#john goodman says his thing about human anime | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

myhahnestopinion · 4 years ago

Text

THE AARONS 2020 - Best TV Show

It was prime time for TV in 2020, with many more free hours to fill. I managed to get through a lot of my backlog in fact, finally getting around to watching shows like The Strain. It’s a show about a deadly disease that tears society apart because a lot of arrogant people think they are exempt from quarantining. The disease turns people into vampires, so it’s technically escapism. Here are the Aarons for Best TV Show:

#10. The Plot Against America (Miniseries) - HBO

It’s not TV, it’s not HBO, it’s real life. The Wire-creator David Simon’s penchant for illustrating the human fallout of institutional failures made him a perfect collaborator for HBO’s Plot Against America, an adaptation of Phillip Roth’s alternate-history novel. Following a Jewish family in New Jersey navigating the increasingly-fascist America of a hypothetical Charles Lindbergh administration, the show is a terrifying warning of what happens when hatred and conspiracy theories are allowed to accumulate political force. Notably, while the book ends with history back on the right track, the closing moments here are left ambiguous. The show was a limited series, but in many ways, The Plot Against America is ongoing.

#9. Mrs. America (Miniseries) - FX

Its interests are married to The Plot Against America, but Mrs. America traces the country’s rising extremism from a more historically accurate perspective. The miniseries centers on political activists in the 1970s on opposing sides of the proposed Equal Rights Amendment, but its dialogue isn’t a strict dichotomy. The episodic format is expertly utilized to build out intersectional ideas from the likes of Rose Byrne’s Gloria Steinem, Uzo Aduba’s Shirley Crisholm, and Margo Martindale’s Bella Abzug, detailing the difficulties in building a diverse coalition, and the dangers of a single-minded one. Drawing parallels to current debates, its compelling centerpiece is how conservative Phylis Shafley (Cate Blanchett) successfully defeats the Amendment; voting against your own self-interests, Mrs. America says, is as American as apple pie.

#8. The Outsider (Miniseries) - HBO

Societal collapse comes from within in the two shows mentioned above, but the threat in HBO’s adaptation of Stephen King’s 2018 novel is decidedly an “other.” King clearly had his mind on modern manipulations of truth when crafting the ingenious premise: a man is arrested for the murder of two young boys due to irrefutable DNA evidence, only to provide an air-tight alibi for the crime. To match King’s procedural prose, HBO brought on The Night Of’s David Price, who layers the original work with meticulous mysteries. The Outsider has all the pulpy jolts expected of the author, but the show’s true horror lies in its overbearing grief, best brought to life by Ben Mendelsohn’s Detective Anderson. To say more would be to spoil its secrets; you’ll want to be on the inside.

#7. Perry Mason (Season 1) - HBO

Just like the famous fictional attorney, HBO can’t seem to lose, with Perry Mason marking its third entry on this list. The reimagining of the long running court drama actually takes place before the character’s illustrious law career; here he’s a down-on-his-luck private eye caught up in a scandalous child kidnapping case. The result’s a gangbusters production of old-fashioned moody noir: political corruption, femme fatales, and a more morally-complicated Mason, as played by The Americans’ Matthew Rhys. The lavish period details and character-actor cast, including Shea Whigham, John Lithgow, and Tatiana Maslany, will help draw viewers in, but, I’ll confess, I was already hooked by the season’s chilling opening moments.

#6. Zoey’s Extraordinary Playlist (Season 1) - NBC

Dour seasons have dominated this list thus far, but Zoey’s Extraordinary Playlist sings a different tune. It’s a lovably oddball premise: an accident during an MRI causes a young woman, played by Jane Levy, to hear other people’s thoughts in the form of popular music. It’s all karaoke, but, emphasized by the presence of Skylar Astin, a worthy inheritor to Crazy Ex-Girlfriend’s musical-comedy crown. The tracklist, workplace antics, and love-triangle drama all exist in a comfortingly familiar network TV realm, but the show takes additional steps for inclusion with stories highlighting Zoey’s genderfluid neighbor (Alex Newell) and an American Sign Language performance of Rachel Platten’s “Fight Song.” During a year in need of shuffling off stress, there was no better time to queue up Zoey’s Extraordinary Playlist.

#5. What We Do in The Shadows (Season 2) - FX

FX’s expansion of the mockumentary feature film of the same name lit up some of the darker corners of its universe in the show’s second season, transforming mundane-seeming material into something completely, uniquely batty. Each creature of Shadows took their turn in the spotlight this season, from a middle-management promotion gifting energy-vampire Colin Robinson unlimited supernatural power, to undead Nadja befriending a doll possessed by her own ghost, to Matt Berry’s Lazlo forging a small-town persona as a bartender/volleyball coach to escape a vengeful Mark Hamill. As always, it was the sympathetic Guillermo (Harvey Guillén), a Van Helsing descendent desperate to become a vampire, who gave the show its emotional stakes, and the vampires within a different kind altogether.

#4. Stargirl (Season 1) - DC Universe

Shadows was lit, but few things burned brighter this year than Stargirl (perhaps too brightly for the flamed-out DC Universe). The superhero drama is one of several that will outlive its original streaming service - fitting, given its obsession with legacy. Based on a character created by DC Comics stalwart Geoff Johns after the tragic loss of his sister, the show finds a young girl taking on the mantle of a fallen hero after moving to a town run in secret by supervillains. With sprightly fight choreography and an unabashed embrace of its comic book lore, Stargirl outshines the overabundance of small-screen superheroes out there. Its highlight is the bright performance of lead Brec Bassinger; put simply, she’s a star, girl.

#3. BoJack Horseman (Season 6b) - Netflix

Throughout its run, BoJack Horseman garnered acclaim for routinely delivering unexpected pathos, and the final season kept it on that track until the end. ...Get it, because horses run on tracks? The unexpected porter of television’s legacy of antiheroes ended in much the same vein as its sister shows - with consequences finally catching up with its protagonist. No amount of fanciful animal puns could soften that painful catharsis, as the show finally trampled its tricky web of abuse through bittersweet means. The series closed out with an especially thoughtful scene, the kind viewers who looked past the wonky pilot years ago were regularly blessed with; to the very end, BoJack, you were a gift, horse.

#2. Better Call Saul (Season 5) - AMC

As good as Bad ever was and better than ever before, the fifth season of AMC’s spin-off completely upended the world of its eponymous lawyer while bringing Vince Gilligan’s universe one step away from full-circle. Saul Goodman found himself in way over his head, and viewers found themselves way on the edge of their seats, as his first foray into “criminal” lawyering swiftly dovetailed with an escalating drug war. Despite the emotional distress of watching fan-favorite character Kim Wexler placed in perilous situations, there are no objections to be had with the drama’s continued masterful storytelling. Ramping up the slow-burn storytelling, season five saw Kim and Saul’s relationship develop in rich and unexpected ways, while still keeping their final fates unresolved. Fans are thus waiting with bated breath for the show’s final call next year.

#1. The Great (Season 1) - Hulu

Who could be the best but The Great? There was a minor television controversy this year over Netflix marketing The Crown as a historical drama despite its fictional interpretation of events; The Great has no such pretentions. An asterix adorns every title card of the show, letting viewers know that its take on Catherine the Great’s coup against Emperor Peter III of Russia is only “an occasionally true story.” The show indeed is not great for education, but it’s the most entertaining television of the year, locking stars Elle Fanning and Nicholas Hoult in a battle of wits and a fight for the country’s soul under the watch of The Favourite co-writer Tony McNamara. The uproarious comedy slyly collates leadership based in cruelty with leadership based in goodwill in the background of its quite bawdy escapades, a subtle bit of relevant political maneuvering that lets it successfully claim the crown this year.

NEXT UP: THE 2020 AARONS FOR BEST TV EPISODE!

#tv #TheAarons #TheAarons2020 #TheAaronsTV #best of 2020 #the plot against america #mrs america #the outsider #perry mason #zoey's extraordinary playlist #what we do in the shadows #stargirl #bojack horseman #better call saul #the great

33 notes · View notes

erictmason · 4 years ago

Text

The Road To “Godzilla VS. Kong”, Day Four

(Sorry for the delay on this one, Life proved just a bit too busy the other day to finish it; my “Godzilla: King of the Monsters” review is gonna be pushed back as a result too. But! No worries, on we go. ^_^)

KONG: SKULL ISLAND (2017

Director: Jordan Vogt-Roberts

Writers: Dan Gilroy, Max Borenstein, Derek Connolly, John Gatins

Starring: Samuel L. Jackson, Tom Hiddleston, Brie Larson, John Goodman, John C. Reilly

youtube

Technically speaking, Gareth Edwards’ “Godzila” from 2014 was the first entry in what is now generally referred to as “The Monsterverse”, an attempt by Warner Bros. Studios and Legendary Pictures to do a Marvel Studios-style series of various interconnected movies (and which, like most such attempts to cash in on that particular trend, hasn’t really panned out; “Godzilla VS. Kong” seems likely to be its grand finale as far as movies are concerned, the only two “names” it had going for it are Godzilla and Kong themselves, and even at its most successful it was never exactly a Powerhouse Franchise). But the thing is, when that movie was made, the idea of a “Monsterverse” did not yet exist; it was only well after the fact that Legendary and Warner Bros. got the idea to turn a new “Kong” project into the building block of a Shared Universe of their own that they could connect with the 2014 “Godzilla”, with a clear eye on getting to remake one of the most singularly iconic (and profitable) Giant Monster Movies of all time. As you might guess from that description, however, said “Kong” project also had not originally been intended for such a purpose; it would not be until 2016 that it would be retooled from its original purpose (a prequel to the original “King Kong” titled simply “Skull Island”) into its present form, which goes out of its way to reference Monarch, the monster-tracking Science organization seen over in 2014’s “Godzilla” and which includes a very obviously Marvel-inspired post-credits stinger explicitly tying Kong and Godzilla’s existences together.

The resulting film is fun enough, all things told, but that graft is also really, distractingly obvious.

Honestly, I wish I knew why I’m not, generally, fonder of “Skull Island” than I am. It’s not as if, taken as a whole, it does anything especially bad; indeed it does a great deal that is actively good. Consider, for example, the rather unique choice to make it a Period Piece; that’s decently rare for a Monster Movie as it is (indeed one of the only other examples that springs to mind for me is Peter Jackson’s 2005 remake of “King Kong”, which chose to retain the original’s 1933 setting), and it’s rarer still that the era it chooses to inhabit is an immediately-post-Vietnam 1970’s. Aesthetically speaking, the movie takes a decent amount of fairly-obvious influence from that most classic of Vietnam-era films, “Apocalypse Now” (a fact that director Jordan Vogt-Roberts was always fairly open about), and it results in some of the movie’s strongest overall imagery (in particular a shot of Kong, cast in stark silhouette, standing against the burning sun on the horizon with a fleet of helicopters approaching him, one of a surprisingly small number of times the movie plays with visual scale to quite the same degree or with quite the same success as “Godzilla” 2014). It also means the movie is decked out in warm, lush colors that really do bring out all the personality of its Jungle setting in the most compelling way and, given how important the setting is to the film as a whole, that proves key; Skull Island maybe doesn’t become a character in its own right the way the best settings should (too much of our time is spent in fairly indistinct forests especially), but it does manage to feel exciting and unusual in the right ways more often than not. The “Apocalypse Now” influence also extends to our human cast, which is sizeable enough here (in terms of major characters we need to pay attention to played by notable actors, “Skull Island” dwarfs “Godzilla” 2014 by a significant margin) that the framework it provides-a mismatched group defined by various interpersonal/intergenerational tensions trying to make their way through an inhospitable wilderness, ostensibly in search of a lost comrade-is decently necessary. Though here we already run into one of those aspects of “Skull Island” that doesn’t quite land for me. Taken as a whole, it sure feels like the human characters here should be decently interesting; certainly, our leads are all much better defined and more engagingly performed than Ford Brody, to draw the most immediately obvious point of comparison. Brie Larson (as journalistic Anti-War photographer Mason Weaver), Tom Hiddleston (as former British Army officer turned Gun For Hire James Conrad), and John C. Reilly (as Hank Marlow, a World War II soldier stranded on Skull Island years ago) definitely turn in decently strong performances; I wouldn’t call it Career Best work for any of them (Hiddleston especially feels like he’s on auto-pilot half the time, while Larson has to struggle mightily against how little the script actually gives her to work with when you stop and look at it) but they at least prove decently enjoyable to watch (Reilly especially does a solid job of making his character funny without quite pushing him over the edge into Total Cartoon Territory). I likewise feel like Samuel L. Jackson’s Preston Packard has the potential to be a genuinely-great character; his lingering resentment at the way the Vietnam War played out and the way that feeds into his determination to find and defeat Kong is, again, a clever and compelling use of the 70’s period setting, it gives us a good, believable motivation with a clear and strong Arc to it, and Jackson does a really solid job of playing his Anger as genuine and poignant rather than simply petulant or crazed. But there’s just too much chaff amongst the wheat, too much time and energy devoted to characters and ideas that don’t have any real pay-off. This feels especially true of John Goodman’s Bill Randa, the Monarch scientist who arranges the whole expedition; the Monarch stuff in general mostly feels out of place, but Randa in particular gets all of these little notes and beats that seem meant to go somewhere and then just kind of don’t. Which is kind of what happens with most of the characters in the movie, is the thing; we spend a lot of screen-time dwelling on certain aspects of their backstories or personalities, and then those things effectively stop mattering at all after a certain point, even Packard’s motivations. A Weak Human Element was one of the problems in “Godzilla” 2014 as well, though, and you’ll recall I quite liked that movie. There, though, the human stuff was honestly only ever important for how it fed into the monster stuff; it was the connective tissue meant to get us from sequence to sequence and not much more. Here, though, it forms the heart and soul of the story, and that means its deficiencies feel a lot more harmful to the whole.

