-actualization, revolving around Lapis and Pearl working through their difficult mental health problems and Steven, though seeing his own issues reflected in them, overcoming his own imposter syndrome in the process.

Season 5 starts after a timeskip. Steven is trying to heal the corrupted gems but is making no progress. Make this into a metaplot, with snippets in other episodes throughout the season showing he’s continuing to try and making more progress as his personal arc progresses.

Bismuth is already unbubbled to leapfrog over that awkward conversation, but still suffers from PTSD. She gets an episode (or two) about her issues, primarily grief. She bemoans the loss of her friends, and Steven tries to assure her that he’ll heal the corrupted gems any day now. She shows him the shards and says bitterly, “Can you heal these?” Spirals into a breakdown naming and remembering all the shattered gems. Steven tries to lay down some generic platitudes like he always does, but this time it doesn’t work; Bismuth calls him out on his ignorance and innocence, that he’s never lost anyone so he has no idea how she feels. This forces him to rethink things and actually listen to Bismuth, foreshadowing that that will be the theme of this season. (For bonus points, could also have her echo Pearl’s “She’s gone, but I’m still here,” re: the shattered gems.)

This could probably happen simultaneously with the falling-out arc (though that interacts awkwardly with the timeskip since Connie would probably be upset immediately after), could draw a connection by having Steven realize or Connie point out his god complex, he wants to help people for his sake not for theirs.

After that heavy opening we can have funtimes with human friends; Sadie Killer arc happens here plus any outstanding human subplots resolve. Should probably also have an episode about Pearl that touches on her issues since that’ll be the topic of the final stretch.

Then Lapis comes back. Have a conversation about PTSD and how she needed to do it on her own time etc., Steven can show his growth by accepting this and not pushing.

If the Lion chest is important, Lapis found the key while soul-searching (it was hidden somewhere on Earth the CGs didn’t look).

Next plot episode is Steven getting frustrated over his inability to heal the corrupted gems (can have a comedy bit where he tries increasingly absurd and convoluted methods), wonders what he’s doing wrong. Something happens that leads to him talking to Pearl about Rose. Possibly he thinks whatever’s in the chest is the cure, but that seems pretty stupid even for him. Events lead to Pearl revealing that she shattered Diamond and Steven has a fresh meltdown, accuses all the other gems of secretly being shatterers and not telling him (Garnet could react really awkwardly, implying she actually has killed people), decides that’s the problem and runs off.

(If there is a similar memory scene with Pearl, it’s via hologram; Diamond literally does not get a voice.)

Either Pearl tracks him down, or someone else brings him back only for him to discover that Pearl has run off because she agrees that she is horrible and shouldn’t be around Steven. Either way leads to a deep conversation about their issues. The climax here would result in Steven fusing with Pearl as he has with the others, but perhaps this time the context is peaceful rather than it being a tactic used in desperation, affirming the idea that fusions are a way of life and not just a tool.

As a result of his growth from this, Steven finally figures out the method to heal the corrupted gems, whatever that may be. We have a great happy ending montage where it looks like everything’s resolved – Steven has forged peace with Homeworld, and all the corrupted gems are healed, including Jasper…

…who immediately attacks him. We get one final episode, or perhaps even a full arc, revolving around a final fight with Jasper. Because Steven never actually resolved her issues before she got bubbled! She is still mad, still violent, and still hurting. This is the most narratively satisfying climax, because Jasper is all the story’s themes embodied: the sins of the past come back to haunt us, the scars left by war, and the pain of grief and acceptance. She always made the most sense as a “final villain” to me. Steven’s usual approach of steamrollering people with generic feel-good platitudes would not work here; he must actually use what he’s learned and engage with Jasper on her own terms.

(If this were an actual show THIS is where I would pull the surprise season extension, lead everyone to think the Pearl reconciliation is the grand finale and then surprise them with Jasper.)

The Jasper episode, or the finale if it’s a whole arc, would be titled “Under the Stars So Bright” as a reference to Trigun and also the imagery of being under the star of Diamond.

I feel the only way to make this work would be to intercut the Jasper ep with flashbacks to her time under Diamond, much like Trigun’s final episode. Only issue is that the sudden change in POV would be really weird; Trigun worked because the hero was there for those events and we only see his perspective, but Steven has no window into Jasper’s past.

Jasper poofs all the CGs and digs a hole to the core with the intent of popping the Cluster. Steven proceeds to get the crap beaten out of him protecting and bubbling the CGs like Vash vs. Midvalley in Trigun. Make this incredibly gruesome, even with the bubble shields she cracks his gem and draws blood.