Still, those deficiencies really aren’t that severe, and moreover, like I was saying before, there’s a lot about “Skull Island” to actively enjoy. The Monsters themselves do remain the central draw, after all, and for the most part the movie does a solid job with that aspect of things. It does not, perhaps, recreate “Godzilla” 2014’s attempt to make believable animals out of them (even as it does design most of them with even more obvious, overt Real World Animal elements), but there is a certain playful energy that informs them at a conceptual level that I appreciate. Buffalos with horns that look like giant logs with huge strands of moss and grass hanging off their edges, spiders whose legs are adapted to look like tree trunks, stick bugs so big that their camouflage makes them look like fallen trees…the designs feel physically plausible (especially thanks to some strong effects work that makes them feel well inserted into the real environments), but there’s a slightly-humorous tilt to a lot of them that I appreciate, especially since it never outright winks at the audience in a way that would undercut the stakes of the story. Kong too is very well done; rather than the heavily realistic approach taken by the Peter Jackson version from 2005, this Kong is instead very much ape-like but also very clearly his own creature (in particular he stands fully erect most of the time), with a strong sense of Personality to him as well; some of the best parts of the movie are those times where we simply peek in on Kong simply living his life, even when that life is one that is, by nature, violent and dangerous. Less successful, sadly, are his nemeses, the Skullcrawlers; very much like “Godzilla” 2014, Kong is here envisioned as a Natural Protection against a potentially-dangerous species that threatens humanity (or in this case the Iwi Tribe who live on Skull Island, but we’ll talk more about them later), and while they’re hardly bad designs (the way their snake-like lower bodies give them a lot of neat tricks to play against their enemies in battle are genuinely fun in the right sort of Scary Way), they’re also pretty bland and forgettable, even compared to the MUTOS. That said, they serve their purpose well enough, and their big Action Scene showdowns with Kong are genuinely solid. Indeed, the movie’s big climactic brawl between Kong and the biggest of the Skullcrawlers has a lot of good pulpy energy to it (particularly with how Kong winds up using various tools picked up from all around the battlefield to give himself an edge), likewise there’s a certain Wild Fun to the sequence where our hapless humans have to try and survive a trek through the Crawlers’ home-turf.

Where things get a bit tricky again is when the movie attempts to put its own spin on “Godzilla”’s conception of its monsters as part of their own kind of unique ancient eco-system. The sense of Grandeur that gave a lot of that aspect such weight there is mostly absent here, especially; there are instances where some of that feeling comes through (Kong’s interactions with some of the non-Crawler species, for example, do a good job giving us an endearing sense of how Kong fits into this world), but far more often it treats the monsters as Big Set-Piece Attractions. Which is fine as far as it goes, it just also means a lot of them aren’t as memorable or impactful as I might like. Meanwhile, the way the Iwis have built their home to accommodate, interact with, and protect themselves from the island’s bestiary feels like a well-designed concept that manages to suggest a lot of History without having to spell it out for us in a way that I appreciated (I would also be inclined to apply this to the very neat multi-layered stone-art used to portray Kong and the Crawlers except that the sequence where we see them is the most overt “let’s stop and do some world-building” exposition dump in the whole movie). But the Iwis in general are one of the more difficult elements of the movie to process, too; it seems really clear there was a deliberate effort here to avoid the most grossly racist stuff that has been present in prior attempts to portray the Natives of Skull Island, and as far as it goes I do think those efforts bear some fruit; we are, at the very least, very far away from the Scary Ooga-Booga tone of, say, “King Kong VS. Godzilla”, and that feels like it counts for something. I just also feel like there’s some dehumanizing touches to their portrayal (in particular they never speak; I don’t mean to imply that Not Speaking equals Inhuman, but the fact that we are not made privy to how exactly they do communicate means we’re very much kept at arm’s length from them in a way that seems at least somewhat meant to alienate us from them), especially given their role in the story as a whole is relatively minor.

At the end of the day, though, all the movie’s elements, good and bad, don’t really feel like they add up together coherently enough to make an impact. And I think if I had to try and guess why, even as I find it wholly enjoyable with a lot to genuinely recommend it by, I don’t find myself especially enamored by “Skull Island”. It has a lot of different ideas of how to approach its story-70’s pastiche, worldbuilding exercise, Monster Mash-but doesn’t seem to quite succeed at realizing any of them fully, indeed often allowing them to get in each other’s ways. It isn’t, again, a bad movie as a result of that; there really isn’t any stretch of it where I found myself bored or particularly unentertained. But I did paradoxically find myself frequently wanting more, even as by rights the movie delivers on basically what I was looking for from it.

#king kong #kong: skull island #godzilla vs. kong #movies #theroadtogvk #review #ericthemason #my writing

6 notes · View notes

wonderfulworldofmichaelford · 5 years ago

Text

Psycho Analysis: Christmas Special Villains

(WARNING! This analysis contains SPOILERS!)

Much like I did for Halloween, I wanted to do a bunch of one-shot or at the very least minor Christmas villains, which presented me with an interesting problem – most Christmas specials don’t really have villains. Usually the main obstacle to overcome in any holiday special is some sort of emotional fault of the main character, a lack of belief in the spirit of the holiday, or something to that effect, and when there is an actual villain, it tends to just be ones from the show at large with a Christmas-related scheme. Like I’m not doing Princess Morbucks or the Kanker sisters for this.

Luckily, There were a few I was sure on, and I managed to scrounge up a few more to deliver five lovingly-wrapped holiday villains. We have:

Mrs. Claus from The Grim Adventures of Billy & Mandy

Ghost Writer from Danny Phantom

Robot Santa from Futurama

Edna Jucation and the Faculty Four from Codename: Kids Next Door

The Woodland Critters from South Park

Here’s the most interesting thing: Despite Christmas stories tending to lean more towards internal conflict and self-reflection, when they do have actual, tangible threats like these, they tend to be honestly and genuinely great. This is in stark contrast to A lot of the villains from the Halloween specials, who tended to just be big scary baddies without much oomph to them.

Actor: Mrs. Claus is portrayed by Carol Kane, an incredibly prolific actress who you may know best as Valerie, the wife of Miracle Max from The Princess Bride. And much like in that film, she manages to be as enjoyable and funny as the guy playing her husband, which is a tall order indeed – in that film it was Billy Crystal, and in the special it’s Gilbert Gottfried.

Ghost Writer is portrayed by Will Arnett of all people. This was post-Gob Bluth but pre-Batman and BoJack, so while not unknown by any stretch it’s definitely weird to go back and see him in a Butch Hartman action cartoon of all places. He does a great job, as to be expected; when has he ever done poorly?

In his first appearance, Robot Santa was voiced by none other than John Goodman. Normally I’d say Goodman would be perfect for the role of Santa, but… this one’s a maniacal robotic serial killer. It’s a wonderfully jarring juxtaposition. After that, John DiMaggio gave Robot Santa a voice for his other appearances, and he does a good job for sure. Obviously he’s no John Goodman, but really, who is?

Edna Jucation is voiced by Candi Milo, and the Faculty Four are played by Dee Bradley Baker and Darran Norris; Baker is the Unintelligible Tutor and Thesaurus Rex, while Norris is Mr. Physically Fitastic and the Human Text. These are all top-tier veteran voice actors, and they do a fine job, but I can’t particularly say they really make any of these characters stand out or be memorable, which is a shame.

As to be expected, the Woodland Critters are voiced by Trey Parker and Matt Stone. Big shock there. Even less shocking is that they are perfectly funny as these depraved animals.

Motivation/Goals: Out of all of these, I think it’s really fitting that Mrs. Claus is the one with the best motivation. As the HEAD head vampire in the North Pole, she has turned Santa into a vampire and put a halt on Christmas because she is overworked and exhausted, having to do all the household chores all year while Santa only works one night. It is absolutely, perfectly understandable that she snapped… but apparently this isn’t even the first time, as Santa mentions at the end this has happened on multiple prior occasions. You think he’d treat her better after the second or third time, but then we wouldn’t have a plot.

I’d say that Ghost Writer and the Woodland Critters are tied for the next spot; both of them have solid reasons for doing what they’re doing. Ghost Writer was just a humble author trying to finish a Christmas story in time for Christmas, but unfortunately this caught the eye of the extremely Scroogey Danny Phantom, who absolutely hates Christmas due to traumatic events caused by his family fighting on Christmas in the past. Danny, in a moment of incredible callousness, blasts the poor ghost’s manuscript to bits and then proceeds to rub it in, which drives GW to breaking the annual truce and using his powers to torment Danny by trapping him in a Christmas story where he and everyone else can only speak in rhyme. It’s honestly hard to feel sympathy for Danny here, but GW does take it a bit too far.

The Woodland Critters, on the other hand, are just utterly depraved… but that’s to be expected seeing as they are the creations of Eric Cartman, inhabiting a Christmas story whose sole reason for existing is to make Kyle look like a tool. In the story, they get Kyle knocked up with the Antichrist. You see, there master is Satan, and they want nothing more than for his spawn to be born into the world. They really just exist as a reason for Cartman to rip on Kyle for being a Jew at Christmastime, as Kyle himself points out in their debut episode.

Edna and the Faculty Four are a bit simple and amusing, as is befitting of a gimmicky villain from The world of the KND. They team up with the Delightful Children because Substitute Teacher’s Day is virtually unknown compared to Christmas, the kind of absurd, wacky reason for villainy you’d expect from a world where some of the most feared supervillains include an evil dentist and a vampire who spanks people. Robot Santa is likewise extremely simple, yet effective: every Christmas he flies down to Earth to punish the naughty – which is everyone except Zoidberg. This is due to a programming oversight that left his standards set way too high, so no one can ever measure up. Except Zoidberg. There’s really not much more to him than that, but really, does their need to be?

Final Fate: Mrs. Claus is redeemed at the end of the special thanks to Billy, who helps her understand the true meaning of Christmas and who heals her husband so that he can apologize. Things seem like they might work out for real this time because now Malcolm McDowell’s vampire is around to help with tidying up, so hooray! Happy ending here!

Ghost Writer gets thwarted because Danny picks up an orange; as Ghost Writer never watched Drake & Josh and thus didn’t realize that “door hinge” is an acceptable rhyme, he was unable to continue writing his story and got beat up by Danny and his rogues gallery and then thrown into Walker’s prison for breaking the yearly truce in the Ghost Zone. At least he got to complete his book?

The Woodland Critters go out when Santa comes in and blasts them away with a shotgun… but since they are technically fictional characters, they show up in Imaginationland to cause problems. Still, it’s reassuring to know they can be taken out with simple firearms.

Edna Jucation, the Faculty Four, and Robot Santa really don’t have any canonical final fate; they just get defeated and then go on their merry way. In Robot Santa’s case, he actually showed up quite a few more times after his initial appearance to wreak havoc, but the Faculty Four and Edna were entirely oneshot antagonists.

Final Thoughts & Score: Christmas honestly fares a lot better than Halloween does as far as I can see. The villains tend to be a lot more thematic, or at the very least they have more personality and thematic function. Halloween doesn’t really have any sort of core themes to work off of as opposed to Christmas, which has a lot of reoccurring themes in works based around it. Still, most of these characters just settle on being funny.

Mrs. Claus and the Woodland Critters are the best of the bunch here, and both earn themselves a spot on the Nice List with a 9/10 each. Mrs. Claus is just a lot of fun, mostly because of the fact she has legitimate grievances on top of being a unique twist on the character. Mrs. Claus as a vampire overlord who commands hordes of vampire elves? That’s the sort of creative wackiness that Billy & Mandy delivered on. The Woodland Critters are just funny, plain and simple, acting as the sort of amusing subversion that could be expected of from South Park in its glory days as well as being totally in line with Cartman’s personality. These are the exact sort of original characters I’d expect from a guy who ground up a kid’s parents and made them into chili, what with their blood orgies and ultraviolence. Amusingly enough, they score a point higher than Cartman did in his own Psycho Analysis, which is mostly due to their limited appearances meaning that they stay remarkably consistent, where Cartman tends to be whatever an episode needs to be, be that hero, anti-hero, or villain.

Next up are Ghost Writer and Robot Santa, who both get 7/10. Ghost Writer is a very amusing oneshot, but it’s honestly weird that out of all the Villains from Danny Phantom, he’s the first one I talked about. You’d think it would be Ember or Vlad or something… at any rate, he’s an amusing antagonist, but he’s also one who it’s hard not to view as being in the right, especially since Danny was just a jerk to him completely unprovoked due to his own personal hangups with the holidays. As usual with fun ideas on the show though he was only ever used once, which is a real shame but at the same time understandable; his gimmick really only works with Christmas, so it would have been weird shoehorning him into another episode’s plot. For what he is, he’s fun.

Robot Santa has a similar problem, not really being able to function outside of Christmas specials, but his few appearances leave him as an amusing antagonist who never really overstays his welcome. He’s not as entertaining or engaging as, say, Mom, but he definitely offers some laughs with his hilarious concept and his ridiculous levels of bloodlust. Points t him for helping out the heroes in the first Futurama movie too.

That just leaves us with Edna and the Faculty Four, and the Faculty Four just manage to scrape onto the bottom of the Nice List with a collective 5/10. They don’t really have much character or personality, especially when compared to the heroic Marvel pastiche that is Elfa Strike, but as brief amusing gag villains meant to pay loving tribute to the Fantastic Four, I think they’re decent. Edna is not so lucky; she’s a bit obnoxious, shrill, and doesn’t really correlate to any sort of Marvel character, which is baffling since the entire episode is one big love letter to Marvel comics. Sad to say, but she’s landing smack dab on the Naughty List with a 2/10. She doesn’t even have a cool gimmick!

I suppose that wraps it up for Christmas special villains. Doing something like this is tough, because it really makes you sit back and wonder what sort of Christmas villains you should put on. Obviously I avoided any theatrical film villains, but that did leave one particularly glaring omission of a villain from a holiday special… a big, green, unpleasant omission. He’s a mean one, for sure...

47 notes · View notes

creativenicocorner · 6 years ago

Text

Some 1700′s Walter Strickler x Major John André bits born from some musings during my time waiting at the dentist’s office.

Based on this HC so it’s safe to call this is canon within the Terpsichore universe ( the concept of their relationship at least, there’s still so much to flesh out and think about. All the same Major John André is for sure one of Strickler’s past loves )

A note: this is Mature / Explicit- please read responsibly. You can read/learn more about the ACTUAL Major John André here

The New York heat stuck to every surface. From the floorboards to the creak of the door in the tavern. The way the humidity hugged the face. How locks of hair would stick to sweaty skin.

It could drive anyone mad. But uniform is uniform no matter the season. And so the good Major placed a chilled kerchief to his brow. Dabbing it slight to ease the sense of being stuck in a bubble of heat. All while not breaking eye contact with the bar maid.

A curvaceous woman with rosy cheeks. Although whether the rosy completion was from the heat or her good humor was yet to be established. In their gaze, her blush deepened all the more. Not that the Major planned on doing more than amuse himself with a good flirt. After all he had a schedule to keep, and a meeting to honor.

Feeling satisfied the Major checked his pocket watch once more. Seeing the hour, he stilled himself from the rising worry André was trying to keep to the back of his mind.

“Steady on.” he comforted himself before sipping his beer. Hoping the taste of hops could distract himself with how late it was getting. Carefully the Major returned the glass to his table. The sound of a pair of heels clicking was heard in the same tempo of the Major’s heart picking up.

A gentleman stepped into the Major’s line of sight. The Major’s eyes trailed upward at the sight of the man. A lanky man with long curling dark hair. Skin tanner than leather, born from long hours under the sun. A hooked nose like a falcon’s beak, smelling of brine and hickory with a long pipe hanging from his lip. The Major rested his viewing journey on the man’s set of impossibly still evergreen eyes.

“Well.” Smiled the Major, clasping his hands together on the table, “If it isn’t the whaler.”

“Aye.” winked the whaler in a way that made the Major’s mouth twitch. It reminded Major André of their first meeting; during a street side brawl.

A brawl like no other that bordered the animalistic. That intrigued the Major, and brought these two together as a start of a rather interesting, and soon to be very close, partnership.

The whaler lifted his floppy hat some, respectfully. Causing a few wispy curls to fall over his forehead, “So it is, sir. Mind if I share your company a while?”

“Please.” gestured the Major, “There’s always space at my table for a good yarn.”

A grin spread over the whaler, a row of teeth gritted on the bit of his pipe. Humor twinkling in the whaler’s eyes. “Much obliged.”

As the whaler sat down, the pair of them shared a knowing joke. After all, the supposed whaler was a spy, and with the coming war the whaler Strickland would prove to be quite useful as Major John André’s man.

The Major flagged down the bar maid with a polite raised hand. The two ordered more drinks. Talked of nothing, the weather mostly, conflicting news from a farmer’s almanac, and then, with a knowing calculating twinkle the Major leaned forward and asked, “So...what news does the sea bring my goodman? What new tales from The Charun?”

And so the whaler would tell his seafaring tale. Or rather hidden news, reports, and intel of the rebels disguised as a story.

As the days went on, these meetings grew more frequent. They also grew longer as they found great company in the other. Time would seem to warp when they conversed. A second of philosophy turned quickly into 3 hours. A discussion of new inventions of a half hour, turned into having to be requested to leave at final call.

One night, after one of these time warping discussions and deep drinks into their glasses, the tavern grew dizzyingly hot. So dizzying that the Whaler Strickland and Major André’s hands did graze, ever so briefly, above the table.

Instinctually the two retracted their hands, in fear, and shock at such sudden intimacy. A fumbled apology graciously rectified the situation. Clearly it was the heat. Clearly it was the drink. Clearly the summer heat was dizzying that any gentleman might lose their bearings.

And yet their cheeks were as red as Major John André’s uniform.

Awkwardly they’d avoid eye contact. And without the other noticing with their eyes looking elsewhere, they’d observe the other.

Strickland would note how André’s fingers twitched against the glass. Attempting to draw some sort of coolness from the glass, to ease the beating heart rate in his pulse.

André would note how Strickland’s ears, even in their tan complexion grew darker with a reddish hue. How Strickland’s eyes, normally so still an unnervingly unmoving like a nocturnal animal, shifted unable to stay still.

The Major also noted how Strickland worried ceaselessly at his pipe, and gulped.

“Some fresh air, perchance?” offered the André.

“Yes!” agreed Strickland with a slight crack in his voice. The whaler cleared it and said again, calmer, “Yes.” Though his eyes were more erratic than ever.

The two paid for their drinks, and took to walking through the balmy New York evening heat.

Their buckled shoes clacked over the cobbled stones. The streets themselves weren’t very crowded, and both André and Strickland suspected that perhaps it was later than they both originally thought it was.

The distant chimes of the clock tower confirmed this. Sending the Major and the Undercover Whaler into fits of laughter so strong that Major André nearly lost his kerchief.

Luckily Strickland was lithe enough to catch it before it hit the path, in a smooth almost far too elegant to be human move. Strickland straightened himself, thumbing the cloth ever so slightly before giving it a tiny shake and presented the kerchief. André stared without moving.

“Sir?” asked the whaler. Confused, and misunderstanding André’s silence. In a bout of self consciousness Strickland looked at his hands. Attempting to lighten the air with a joke he grinned through his pipe, “A good wash and a bit of perfume should get the smell of fish off it, I’m sure.”

This seemed to break André’s trance as he huffed an amused smirk. Taking back the kerchief with an upward zeal. “Stuff and nonsense.” without so much as waving it in front of his nose André stated, “It smells good.”

It was Strickland’s turn to gawk. Except André wasn’t as patient as the whaler was. Quickly initiating the return to their walking. Their pace was far more brisk this time around.

Another late evening found the two of them walking yet again under the cover of night. This time, they were closer to the pier. The two of them had been noticed walking together before by the officers. Not that it was the subject of talk or rumors.

Yet Strickland could tell there was a dark thought that preoccupied the ever cunning mind of his companion. He noticed something was awry when the sound of chatter from idle infantry brought a huff out of André.

“Lets not walk the pier.” suggested André, stopping in his tracks.

“Oh? But you enjoy it when it’s high tide. And you have yet to show me this special view you mentioned.” went Strickland softly. Distant laughter trailed over. And André looked away. Witness to this reaction, Strickland’s heart traitorously sank. “I see.”

A hollow chuckle escaped the whaler. Feeling himself foolish. After all he wasn’t walking with just anyone. He was walking with an officer, and noted Major. The Major. While he was merely, well, not even in uniform to say the least.

It was Strickland’s turn to have his brows darkened. Undercover or not. The whaler, no, the changeling felt exceptionally foolish then.

In the summer heat, the air chilled around them.

When Major André turned back to Strickland, he sighed at the brooding sight of his companion. Hurt to see him so put out. Desperately, André searched his companion’s darkened features.

In a huff the Major gripped Strickland’s forearms tightly. “No.” he said, as if ordering the creeping negative thoughts out of the whaler’s mind. Strickland’s face shot up in shock.

Slowly André’s hands trailed down the length of Strickland’s arms. Passing the cuff and ruffle, gripped the bare callused flesh of Strickland’s hands.

Strickland felt himself no longer able to breath.

“It isn’t what you think.” reassured André in a soft voice. “I don’t care who sees us.”

“Sir!” Strickland exhaled at last.

“I simply do not wish to be accosted with talk of, of Military. Of planning. I do not wish for my mind to return to such things right now.” André’s thumb grazed ever so slightly over Strickland’s knuckles. His own voice growing low. Gentle, “I wish for my mind to seek refuge with you tonight. With your voice, your thoughts, your opinions. With you, alone.”

Strickland’s breath faltered, and the summer heat became sweltering hot once more. Stifling even, as words stuck to his throat.

André gave his hands the slightest of squeezes, and the blush that spread over Strickland’s sun tanned cheek’s and ears grew more noticeable.

Unsure how he was able to stand, Strickland took a step closer to André. Closing the space between them, speaking in an equally gentle tone. Just above a whisper. “Sir. The view you wished to show me. Was it the lighthouse?”

André looked up into those impossibly still evergreen eyes. Felt his own insides tremble at the intensity at which they stared. Standing so close as they did, the Major never realized how tall the whaler was. Nor the little moles and freckles that lightly scattered over the bridge of Strickland’s aquiline nose, and cheeks.

André began to wonder how many other moles and freckles lay hidden, sprinkled beneath the whalers clothes. The Major gulped, and realized Strickland was still waiting for an answer.

“Yes.” André admitted at last with a shy smile. “To see the view.”

A smile slowly dawned on Strickland’s features. Equally shy. “Of course, Sir.” The tall whaler took a step back, breaking the closeness that had grown in their moment. And gestured down an ally. “This way, Sir. I think I might know a trick that might get us there without being flagged aside.”

“I should like that very much.”