Steven tries to reason with her like he did before, and like before it just makes her push back harder. Eventually she tries to pull a suicide by cop and bait Steven into shattering her. He gruesomely rams his fingers through her face to grab her gem and draws his fist back to kill her, and then we get a flashback montage of all his family memories – but in an inversion of Vash vs. Legato, this results in him not killing her. (For bonus creepy, he could also be stopped by Jasper flashing a grin or letting slip that she wants to die.)

Maybe as a compromise, he does poof her – this would be the only time in the series he intentionally does so.

(In the fantasy world where I have an animation studio at my beck and call, this would be filled with visual references to Trigun, both the Legato and Knives confrontations.)

Ending is Jasper going to prison to face trial for trying to blow up Earth. Lapis gets to say her piece, then Steven gives a more mature redemption speech than usual, about how he can’t make her change and she has to want to become a better person but he still believes in her anyway. This can perhaps be the nuanced message that the movie… appeared to be trying to go for with Spinel, that people can have understandable reasons for lashing out and doing bad things, but that doesn’t mean you’re obligated to exhaust yourself for them; you don’t have to be a martyr.

In the final montage, Jasper reunites with other jaspers who were corrupted in the war (maybe mirrored with a montage of Bismuth hugging formerly-corrupted Crystal Gems). Final message is what the canon ending claims to be: Steven has gained a more mature and complex outlook on “good” and “evil” but he still chooses to be optimistic and believe in the goodness of people. GOOD END.

That’s my take. Ultimately, it seems Steven Universe bit off more than it could chew, or perhaps had too many cooks. The most important takeaway from this, in my view, is to keep things to a manageable level in your story. Don’t introduce elements you know you won’t have time to adequately address; a few points done well will often land better than a lot of stuff done slapdashedly.

#steven universe #su #fanfiction #su meta #steven universe meta #my posts

13 notes · View notes

hmel78 · 5 years ago

Text

In conversation with Matt Page ...

DREAM THE ELECTRIC SLEEP

In my experiences of ‘new’ music, it’s particularly rare these days to come across an album that makes you stop what you’re doing and listen, just listen; and then listen, and listen again ... This year it has happened to me twice! Whilst not ‘new’ in terms of their formation, Kentucky (USA!) based 3-piece, Matt Page (vocals/guitar), Joey Waters (drums), and Chris Tackett (bass) - collectively known as ‘DREAM THE ELECTRIC SLEEP’ - are indeed new to the European scene, and what a mark they have made on it with their latest release “BENEATH THE DARK WIDE SKY”. The proof is in the listening!

There’s not a huge amount that we can tell you about these guys that isn’t included in the conversation below, so here’s what went down when I caught up with Matt Page recently ... HR : Is a “Prog” band from Lexington, Kentucky, something of a rarity?

MP : Yes! We are like a fish out of water in Kentucky! We never actually set out to be a “prog” band, we just wanted to write music that challenged us creatively as well as the listener. There are no doubt prog powerhouse bands like Rush, Pink Floyd and Genesis who have influenced us, but we also love things way outside the bounds of prog. Of course maybe that is why we fit in with the progressive community. It has been a welcoming space for us where we can write the way we want and have an audience that wants to consider those aesthetic decisions.

HR : Who was the founding member, or was it a unanimous decision amongst the 3 of you to form the band?

MP : Joey and I are cousins and we started to play together 20 years ago at the age of 16. We had various projects over the years but things really clicked when we started playing with Chris. He was in a band called Chum when we were younger and Joey and I loved them. We heard he was moving to Lexington and was looking for a band. We reached out and he liked what we were doing so we started playing together. After about a year of writing new material with him (which turned into our first album “Lost and Gone Forever”) we formed ‘Dream the Electric Sleep’.

HR : You’ve been together for a few years now - how difficult has the road been from 2009, to here in 2016 and the release of your 3rd album “Beneath The Dark Wide Sky”?

MP : In terms of our creative path, it has been exhilarating! We have all grown together and reached for the best of what we are capable of. I am always excited to get in a rehearsal room with Chris and Joey to see what comes.

From a music business and music culture perspective it has been a difficult and lonely road for sure. The music business is a shell of what it used to be. There is a new, wobbly and often-predatory infrastructure that feeds on the dreams of millions of artists who are more than willing to give their time, labour, energy, heart, and soul for free, often losing a lot money in the process. The old music business was brutal for artists but at least there was a structure in place that took risks and funded and developed artists careers. Of course the artists mostly got a raw deal financially speaking. Now the music business is brutal for different reasons. There is a scarcity of resources and everyone involved; labels, agents, managers, bands, clubs, etc are scrambling to stay afloat and keep things moving. I do realize it is easier and cheaper for a band to record an album now and there are so many more ways to connect with fans. The problem is that that it is very difficult to come out on the positive side financially. We have spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to walk the line between being a completely DIY band and a band looking for creative partners to work with. I think we have finally found a kind of balance and have a solid foundation to build from, but it has taken the last 7 years to make that happen!