The two went into the shadow of the ally for the briefest of moments. And reemerged with André wearing Strickland’s long coat. His uniform and rank hidden beneath the whaler’s coat. The collar of which was raised.

Strickland himself didn’t mind walking without the jacket. His pipe bobbing along on his lip as they made their way down the pier with a nervous electrified zeal.

“How do you stand the heat of this thing?” André asked from beneath the coat. Not without humor.

“I enjoy the warmth it can retain. I chill easily. Perhaps it’s my reptilious heart.”

“Stuff and nonsense.” snorted André. “You’re as warmblooded as they come, Strickland.”

And it took everything for Strickland to stop himself from turning and grasping on to André then and there.

“Yes. Well.” went Strickland, worrying his pipe. “Not too far now.”

Usually a lighthouse worked not only as a beacon in the night. A warning to sailors during rough seas, to stay attentive of the rocks and shore. But also, as a living abode to the people who ran the lighthouse.

This night, Strickland was not too surprised to discover, the lighthouse was empty. With only himself and André to stare off at the rocking waters below. The whaler had a hunch that the lighthouse’s emptiness might have been premeditative.

The awkwardness that grew with each step higher into the lighthouse confirmed this.

As well as a dire awareness of Strickland looking up at André’s behind as they marched upwards. André could practically feel the unmovable gaze shift in the dark. The observed and observer knowing they are observing and being observed. Welcoming it.

André found himself trying to guess what part of himself Strickland was gazing at, and his cheeks grew rosier.

Half way up the lighthouse André nearly found himself out of breath, and slipped on a caved stone step. Only to be caught by the secure arms of the whaler. Who’s grip was surprisingly light under such calloused hands. As if clutching a bird’s egg.

“Are you alright, Major?”

André looked up into Strickland’s face, surprised and comforted all in one. Readjusting his footing, André’s cheek nearly brushed against Strickland’s. “Yes.” he said, cheeks feeling warm. “Yes, quite. Thank you.”

“Shall I lead the way, Sir? I’m rather good at seeing in darker surroundings.”

The Major laughed at that. Smoothing his hair in the process. “By all means.” gestured the Major with an open palm.

Strickland smirked with a little knowing twinkle in his eye. Perhaps it was the adrenaline of catching the Major. Perhaps it was the privacy of the narrow lighthouse staircase. But it was then that the whaler reached out his calloused rough hand, and gently clasped it around the Major’s.

“Very well.” said Strickland softly in passing. “Hang tight.”

And André did. He squeezed Strickland’s hand as he did before. Though as they traveled upward on that spiral staircase. His thumb did wander over the calluses of this undercover whaler.

It surprised the Major. How many calluses could one hand have? André had shaken hands with sailors before. And yet these hands. The whaler’s hands, Strickland’s hands, bore the roughness of a sea of troubles that no man with a normal lifespan could achieve.

As if hearing André’s internal thoughts, Strickland spoke in the quiet dark. Between the seaside wind that whistled now and then through the damp stone walls. “Rough, I know. Not much grows from salted earth, I’m afraid.”

Major André struggled with this cryptic meaning. And yet was filled with a want to prove the whaler wrong. Palming the rough hand, André lowered his lips ever so slightly. Halting himself in a moment of panic, misplaced insecurity, and loosing his chance to kiss into that palm as the door to the exterior opened. Bringing with it a quick gush of night air.

The air was thick with brine and the smell of sea spray. André gasped, catching his breath with a hand to his breast. Their clasped hands, fall away under the watchful eye of the stars.

Together they leaned on the railing, elbows ever so close to touching. Looking out into the moving living horizon. Despite the roaring crash of the waves, it was quiet on the lighthouse.

Just as quietly Strickland began to fill his pipe with tobacco. André watched the whaler’s meticulous hands at work. The punctilious care of his fingers. How it gently pressed the herb into the bowl. Coaxing it, padding it lightly. Filling it.

Another blush started to grow on the Major’s face, and he is unsure how much more of himself he could keep check. With nothing to worry his own hands over, the Major fixed a calculated stare at the moving waters.

It was Strickland’s struggling with lighting the pipe that draws the Major’s eyes back from the horizon. He watched how the whaler tried to pull and puff the pipe to life before the match would be blown out by the wind. Cursing as he waved away the little match between the black smoke.

It would be a lie to say it didn’t amuse the Major some. Yet he was never a gentleman who enjoyed the sight of torture, and took pity on his companion.

“Here.” went André, cupping his hands around the bowl. Blocking the match from the seaside wind. They shared a look. André gave an encouraging nod, and a flashed smile of, “Go on then. Just be sure to share afterwards, hm?”

The whaler’s face lit up with delight, and with the glow of a newly lit match, “Aye, aye.” he smirked.

André could feel the projected warmth of the match spread on his palms. Stilling his own lip as he watched Strickland pull on the pipe, finally managing to light the tobacco within. The whaler jerked his eyebrows cheekily. And between the newly light bowl, the match, and the closeness of their faces, it was unclear what glowed brighter.

Strickland, without breaking eye contact, tilted his head upwards, and exhaled the smoke slowly and languidly above them. André didn��t dare look away. No matter how much the Major yearned to look at Strickland’s briefly exposed Addam’s apple.

Lowering his head, Strickland passed André the pipe. Their hands grazed once more in the process. Though this time neither of them shied away from such a touch. And just like that, at the risk of the pipe going out, they lingered. Captivated by the each other’s eyes.

The pipe was forgotten, on the floor. No longer outside, as the lighthouse’s light swirled rhythmically in its swooping trajectory around them. A pulsating under rhythm to their own frantic heavy breathed movements.

Their teeth crashed like the waves below. Artlessly they fumbled at waistcoats and jackets. Pulled at drawstrings and trouser buttons. Moving between deeply planted kisses and face cupping, and the combing of long hair.

As the Major worked on Strickland’s buttons, and kissed into that Addam’s apple he so desired to kiss his mouth upon, the whaler’s breath stuttered and hitched. Grinding encouragingly while he breathed in the Major’s well groomed strawberry blonde hair.

Strickland pressed his hands to André’s back drawing him closer as he worried André’s earlobe and caressed his now bare neck.

“Heavens above.” breathed André, struggling to undo Strickland’s buttons. Easing into the enjoyable distraction of Strickland’s passing hand that cupped the Major’s bottom. Oh how the Major wished his bottom was already bare.

André’s breath hitched, his erection aching for more than teased confined attention. Struggling against his trousers and Strickland’s hand. “Christ Strickland” he barely breathed, forehead resting into Strickland’s shoulder. Kissing into it as his eyes screwed more shut.

Strickland lowered his head, kissing into André’s hair, temple and brow. He purred low and animal like into the Major’s ear a balmy question “Was this the view you wanted to show me, Sir?”

André’s eyes popped wide, an internal competitiveness brimmed with the equal desire to see Strickland’s face become undone with desire.

The Major grasped Strickland’s disheveled shirts, and guided the whaler to be pinned against a wall. Strickland hummed. Perhaps it was from the swirling light of the lighthouse, rhythmically making its rounds. But André could have sworn Strickland’s eyes momentarily lit up like candle light.

It fueled André all the more. André pressed against Strickland, trailing his mouth over the whaler’s bare neck and collar bone. Kissing into Strickland’s jaw. Strickland allowed André’s hand to press into Strickland’s mouth. They hummed and moaned at the sucking sounds and feeling that followed. How Strickland willingly closed his mouth around the length of André’s fingers. Pulling on it like his pipe, licking it wet.

“That’s right.” panted André, as he coaxed Strickland on with his spare hand, causing the whaler to moan against his fingers. “Ready your spirits.”

"Ready, Sir. For you- oh, ohou, I’m ready.” Strickland struggled to pant with André’s fingers in his mouth, and his other hand trailing below his trouser. Thumbing and teasing with pinches and thumbed circles of his hip, and thigh. A moaned sound that could have been, “please” followed.

André slowly and meticulously slipped his fingers out from Strickland’s mouth. Letting his fingertips linger on his lower lip. Feeling the whaler’s pant on his nail and knuckle.

“Alright.” cooed André. Shimmying Strickland’s trousers down as he pressed a gentle kiss into him. “Alright.”

They pulled apart long enough to look at the other’s flustered completion. André cupped Strickland’s cheek. And Strickland, without thought, pressed his temple against André’s.

“Sir, I-” went Strickland, trying to suppress the begging want in his voice. His erection pulsing bare with anticipation.

“I know...I know...” smiled André soaking in the sight of him.

“You’re a tease, Sir.” went Strickland, unsure how he wasn’t seeing his own breath with how warm he felt. Pulling at André’s shirts.

André grabbed a cusp of Strickland’s hair. Coaxed him close as he said, very seriously, “That’s Major Tease, to you.”

They stared at each other for as long as they could before breaking down into a tittering fit of laughter and giggles. Their laughter followed them in a gentle embrace that continued amorously to the floor. Where they would move in one another as the waves did move against the rocky coast of the lighthouse. Where sweat would form as salty as the brine. Where laughter turned to heavy panting and moans. Moving in various tempo changes as the lighthouse’s swinging light acted as their metronome.

The seasons changed, and although summer ended, turning to a golden fall, their friendship grew tenfold, as did the frequency of André and Strickland’s meetings. Though, try as they might, war was on the horizon, it was a fact. And with it André grew to appreciate the whaler’s own tactical mind.

So much so, that he needed his undercover man elsewhere, in many places in fact. No longer only the whaler, but an officer. A quartermaster to a 75 gunned ship of the Royal Navy. Strickland would quickly earn a reputation as the Gentleman of Many Hats. Rumors would claim him to be impossible to follow, as if capable to change face and disguise himself at will.

When hearing this one night in the parlor of Major John André, dressed smartly in blue and golden buttons, Strickland spun on his heal and floated into a sofa with burgundy tassels. Cat like humor on his lips “Change at will? Now that is a thought!”

“I’m serious Strickland. That’s quite a reputation to be proud of.” André lifted a glass of sherry in cheers, “Admirable.”

“No, no.” Pressed Strickland, wanting to explain “I mark the skill of it. I simply know a chap who’s skill in changing faces is far superior to my own.”

“Oh?”

“A Hessian friend of mine. Otto von- something.” Strickland pretended to struggle with the name, scratching the side of his nose “Can’t quite place it. Heard of him, Sir?”

“Can’t say I have.” said His Majesty’s spy master André.

“Then clearly he is better at this than I. It’s the ghosts you don’t know one should fear, not the phantoms in plain sight.” mused Strickland with an idle waving hand that found a crystal glass filled with sherry pressed into it. André’s hand lingered there. Not retracting after handing off the delivery of sherry. Slowly André placed his index finger over Strickland’s. “Sir?”

“Drink with me Strickland.”

“Jealous?” Teased the now quartermaster, “I assure you we’re not as-”

“Stuff and nonsense.” huffed André. The Major leaned down, smirking all the while, “I merely enjoy how you weave your words around.”

“It’s what happens when your mother is punched in the mouth by Arachne.”

André rested his arm at the back of the chair, pinning the quartermaster in his chair “Oh? From my observation; I fear you have the makings of an old man.” mused André. “I’d hate to see your old soul age you so quickly.”

“Coming from such a kindred spirit as yourself, I’m surprised.” Strickland looked at their overlapping index fingers, then the glint he had come to recognize rather well in André’s eyes. A cat like smile grew on Strickland’s face, “Perhaps a reminder is in order.”

The Major smoothly lifted Strickland’s other hand, and kissed into his calloused palm. “Perhaps.” he said, and leaned forward to kiss Strickland.

youtube

FIN

[For now]

I think I’ll post everything sometime later on Ao3, or it might crop up in Terpsichore in someway (whatever comes first)

Thank you so much for reading!

#[enter melodramatic harpsichord music]#SELF INDULGENT AS H E C K #Hello yes did someone order two emotionally restrained men with #unrestrained feelings?#Walter Strickler #1700's disaster muppet #Major John André #aka The Strawberry Blonde that got away #Stricklander #Strickler #Trollhunters #Tales of Arcadia #historic loves #Terpsichore #Nico Writes #Sailors #1700s #fan fiction #fanfic

18 notes · View notes

joyofcrime-elinorhigh · 6 years ago

Text

Frosty Returns REVIEW:

Hello there, everybody. My name is JoyofCrimeArt and welcome to the second review in my month long "Deviant-cember" special event. Christmas time is right around the corner and I don't know about you, but I'm loving it. Christmas is awesome! (No offence to any non Christian or non practicing readers out there. I'm sure your holidays are awesome to, I guess have no personal experience in that department.) The music, the decorations, the food, and the festive feeling of kindness towards your fellow man are all things that make this time of year so wonderful! But one of my favorite parts of the Christmas season is all of the Christmas specials. I love Christmas specials. Every year I make it my personal mission to watch as many as I can, from classics like "Rudolph" and "Charlie Brown", to the more contemporary specials like "Olive the Other Reindeer" and "Yes, Virginia." And that's not even counting the really frickin' out there Christmas specials, like "T.I and Tiny's Holiday Hustle." an animated special about hip hop artist T.I. and his family having to team up with an elf in order to save Christmas. Yes, this exist! But that's a review for another day...

(THIS EXISTS!) Today, I want to talk about a different holiday special. A holiday special that features significantly less hip hop and also significantly less holiday. That special would be the 1992 animated tv special "Frosty Returns."

"Frosty Returns" is the a um....sequel?.....Reboot?.....Cash grab? -Of the original Rankin-Bass Frosty special from 1969. This special, however, was not created by Rankin-Bass, but rather Broadway Video's and directed by Bill Melendez. Bill Melendez is most well known for his work on the four theatrical Charlie Brown movies, and this special shares a similar art style to those old Peanuts cartoons. I'm going to be honest here, while I do like the original Frosty the Snowman special, it was always one of the lesser Rankin-Bass holiday specials in my opinion. Like it's not bad or anything, and I use to like it a lot more when I was younger, but it just seems kinda bland compared to some of the other specials. In the original special Frosty was never a super interesting character, and Karen had even less personality then Frosty. The overall story, at least in my opinion, was never super enticing. I guess I've just always been more of a "Santa Claus is comin' to Town." type of guy. Now I don't hate the special by any means, I watch it ever year, and there are stuff in it worth watching. Professor Hinkle is a fun villain, the scene with Frosty melting is genuinely sad, and it's really fun seeing the original crew just go completely bonkers with the sound effects. (Though that part I don't think was intentional.) Sorry if I piss off any die hard Frosty fans out there, (I'm looking at you, little brother!) but I just felt like I needed to show my background with the original Frosty the Snowman special before I start talking about this special. Does this special hold up to the original, or is it just a pale imitation of a true holiday classic? Let's find out together, shall we. The special begins with our weird uncanny valley narrator. A weird uncanny valley narrator is a Frosty the Snowman tradition at this point, and is usually some kind of celebrity who was popular at the time of the specials release. The original Frosty has Jimmy Durante, "Frosty's Winter Wonderland" had Andy Griffith, and this special has Johnathan Winters. Just like director of the Amazing Spider-man films Marc Webb, I'm pretty sure he was only chosen because of his name. Now while all of the Frosty narrator's (with exception of the one from "Legends of Frosty the Snowman.") have fallen into the uncanny valley, the narrator in this special takes the fricking cake! While the other narrators looks a least a little human, Johnathan Winter's in this special looks like an actual gremlin! He's only a few inches tall, and floats around on snowflakes like some kinda sprite. And there's no explanation at all for his existence. He just happens to be like this and where suppose to just nod our heads and go along with it! Also he likes hot coco. This is very important.

Anyway he introduces us to the town of Beansboro, a small town that has just gotten covered with seven inches of snow. We get a brief musical number where all the kids sing about how much the love the snow, and all the adults sing about how much they hate it. The kids love the snow because of all of the fun they get to have in it, while the adults don't like the snow because they have to shovel it, it raises heating bills, makes it harder to drive around, ect. The song is rather good, and but we'll get into this specials music a bit later. After the song is finished we meet our main character Holly DeCarlo and her best friend, Charles. Holly is a shy girl who dreams of becoming a magician, while Charles is a the stereotypical nerd archetype, and kinda looks like a genderbent Marcy from the Peanuts specials. Holly is sad because she was not "invited" to go play in the snow. Now living in the south, I'm far from an expert on snow, but is snow the type of thing you need to get "invited" to? If all the tv specials I've seen has taught me anything I think you just kinda...go out there. All kidding aside though, I get it. She's sad because she has nobody asked to go play with her. I'm just saying, they phrasing is kinda strange. Then Charles asks Holly if she wants to go outside and build a...fertility goddess? Um...as I just stated, I'm far from an expert on snow, but is that something kids do on snow days that I was just blissfully unaware of? Also Is Charles a Pagan? Not the belief system I would expect from somebody who, as the special is going to continually bring up, is a man of logic and does not believe in anything that he cannot solve with logic. Well I for one appreciate the religious diversity this special presents. Bout' time we get a Pagan character in children's media without society making a big deal about it! That's what I say!

pictured Demeter, our Holy Jolly Fertility Goddess.) Anyway, Holly decides that instead of doing...that, she'd rather practice her magic for the magic act because Holly is going to be preforming her magic act during the annual winter carnival in front of the entire town. Holly tells Charles to get into a box and then she gets out the saw. Oh geez, I think this specials about to get a bit dark. Holly doesn't even have another box attached to the box that Charles is in. And the box isn't even closed! Holly clearly has no idea what she's doing and Charles is going to pay the ultimate price for it. This is about to become a very red Christmas. But luckily before Charles goes off to meet Persephone, he asks Holly to open a window because it's hot inside the box. Then a giant gust of wind blows in the room and Holly loses her magic hat. And by giant gust I mean, I pretty sure there's a class five hurricane going on outside and those kids really need to get inside. I mean the wind is strong enough to spin Charles' box around at ridiculous speeds. So then Holly decides to chase after her hat and-HEY WAIT HOLLY, WHAT ABOUT CHARLES?! You're just going to leave him spinning in that box until he vomits, just to go get your stupid hat? It's called priorities Holly, Jesus Christ!

(Bye Charles, thanks for letting me nearly saw you in half!) Holly chases after the hat, and for one brief close up shot we see that Johnathan Winter's is riding the hat. I do not get this. What is the point? Is he guiding the hat to Frosty, or is he just riding it just cause? Holly trails behind the hat, (as it seems this wind managed to blow the hat not only out of Holly's room, but out of Holly's house somehow and down the block. Can the hat open doors?) She bumps into her school teacher, and the teacher talks about how much she hates the snow. There's not much to this scene other then driving the point home that the adults hate snow. After that scene Holly finds the hat it's on the head of a snowman, who just happens to be alive. This is Frosty, this time played by John Goodman, who honestly I really like in this role. He has a very kind and welcoming voice, and it's a lot less "bumbling" sounding then the other Frosty voice actors. Not that I'm trying to knock those voice actors or anything, I'm just saying. Holly tries to introduce herself to Frosty, but Frosty already knows who she is because in Frosty's own words she's a "famous" magician. While yes, this doesn't actually make any sense as an answer I actually really like this scene. Frosty in this special is a lot wiser then he was in the previous Frosty specials, and that's something I really like. Like for example, Holly mentions that she doesn't have any friends other then Charles, and Frosty tells her "Having one friend is a lot more than having no friends." It's a really nice sentiment and a good message for the kids, and to anybody really. Holly's mom walks in and Frosty goes all Toy Story and stops talking or moving because...Well look, if "Toy Story didn't have to explain it then why should this special have to? Oh, there's also a funny joke where Holly's mom calls Holly out for abandoning Charles, saying that he's going to end up "needing to join a support group." Holly's mom talks about how she just bought this brand new product called "Summer Wheeze." the least marketable name for the product ever devised. This product is like a can of aerosol spray that can make snow disappear in seconds! Holly's mom's friend shows up and they start talking like there in an infomercial for the spray. Holly's mom's friend ends up spraying Frosty a bit, causing him to yell. And conveniently nobody seems to hear or acknowledge the snowman's screams of pain. We then transition to the board room of the company that makes Summer Wheeze, and here we meet our villain, Mr. Twitchell and his pet cat, Bones. Mr. Twitchell is a crotchety old curmudgeon played by Brian Doyle-Murray. He's best known for playing Captain K'nuckles in "The Marvelous Misadventures of Flapjack" and The Flying Dutchman in "Spongebob." He's also the older brother of actor Bill Murray! I know, it's crazy! He gives a great performance in this special. Now let me lay out Mr. Twitchell's evil plan in this special. It's a pretty complex plan, so try to follow along. Step 1) Make the town love him by getting rid of all of the snow. Step 2) Get rid of all the snow. Step 3) Have the town make him their King out of gratitude. Um......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgxYUxqcg1Q

I swear to high heaven, Mr. Twitchell makes this special. He's so over the top and ridiculous that it's near impossible not to love it. Then, when one of his employees points out the environmental concerns he has his James Bond style cat press a button that activates a trap door under that employees' desk! This villain, man, this villain! He then has his cat, Bones, release an army of trucks to spray the entire town with Summer Wheeze! Let the snowman genocide begin!

By the way, this Summer Wheeze thing must really be a labor of love from Mr. Twitchell. I mean as far as I can tell he's releasing these cars for free. All that Wheeze there using is coming out of his bottom line, unless the town is paying him to use these trucks or something. Then again, I don't think this guy has really thinks through most of the stuff he does. I mean why would anybody buy Summer Wheeze if the company is spraying peoples yard's for free. The next day, Holly decides to keep Frosty in her Freezer until after she comes home from school. What I want to know is what would happen if Holly's mom needed to open the freezer at any point during the day and just saw a talking snowman in there, but that's a question this special doesn't want to answer for us! Also there's a bit where she has to take some turkey out of her freezer to make room for Frosty, then she put's the turkey into her backpack in her rush to get to school on time. Then during class the teachers ask why she has turkey in her desk and she says its for lunch. The teacher tells her to put it away unless she wants to present it as a science project. Holly then, really sincerely sounding, says that she does intend to use the turkey as a science project. It's hard to explain in post form but it's a really confusing bit. Did she intend to bring the turkey or not? Was she intending to use the turkey for her science project or was that just a lie for the teacher? She didn't sound like she was lying. I don't get it. This is another question the special doesn't want to answer for us! Charles is giving a science report about snow, and the environmental importance snow has on the world. Well, it was the nineties, so it was really a matter of time before we got some kind of environmental message. One of the kids interrupts Charles, saying that snow isn't important and his dad says that it gives you heart attacks. (Charles remarks that the kids dad may be confusing snow with chili dogs, another funny joke.) And all the kids start talking about how happy they are that all the snow is melting, so they can do more summer time stuff, like having picnics and volleyball games all year round. Charles points out how snow is important to the environment but none of the kids listen. There are a lot of logical problems with this scene. One, why do all the kids suddenly hate the snow. I know kids can be fickle but earlier in the special the kids love the snow, and that scene took place, like, the day before this scene takes place. Second, I don't get why Charles is so concerned about the environmental aspect of the Wheeze. I mean yeah, it's an aerosol spray so in that regard it's bad for the environment, but if it's just melting the ice it shouldn't be that big a deal right? Again, I'm no snow expert, but snow melts naturally anyway, and this spray is just speeding up the process. One of the environmental benefits of snow that Charles brings up is a source of fresh water, but if the spray is melting the snow it's still making the fresh water, unless the spray itself is contaminating the water. Or unless the snow isn't melting and it's just disappearing, in which case Mr. Twitchell found a way to destroy matter itself, which I think is the much bigger deal here. This special makes a big deal about how important snow is, and while I know different parts of the world are different and have different environmental needs, there are tonnes of places all over the world where it doesn't snow and those places are fine. As long as the snow is still melting things should be fine. And again, maybe there's something in the spray that is bad for the environment, but the special really treats it like it's the absence of snow that's the problem, not the contaminated water supply. Also third, just because the snow is melting doesn't mean that it'll suddenly be a year long summer! The spray isn't actually increasing the temperature of the air! (Well, I mean it is slowly, because of the aerosol, but you'd need to spray a lot of that stuff to make a hole in the ozone layer big enough to create an endless summer.) I mean I've only seen snow twice in my life, but I've still experienced winters! (Though last year it was over eighty degrees on Christmas. That sucked.) Anyway, Holly goes to talk to Frosty, who has left the freezer and is now staying at the winter carnival's ice castle. She tells him about how everybody wants to get rid of all the snow, and how she was to scared to speak out against them. Frosty tells her that it's okay, and gives her some advice on how to be less shy and timid....in the form of a song! The song is actually really good, and one of the most memorable part of the special. I mean, yeah, it does continue to shoe horn in the whole "snow is the most important thing, snow is love snow is life" theme the special has been doing this whole time, and the moral of "when your to scared to talk to someone just sing" is a pretty weird lesson, but dang it the song is really darn catchy! I really feel this is underappreciated Christmas/winter song that really deserves more appreciation! At least until we get to the part where Mr. Twitchell get's his dark reprise verse, and it's basically a weird....rap....I think? That's amazing for completely different reasons!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6PnTmyYT6w

(Also this is unrelated but why does Frosty have a human nose? He says early in the special that once some kid stole his nose to play hacky sack so is it suppose to be a hacky sack? Why does it look so human-ish?) Anyway after the song Charles meets up with Holly and Frosty. At first Charles believes that Frosty is some kind of robot, but Frosty (rather quickly I may add) convinces him that he is a real talking snowman. But then Mr. Twitchell shows up in him limousine and see's Frosty. Naturally, Mr. Twitchell is not at all phased by the talking and walking snowman, and is more concerned with Frosty spreading snow onto his sidewalks. So he does the "logical" thing and sends his pet CAT out to destroy Frosty with a can of Summer Wheeze. SURPRISINGLY this does not end up working. This is what happens when your cat is your elite henchman. Though the cat is able to spray frosty enough to make a massive hole in his chest. Holly is concerned, because there's barely enough snow on the ground to fix Frosty....except for the fact that that isn't true, at all! There is still plenty of snow, just look around you!