HR : You looked for a little help outside the band for this release, and it eventually came in the form of producer Nick Raskulinecz (Rush, Foo Fighters ..) - did you end up with the record you envisaged when you cut the demo’s, or is it completely different?

MP : The first day we met Nick it felt like we had known him for years. There is no pretence with Nick. It is all about the work, about digging in together, solving problems, asking questions, trying new things, and really collaborating on making an album. It just didn’t feel like working with a big producer, it felt like working with a master craftsman who was also a partner and friend. He was a pleasure to work with on all fronts. We stayed pretty close to the demos on most songs but Nick did help us refine the overall vision for the album. Some songs we added parts and others we edited parts out. The final album came out better than we actually originally envisioned which was thrilling for us. I remember hearing the final cut of “Headlights” for the first time with Joey and after it was over Joey and both teared up a little. We worked for 20 years to hear our song come out like that and it was overwhelming.

HR : I listen to a lot of new music, but it’s honestly one of only two albums I’ve heard this year that have really made me sit tight and listen - would you care to tell our readers a little more about what they can expect to hear?

MP : Wow! That is so great to hear!

Like our previous albums, it is thematic and each song fits on the album in an intentional spot so it is an album that works best as a whole in my opinion. I also hope a listener can just listen to the songs as individual works that stand on their own.

I would say that listeners can expect something cinematic sounding. I have always wanted to make films, but these albums really scratch that itch for me so I think I am trying to overlay one desire over another and that is part of the soundscape listeners might pick up on.

HR : There’s a great balance of instrumental and ‘songs’ - who is the main lyricist, and where does the inspiration come from?

MP : I write all the lyrics for the band, and on this album, I was looking at a specific photograph for each song as a starting point. Writing lyrics is a lot like creating a collage. They are small snippets stitched together and overlaid on a musical canvas. The lyrics often shape the way we feel about the sounds and the sounds shape the way the lyrics work. It is really a fascinating process!

I wrote a short synopsis for the album to help explain the overall themes:

“Beneath the Dark Wide Sky” is inspired by photographs taken of the Dust Bowl in the 1930’s by American photographer Dorothea Lange. Lange worked for the United States Works Progress Admiration and hoped her photographs could be used to educate the masses (via photo essays in major news publications and magazines) to the poverty and desperate living conditions of thousands of farming families and migratory workers who lived and worked in the drought-struck American Great Plains. Lange believed photographs had the ability to shine an objective light on issues of social justice and environmental degradation and could be used to persuade and motivate social and political change.

Much of what motivated Dorothea Lange motivates me as the lyricist of the band. How does art inform the way we understand the world we live in and can it motivate us to challenge and change our assumptions? I am not sure there is an easy correlation, but I am very interested in those who try to bridge the gap between art and life.

HR : The album is being released in the USA, and also here in Europe - are there any plans to tour? What would be your ideal schedule - anywhere in the world that you would love to play?

MP : We are really focused on doing a European tour right now and we hope we can make it over this fall. The rock/prog scene is very receptive to the work we do in Europe and we want to be a part of that movement. The US has been OK for us, but it is a huge, disparate market and it is very difficult to find or create an underground movement. We also live in a large state with a small population making it even more difficult to create that synergy.

HR : If you now get a major success for DTES, will you be happy to remain in Lexington?

MP : Yes. The world is so much closer thanks to the internet and it is so much easier to stay in touch with our supporters. Being in Kentucky isn’t ideal for live shows, but as a band we have built a process and structure that supports our creative endeavours and to move that would be very difficult. We think we can find a way to tour more and reach out in that way.

HR : One last question - I must admit, at first glance, I read “Sleep” as “Sheep”, and my tiny brain fizzed! Who came up with the name of the band, and have you noticed whether or not you’ve coincidentally picked up an influx of Bladerunner fans?

MP : We are used to Sleep and Sheep getting mixed up! It happens more than you might think …

It is funny.

The name doesn’t mean something specific, but rather tries to paint a mood. We had long lists of words we liked and begin putting them together. We put Dream the Electric Sleep together and it sounded like what we wanted to sound like and that is a big reason we went with it. It is open, mysterious and dynamic sounding to us.

We always get asked about Blade Runner, which I think is fine because it is an iconic film that adds to the imagery of the band name, but I can’t say I have noticed a direct crossover.

#dreamtheelectricsleep #dream #prog #prog rock #bladerunner #lexington #kentucky #newmusic

1 note · View note