But despite the fact that there is still snow all over the place Charles decides to go get some snow that he was saying and pack it all into Frosty. Then they decide to finally do something about mean old Mr. Twitchell. Mr. Twitchell decides to attend the Winter Carnival, and melt all of the snow, cementing himself as the towns hero and future king. Sure, why not. Mr. Twitchell goes on stage so he can be crowned king of the Winter Carnival, when Holly goes on stage to call him out. She talks about how important snow is but Mr. Twitchell is unfazed and unrepentant. So Holly decides to unveil Frosty in front of the whole town and, Hey wait a minute!

Frosty is alive without the hat! That's not allowed! Unless this takes place after "Frosty's Winter Wonderland." Is this a reboot or a sequel?! HAX! I call HAX! So anyway, Frosty decides to sing a reprise of his song to the towns people and everybody in the town immediately decides that they love snow again. No wonder Mr. Twitchell thought he could become this towns king, this is the most easily swayed town in the world! Everybody in town rejoices at the magical talking snowman that nobody questions the existence of. Mr. Twitchell decides to get into one of his weird Summer Wheeze spraying vans and, because he's Mr. Twitchell, decides to let the cat drive. This goes about as well as you'd expect.

FRICKIN' REK'D SON!

I kid of course, Mr. Twitchell survives the crash Holly and Frosty shows him some kindness by giving him the Winter Carnival crown and taking him on a sled ride. Frosty then tells Holly that it's time for him to leave, as he wants to go to another town to help another kid. Holly hugs Frosty and wishes him goodbye and the special ends with weird Johnathan Winters/Mr. Mxyzptlk hybrid telling us that Mr. Twitchell decided to change his ways and go into the sled making business. This change of heart lasted a total of four days until, at the age of one hundred and ten, Mr. Twitchell died in his home and his body was eaten by his cat, Bones. The End. So in conclusion, is the special good? Well that depends on your perspective. On a technical aspect the special is not very well made. The animation isn't very good, with the exception of one scene early on in the special where Johnathan Winter's is actually animated very fluidly. But other then that you can see that this special doesn't have much of a budget. There are a lot of plot points in the special that either don't make sense or only make sense because the characters are so stupid. Also, while the environmental/"snow is totes awesome" moral isn't as heavy handed as I remembered them being, there still pretty heavy handed. Also, this isn't flaw or anything, the background music has a real "Rugrats" vibe to it. I'm not knocking it, but I really wonder if that show and this special had the same music director or something. All that being said the special isn't awful either. There's a lot of stuff to like. It has an excellent voice cast, not just in John Goodman and Brian Doyle-Murray, but also Holly's voice actress, Elisabeth Moss. She was only ten at the time this special was made, but her voice really adds a good level of sincerity to the role. Also while Holly is still a fairly generic character she's still more interesting then Karen. I don't know if the Frosty purist will agree with me on this, but that's really how I feel. Holly has an arc, she starts of timid and shy, but in the end ends up standing up to the villain head on. Also I like how Frosty is characterized. He's a lot wiser, and much more comforting. This probably has a lot to do with John Goodman's performance, but I think the writing had a bit to do with it to. This special has a really catchy song and a really hammy villain in the form of Mr. Twitchell. The other Frosty specials don't have Mr. Frickin' Twichell. So that's a plus in this specials favor. Overall, while I'm not sure if this is an objectively better special than the original, I know I definitely enjoy it more. Sure, it's was most likely made as a cash in on the Frosty brand, but it's an enjoyable cash in! While this special probably has higher highs and lower lows that the original special, at least it's not boring. If your looking for a more well made holiday special with good animation, interesting characters, and a good holiday lesson this special is probably not for you. But if you want a weird, so bad it's good type of special that does have some legitimately good parts in it, even if the special as a whole isn't the greatest, then I highly recommend it! Check it out if you haven't seen it, and come to your own conclusion. So that's my review of "Frosty Returns." But if you think where done with Frosty the Snowman, oh how wrong you are. Join me next Friday, as I tackle the other Frosty sequel that wasn't make by Rankin-Bass, "Legend of Frosty the Snowman." Because, to quote Notorious rapper Biggie Smalls "Mo' Frosty, Mo Problems." Have you seen Frosty Returns, and what do you think of it? I'd love to hear your opinion, even if it's completely different from mine. I'd love to start a conversation. What's your favorite Frosty special, or just holiday special in general. If you have any suggestions for stuff for me to review in the future leave it in a comment down bellow, and I might look into it. Please fav, follow, and comment if you liked the review, and have a great day. (I do not own any of the images or videos in this review all credit goes to there original owners.)

https://www.deviantart.com/joyofcrimeart/journal/Frosty-Returns-REVIEW-651578677 DA Link

#Frosty the Snowman #Christmas #Christmas Special #review #Frosty Returns

6 notes · View notes

informalrevue · 7 years ago

Text

“‘The bee, of course, flies anyway:’ Social Protest and Critique of Global Capitalism in Dreamworks’ Bee Movie”

In his 2011 feature Marx Reloaded, a documentary which uses animation to parody the Matrix series and the 20th century revolutionaries who famously claimed to carry on Marx’s theoretical legacy but who did so with violent means, Jason Barker explains that after the 2008 global financial meltdown and following Great Recession, many economists and philosophers are returning to Marxist critiques of the capitalist market to find ways of reimagining the future so as to prevent another global catastrophe. At its opening, the narrator, voiced by Barker, asks “Is capitalism destroying itself and the wealth of the planet with it” (Barker)? The documentary goes on to explicate Marx’s critiques of capitalism, define contemporary capitalism, and feature contemporary Marxist philosophers as well as detractors of Marxist ideology in finding solutions in the global financial market.

Marx Reloaded was not the first film to use animation in its featuring of Marxist critique. Four years prior to Barker’s film release, at the exact same time as the financial crisis, Dreamworks animation studios released a new comedy featuring the voice talents of Jerry Seinfield, Renée Zellweger, Matthew Broderick, and John Goodman. Bee Movie features two young best bee-friends Barry and Adam who are to be assigned their jobs for the hive after graduation. Barry, contemplating which job to take up for the remainder of his short life, flies away from the hive, meets a woman and discovers humanity is stealing honey and making profit on it. He sues humanity, wins the case, and stages a bee strike but quickly everyone realizes the importance of bees in maintaining the global ecosystem. Finally, after seeing his crush (the woman he met during his first flight away from home) will have to close her flower shop and find income elsewhere without the important job of pollination that bees do, Barry decides bees must end the strike for the sake of camaraderie and because bees were meant to make honey. The bees work together to re-pollinate the world’s flowers and go happily back to their jobs. The film moves quickly, maintaining the ninety-minute norm for animated feature made for children. However, its relevance to the market meltdown happening outside of the theaters makes this film uniquely positioned to stage important an critique of the imbalance of labor that exists in the global market.

Bee Movie attempts to situate itself within narratives of Marxist protest and critiques of global capitalism, particularly that of the exploitation of labor. Yet, the film ultimately falls short of being a truly Marxist film because it suggests that reparations and royalties be paid in exchange for surplus labor. The film also fails to follow through on the critiques it poses to the capitalist structure by ultimately suggesting that profiteering capitalists, as represented by the humans in the film, garner sympathy while laborers, as represented by the bees in the film, essentially have a duty to be exploited. Bringing this argument about in the context of ecological studies that recognize the need for bees to continue to pollinate flowers and produce honey may seem morbid, but what is perhaps just as morbid is the misguided critiques of capitalism staged at the beginning of Bee Movie that are completely forgone by the end, as if to say those critiques do not have merit or, worse, should be ignored. If anything, this film appearing at the exact moment when the financial crash occurred in late 2007 and early 2008 is evidence that the critiques at the beginning of this film need to be given a closer look. This essay seeks, therefore, to explain the connection between Bee Movie and the Marxist critique of capitalism, particularly that on the exploitation of labor. As well, this essay will situate its argument within a chronology of criticism (a) using animated film, (b) about animation, and (c) on Bee Movie specifically. Finally, this essay looks at the afterlives of animated film and its significance as a popular medium directed at children.

The question from the opening sequence of Barker’s documentary, whether capitalism is destroying itself and the wealth of the world, echoes into the viewing of Bee Movie. The outline of the Barker documentary mimics that of the Bee Movie as well. After the Matrix parody, Barker defines contemporary capitalism and then moves to asking philosophers and economists what is wrong, given that something is, with contemporary capitalism and what a future without it may be like. Bee Movie’s opening tour of the characters features each job that goes into the production of honey within the hive, which has been metaphorized into a factory called Honex. After realizing the exploitation of the bees is when Barry decides to sue the human race and go on strike. This moment in the film is crucial because it is the moment at which Barry’s story intersects with Marx’s most famous prediction, the creation of the proletariat.

However, before understanding the significance of the social protest Barry stages based on his critiques of the exploitation of the bees’ labor, we must consider how the film mimics the entirety of Marx’s critique of capitalism. In much the same way as Barker parodies the mishaps of the 20th century revolutionaries who used vulgar interpretations of Marx to commit crimes against humanity in their quest for absolute power, it would be parody (and dangerous) to ignore the ways Bee Movie stages Marx’s argument in favor of jumping to the conclusion that Barry is the proletariat revolutionary every viewer should aspire to be.

Understanding Marxism begins with understanding the material conditions for the creation of the proletariat, the body which Marx predicts will revolt against the capitalist exploitation of labor. Prior to the scene in the grocery store, when Barry gets his first look at the human consumption of the bees’ product, Bee Movie establishes these material conditions. It is understood, for example, that each bee carry out their entire life doing the same job. When Barry and Adam discover they will be stuck doing the job they choose for the remainder of their lives, they are on a tour of Honex. In the tour guide’s words, “You...have worked your whole life to get to the point where can work for your whole life” (Smith and Hickner). Marx may pre-date the assembly line setup used in Honex, but one of his primary explanations of the conditions under capitalism is about alienation. The theory of alienated labor comes from his Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts, in which he writes that workers under capitalism suffer four types of alienation (Wolff). The monotony of doing the same job for one’s entire life may be understood as the third type of alienated labor, the alienation of oneself from her species-being, the essential complex qualities and talents of the self. While the tour guide claims that “every small job, if it’s done well, means a lot,” Barry recognizes the weight of the choice of a single job for an eternity. Adam wants to work the Krelman, a device which collects “that little strand of honey that hangs after you pour it,” but its very existence points to the ubiquity of small, monotonous jobs at Honex (Smith and Hickner). The species-being is interrupted by such monotony because of the simplistic nature of monotonous work.

It is also worth noting that each type of alienated labor is deducible from the one before it. As the third type of alienated labor, alienation from species-being is deducible from type one and type two of alienated labor. The first type of alienation is from the product itself, something the viewer may not recognize in the bees’ existence until Barry realizes what bees do not know about honey: that it is stolen, packaged, marketed, and sold for profit that the laborers never see. However, the very nature of monotony can be understood as alienating from the product. The second type of alienation is work as torment, something also implicitly understood in the nature of monotony, hence the creation of the phrase ad nauseam. One might argue that torment is not felt by the workers in Honex, Adam visibly excited to work on the Krelman forever both at the beginning of the film and at the end. Yet, Marx is clear in stating that alienation is not just subjective discomfort but the fashioning of a distraction, a true and complete alienation, from the exploitation of one’s labor. Alienation is essential to understanding surplus labor, the impetus for profit under capitalism according to Marx, because without alienation, one may simply trade just the amount of labor needed to survive for the products needed to survive. Alienation acts as an important material condition for the exploitation of labor because it acts to break down what makes humans human: connections with other humans and connections with oneself. The self that is Adam is broken down by the monotony of work on the Krelman. In a sense, it does not become ‘Adam’s job’ to work on the Krelman, Adam becomes a “small job...done well” (Smith and Hickner). Adam’s species-being empties out into just being another job carried out by a bee. Understanding this is essential to understanding the exploitation of the bees, which is foreshadowed by Barry’s anxiety over choosing the same job for eternity. Despite the majority of the bees being content, accepting of their part in a wider Honex project, their alienation from their species-being and the product they produce becomes apparent when Barry sees the humans selling honey.

In the grocery store scene, Barry’s anxiety about choosing a single job for his life transforms into a heated explanation of the laborious process of creating honey. He says, “it’s hard to make it. There’s heating and cooling and stirring. You need a whole Krelman thing!” to which Vanessa (Barry’s human crush) replies “It’s organic” and Barry finishes with “It’s our-ganic,” bringing in ownership to the product. This is an essential Marxist point, as well. The labor used to produce a product is what gives it value, meaning that those who put in that labor have part-ownership of that product. This is why laborers are to be compensated for their labor. It is a pay-out for their ownership of the product they produce. The problem as Marx sees it is that this pay-out is uneven for the amount of labor most put in, hence the term ‘surplus labor.’ For Barry, this is even more so because the bees in Bee Movie receive none of the profit made on their honey, no pay-out for their labor. The concept of surplus labor is Marx’s explanation for how profit is made under capitalism:

In setting up conditions of production the capitalist purchases the worker’s labour power — his ability to labour — for the day. The cost of this commodity is determined in the same way as the cost of every other; i.e. in terms of the amount of socially necessary labour power required to produce it. In this case the value of a day’s labour power is the value of the commodities necessary to keep the worker alive for a day. Suppose that such commodities take four hours to produce. Thus the first four hours of the working day is spent on producing value equivalent to the value of the wages the worker will be paid. This is known as necessary labour. Any work the worker does above this is known as surplus labour, producing surplus value for the capitalist (Wolff).

The surplus value is created for the owner of the factory, not the worker. In exchange for the surplus labor, the factory owner lets the laborer keep her job the next day. However, Marx defines this as an exploitation of her labor because, as she does not see the profit of all of her labor, the exchange rate is no longer balanced. In the film, the humans exploit the bees completely because the bees never see the profits on the honey. Their labor is not exchanged for anything. They produce a product that is stolen by humans and therein lies the crux of the bees’ exploitation: all of the stolen honey is of surplus value, value only seen by the humans. In Barry’s words, “This is stealing, a lot of stealing!” (Smith and Hickner).

Once Barry realizes the exploitation of the bees’ labor is when the creation of the proletariat, Marx’s most famous prediction, seems to occur in the film. The Marxism in the film, however, ends at the recognition of this exploitation in the grocery store. While the implicit critiques of Honex and Barry’s anger at the humans profiting off of the bees’ honey align with Marxism, the strike that happens in the film is not in the service of Marxist ideology. In his plan to sue the human race, Barry is seeking reparations for the already stolen labor. This, again, may seem to be aligned with a form of Marxist protest, but in saying “When I’m done with the humans, they won’t be able to say ‘Honey, I’m home’ without paying a royalty,” Barry proves that his scheme does not uproot or even protest the capitalist structure, it actually takes place within it (Smith and Hickner). The film illustrates the material conditions for the creation of the proletariat according to Marx’s historiography and in the staging of a strike by the bees, it seems to follow through on the critiques it presents. However, because Barry is suing the human race for reparations and royalties, his act of protest is in vain because his process for seeking profit for the bees does not actually protest or do away with the material conditions that created their exploitation in the first place: the alienation of the bees and the imbalance of the burden of labor on the bees. Not only that, by the end of the film, the bees decide to return to their jobs and make honey for the humans and give up their honey and pollination labor willingly. The radical critiques from the beginning of the film are met with a deus ex machina end that not only seems to negate the primary critiques but actively work against their recognition for the sake of working together. In fact, the film suggests in its ending that laborers, regardless of their exploitation, have a duty to provide for consumers no matter how much they are exploited or how much they carry the burden of labor for production. In other words, the bees in their bee-ness have a duty to continue to produce honey for the humans without critiques.

As aforementioned, the use of animation to stage Marxist critiques is not exclusive to Bee Movie. Films like Marx Reloaded (2011), Capitalism: A Love Story (2009), and Requiem for the American Dream (2015) all use animation in discussing the 2007-8 financial crash and following Great Recession in Marxian terms. Therefore, Bee Movie exists in a chronology of animated films that take up Marxism; though, of those mentioned above it is the only one that is not documentary.

Bee Movie is also the only one which is directed toward children as an audience, the only one that uses fantastic elements (anthropomorphic bees) to stage Marxist critiques, even if it does not follow through on them. Bee Movie is a critical and unique film in its availability to young viewers, which Robin L. Murray and Jason K. Heumann recognize in their book That’s All Folks? Ecocritical Readings of American Animated Features. The film is significant within an ecocritical perspective in the sense that it “asserts a message of interdependence between human and nonhuman nature that calls both to action for mutual survival” (Murray and Heumann 188). By the end of the film, the call to action is has been transformed from recognizing the anxiety brought on by alienation and exploitation into the significance of ecological interdependence. While it is not the project of Heumann and Murray’s to discuss the Marxist themes during the first half of the film, they do recognize the strike’s impetus is Billy’s realization of the “humans’ exploitation of bees through honey theft” (ibid 197).

The significance of this to a child audience may seem negligible, but as Navjeet Sidhu points out in his essay “High-Ho It’s Off To Work They Go: What Children Learn from Popular Media About the World of Work,” “according to researchers, children form a basic understanding of economic principles as early as age three” (Sidhu 32). He points out that in a 1978 study of U.S. students in grades 3 through 12, many had already begun to prefer the principles of corporate capitalism (ibid 33). Sidhu even talks on Bee Movie, saying that Barry’s anxiety about working in the same job forever is something felt by many contemporary workers and the market has largely scaled back single-careers in favor of temporary jobs and multiple career choices for each person. The film, he notes, “present[s] a biased and glamorized portrayal of work,” portraying the workers of Honex as happy, devoid of “job stress, boredom, and alienation” despite their jobs being “menial and repetitive” (ibid 35-6). While Bee Movie insists everyone be “an equally contributing member” of society, it does not balance this with an equity of wealth (ibid 36).

The afterlife of this film, then, is not only one that misappropriates and lacks follow-through on Marxist critique, but one that actively reinforces the capitalist structure of exploitation and argues for its ignorance, a dangerous thing to teach children.

Bibliography

Barker, Jason, director. Marx Reloaded. Films Noirs, Medea Film, ZDF, 2011. <http://fod.infobase.com.nuls.idm.oclc.org/p_ViewVideo.aspx?xtid=52228>

Murray, Robin L., and Heumann, Joseph K. “8. DreamWorks and Human and Nonhuman Ecology: Escape or Interdependence in Over the Hedge and Bee Movie.” That’s All Folks? Ecocritical Readings of American Animated Features. Univ of Nebraska Press, 2014, pp. 183-200. <https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/nu/detail.action?docID=915035>

Ray, Kaustubh. “Capitalism and the ‘Animated Image’: Politics of Morphing on the ‘Culture’ of Animation.” IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, vol. 3, no. 1 (2014), pp. 81-91. <http://journals.sagepub.com.nuls.idm.oclc.org/doi/pdf/10.1177/2277975214529142>

Sidhu, Navjeet. “High-Ho It’s Off To Work They Go: What Children Learn from Popular Media About the World of Work.” Our Times, vol. 32, no. 6 (Dec 2013-Feb 2014), pp. 32-37.

Smith, Simon J., and Hickner, Steve, directors. Bee Movie. DreamWorks Animation, 2007.

Wolff, Jonathan, "Karl Marx", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/marx/>.

5 notes · View notes

justanothercinemaniac · 7 years ago

Text

Epic Movie (Re)Watch #195 - Kong: Skull Island

Spoilers Below

Have I seen it before: Yes

Did I like it then: Yes.

Do I remember it: Yes.

Did I see it in theaters: Yes.

Was it a movie I saw since August 22nd, 2009: Yes, #478.

Format: Blu-ray

1) 1944 prologue.

The prologue with Marlow and Gunpei does well to set up the film’s strong sense of visuals (look at how nice that freaking beach is!) and wastes absolutely no time in introducing us to our giant monster of the film. One of the criticisms of the 2014 Godzilla was its reluctance to show us Godzilla (something I have mixed feelings on) but this film just dives right into it with great effect.

2) I’ve already made on comparison with the 2014 Godzilla and the reason for that is - for those who don’t know - because this film and that film take place in the same continuity. Warner Brothers and Legendary are crafting a Cinematic Universe based on these giant monster properties, so there are some consistencies between both films which I appreciate. One of those consistencies is the opening credits scene over Monarch footage.

3) Oh boy…

Randa [towards the end of the Vietnam War]: “Mark my words: there will never be a more screwed up time in Washington.”

(GIF source unknown [if this is your GIF please let me know].)

4) The intro to John Goodman’s Bill Randa is very good at establishing how dedicated he is to his mission, even if we don’t understand the backstory yet. We know through the writing and Goodman’s performance that Randa is strongly motivated, that his personal stakes are high, and somehow this work for us even before we figure out why.

5) Samuel L. Jackson as Col. Packard.

Similar to Goodman’s Randa, we get a strong sense of the character’s motivations immediately. Packard is a dog of war who NEEDS a fight. It’s what has defined him and he tries to justify it with [and this is not an exact quote], “We fight the fight so our families back home don’t have to!” But really he’s just looking to stay in the environment he knows. War defines him and he goes chasing for a war when there isn’t one. His deprecation into madness feels very similar to Col. Kurtz from Heart of Darkness and I dig that.

6) Tom Hiddleston as Conrad.

Hilddeston’s performance in this film is a nice departure from - say - Loki (not that he’s bad as Loki). The grizzled/jaded rogue can easily be a cliché trope that ends up creating boring characters, but Hiddleston is able to make Conrad unique. He’s not Han Solo, he’s not the same character Tom Cruise seems to want to play in all his films, he’s a little sadder and a little more tragic. Hiddleston plays this well and I think it is one of many things which helps make the film as good as it is.

7) Brie Larson as Weaver.

I love Brie Larson. You could have Brie Larson read the phone book and I’d watch. I first saw her in Hoot when I was 10 and when she won the Oscar I was so freaking happy. She’s good in everything; even if the movie is of lesser quality Brie Larson is likely very good in it. This film is NOT of lesser quality and Brie Larson is still very good in it. Weaver is strong and determined without devolving into an “Action Girl” trope if that makes sense. She’s not strong because she can kickass (her greatest weapon is her camera), she’s strong because she doesn’t waiver and does the right thing even when it’s easy. She stands on her own, with Larson breathing incredible life into the part which helps her stand side by side with a freaking giant gorilla.

8) As you may have noted from the fact that most of my notes so far have been about characters and actors, this film’s strongest asset may well be its and characters. By using strong character actors such as John Ortiz, Toby Kebbell, Shea Whigham, Thomas Mann, Jason Mitchell, and Marc Evan Jackson (among others) each member of the away team is unique and memorable in their own right. We consistently get small but strong moments which further develop characters like Whigham’s Cole and Kebbell’s Chapman, helping the audience invest in pretty much every single character which results in an emotional response when they die or are put into danger. There is no weak link in this chain, you understand all of them through these small but telling moments/interactions. Somehow the filmmakers are able to take what is often the weakest aspect of a giant monster movie - the human characters - and make it the strongest element in Kong: Skull Island.

9) I particularly resonate with Corey Hawkins as Brooks.

Brooks is sensible, curious, cautious, but never cowardly. He may be reluctant to go into danger but that doesn’t mean he shies away from it, while his relationship with Randa is also fun to watch as it speaks to a strong history between the two. Brooks might be my favorite character in the film. Or second favorite after Marlow, but we’ll get to that later.

10) The scene where all the helicopters fly through the storm is a nice way of dividing the normal world and Skull Island, as when they come through the other side the island already feels like a different world.

11) Skull Island.

Kong’s native land is much more a point of focus in this film than other’s before, warranting an entire subtitle devoted to it. The immediate visual aesthetic upon arriving to Skull Island helps establish the character of this place, which only develops as the film continues. Because that’s what Skull Island is: its a character as important as Kong to this movie. The filmmakers put such care into small moments with the island (the bison, the giant spider encounter, etc.) that it helps to make Skull Island an environment the audience can understand perfectly by the film’s conclusion.

12) First real encounter with Kong. AKA: Kong VS Helicopters.

youtube

This scene is absolutely amazing at establishing the incredible scope of our titular monster. We got a sense of his size in the prologue, but now it’s not a sense it’s a definition. This scene establishes Kong. It establishes his size, his strength, his ferocity, all in an incredibly entertaining set piece. Besides the monster, it establishes the sense of action the film will have moving forward and acts as a truly wonderful inciting incident that organically separates the away team. In five minutes, the entire direction of the story has changed and it just feels so organic. Whereas Godzilla took an hour to show its monster, this movie wastes no time in reminding us that Kong is king.

13) This little scene between Packard and Randa about the USS Laughton is an incredibly organic way of tying this movie into the larger Monster-Verse. It is done through the lens of Randa’s backstory and history instead of, “Here’s what the audience needs to know,” much as Bryan Cranston was a device of exposition through tragic obsession in Godzilla. I dig it.

14) I am so so so so SO happy that this film disposes of the “dangerous natives” trope that has plagued pretty much every King Kong movie to come before it. The natives are shown as a culture of people, not vicious animals. They’re not even primitive, necessarily, as Marlow talks about who they’re past certain things our culture has. They’re more simple, peaceful, instead of savage. And they’re not the only non-white representation in the film, there are more non-white people than JUST the natives in this movie and I’m just so over the roof that this film finally did away with that archaic trope.

15) Chapman at the water’s edge is more about developing Kong through an encounter with this giant squid than anything else, letting the audience know that he’s more than just some dumb dangerous beast. Chapman is jus who we see this through.

youtube

16) Marlow has so many great moments in this film. I’ll talk more about him and John C. Reilly in a sec, but come on!

Marlow [about WW2]: “What happened with the war? Did we win?”

Slivko: “Which one?”

Marlow: “Eh, that makes sense.”

Marlow [about the “devils” of the island]: “I call them Skullcrawlers.”

Conrad: “Why?”

Marlow: “Because it sounds neat.”

17) John C. Reilly as Marlow.

Marlow is honestly the beating heart of this entire freaking movie. Reilly is able to bring such warmth to the character who is already pretty damn strong in the writing. He shows a respect to nature and the island, he is incredibly kind despite his situation, but that doesn’t mean he’s a pushover. The way he speaks of his lost friend - a former enemy to boot - and the family he misses just wrenches at your heart strings. It is Marlow which propels this film past an empty monster movie to make it an emotional and human adventure where you are rooting for the main characters. I just…I really freaking like Marlow.

18) The film cutting between the three separated parties (Conrad’s party, Packard’s party, and Chapman on his own) could easily have fucked up pacing but the filmmakers are able to do it well enough that it doesn’t mess with the flow of the story. Pacing is never lost.

19) I love the scene where Marlow is caught up on history, like putting a man on the moon and the Cold War. Also I saw this in Chicago like four to five months after the Cubs won so his line about, “Did the Cubs win the world series?” got a good reaction.

20) If you ever want to know how to develop your characters simply, I recommend that you look at the scene where Conrad talks about his late father. Because that’s really what character development is. Small moments where we are made to understand the characters better.

21) I haven’t really talked about Terry Notary or Toby Kebbell’s motion capture work as the titular monster and I really should. It’s easy to forget that there’s an actor behind a character like Kong who just seems so naturally otherworldly, which I think just speaks to how well the performers and motion capture artists do their job. You’re not thinking about the actor behind the part or even if there is an actor there. They embrace the role of Kong so completely that you don’t question you’re just watching Kong on screen.

22) So there’s a moment in the middle of the film when you sort of forget how dangerous Skull Island is, but the movie does a good job of reminding you of the danger by abruptly and shockingly killing of John Ortiz’s character. There was this woman in the theater who jumped so hard when he got swept up by those pterodactyls it made the whole movie better.

23) The mass grave skirmish.

I mentioned this a lot when I was posting about Hitchcock movies last year, but tension does not come from speeding the story up but by slowing it down. That is especially true in this scene, as (in a very Jaws like way) we don’t see the Skullcrawlers for a lot of it but we know they’re there. Meanwhile I absolutely love the way one of them swallowed a camera with a broken flash so that sound and flash of light is what tells you they’re near. Also this is a fucking badass image:

24) Just a quick little thing: I love that this movie doesn’t have a romantic subplot. At all. You can easily ship characters (Brooks and San are two characters I ship), but the film doesn’t take the time to develop any romances which makes sense because THEY’RE ON A FREAKING MONSTER ISLAND TRYING TO GET OF! So yeah, I like that there’s no romance in this movie.

25) The scene where Packard is trying to kill Kong has a number of nice visual parallels with when Kong beat on the helicopters, mainly when Packard clenches his fists.

26) Cole’s death is incredibly heartbreaking because he’s hoping the Skullcrawler will swallow him with two grenades in his hand, but it just whips him against a mountain where his death didn’t even accomplish what he hoped it would. This is why the film takes so much time to develop these characters: so they’re deaths hit harder.

27) Kong VS Skullcrawler

Okay, this is freaking awesome. In the same scene Kong uses a tree as a spear/bat thing to beat on the Skullcrawler BEFORE HE USES A BOAT PROPELLER AS A WEAPON TO WAIL ON THE THING! Also Weaver gets to shoot a flare at the Skullcrawler like a total badass. Honestly this scene is just filled with so many incredible visuals and a wonderful sense of fun from beginning to end. It’s just a really freaking good climax.

28) I’m so happy Marlow survived, that we get to see him return home to his wife and son. I get a little teary every time I see that.

youtube

29) Okay, let me tell you something about this post credits scene.

youtube

First of all, this is awesome. But I mentioned before that I saw this in the theater. Well when they’re showing all the monsters I hear this guy behind me eagerly say each of their names. “Mothra! Rodan! King Ghidorah!” The movie ends, I turn around to this guy and say, “I don’t know who you are but I feel like I should give you bumps.” This unfortunately speaks to my own biases about what I expected someone who geeks out about Japanese movie monsters to look like, but I was not expecting an African American man in his 60s with the biggest smile on his face ever. AND HE GAVE ME A FIST BUMP! I’ve seen 507 movies in theaters over the course of 8 years and that is one of my favorite stories ever.

Kong: Skull Island is crazy fun and much better than you might expect it to be. The human characters are surprisingly well developed and acted very well, while the film does not skimp on the giant monster action that helps give the movie its entertainment value. John C. Reilly is a particular standout among the cast, but literally I cannot think of a poor performance in this entire film. The visuals are strong, it is paced excellently, and all in all it’s just a very good film I think you should see.

#Kong Skull Island #King Kong #Tom Hiddleston #Brie Larson #Samuel L Jackson #Corey Hawkins #John Goodman #Toby Kebbell #Terry Notary #John C Reilly #John Ortiz #Jason Mitchell #Marc Evan Jackson #Thomas Mann #Shea Whigham #Epic Movie (Re)Watch #Movie #Film #GIF

128 notes · View notes

theblipmagazine · 7 years ago

Text

Identity & Modernity in The Third Man

In order to evaluate how identity is framed by Modernity and the urban context in The Third Man (directed by Carol Reed 1949) we must first understand what is meant by the term Modernity.

Modernity essentially refers to all that is “new” or a modern improvement, in terms of a social revolution which occurred around the 17th Century in Europe. In Marshall Bergman’s book, ‘All that is solid melts into air: The experience of Modernity’, he explains that “To be modern is to live a life of paradox and contradiction. It is to be overpowered by the immense bureaucratic organizations that have the power to control and often destroy all communities, values, lives, and yet to be undeterred in our determination to face these forces, to fight and change their world and make it our own. It is to be both revolutionary and conservative: alive to new possibilities for experience and adventure, frightened by the nihilistic depths to which so many modern adventures lead” (All that is solid melts into air: the experience of modernity-By Marshall Berman… Verso, 1983)

Modernity highlights the changes throughout society, from industrial and technological advances to the new avant guarde art movements that were beginning to challenge the social constraints of modern life; communication was sent into overdrive with the inventions of photography, film and later television. Social Theorists such as John B. Goodman embrace modernity as a positive movement “If man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun, as Geertz once remarked, then communication media are spinning wheels in the modern world and, in using these media, human beings are fabricating the webs of significance for themselves.” (Thompson, John B. The Media and Modernity 1995 Blackwell Publishers)

Modernity also brought us bureaucracy and the nation- state which enables nations to not only control economies but allows a form of national identity and social understanding.

Modernity focuses predominately on city life. This is because, whilst cities are not new, it is a modern reality that the majority of people live and work in them. Bustling metropolitan cultures were therefore the main fascinations for modernist artists and thinkers alike.

Film noir is a genre that is particularly appropriate for this question. This is because the genre has always been notorious for being particularly interested in modernity; it is a genre that gives the audience a darker more pessimistic view of a time in America that was somewhat more positive, economically and culturally. In particular, modernity is shown through the urban context, the winding and shady streets of the urban landscape, which reflect the shady inhabitants of the film noir city. It also gives us more obvious references to modernity, particularly by using modern (within the films historical context) transport, the romanticised use of trains or old Morris-Minor type cars.

Focussing on post-war America the genre film noir appears particularly transfixed on using a sometimes sinister cityscape, which helps to create an aura of mystique, nostalgia, and most importantly claustrophobia. Edward Dimendberg sums up the alienation of the protagonists in film noir and explains that such claustrophobic emotions can be externalised through the settings of film noir.

“Nostalgia and longing for older urban forms combined with fear of new alienating urban realities pervade film noir. The loss of public space, the homogenization of everyday life, the intensification of surveillance, and the eradication of older neighbourhood by urban renewal and redevelopment projects are seldom absent from these films. Thus, it is hardly surprising that the movement of protagonists from urban centre to periphery is a pervasive spatial trope. Unlike the contemporaneous conquests of the big sky and open frontier by characters in the film genre of the western, the protagonists in film noir appear cursed by an inability to dwell comfortably anywhere” (Dimendberg, E, Film Noir and the Spaces of Modernity Harvard University Press 2004)

I have chosen to write about The Third Man because I have found it to be a particularly interesting film from the film noir genre. This is because, while it follows all of the general rules of the genre, such as the shadowy lighting, the story of an unlikely hero, it is not a typical film noir being that it is not set in post war America. Instead, the film follows an American man on his journey to post war Vienna, a city savaged by the war not only physically, but in the unusual bureaucratic politics enforced as well. The gothic style city is torn up, quartered, with mostly Austrians not allowed in to the specific quarters, and passports needed for any inhabitants that wish to live in different quarters, highlighted by the character of Anna, originally Czech but who used a forged passport to escape the Russian quarter of the city. The bureaucracy of the film is often emphasised within the film as Anna is caught out by the police with regards to the forged passport. As well as this, the Viennese locals are left looking somehow subservient to the other nationals that have moved into the city as a result of the war. They are often seen serving the other nationalities, as porters, taxi drivers and musicians in restaurants and are seen in many shots as neighbours “peering” through windows, watching the seemingly chaotic lives of the protagonists that are not native.

The Third Man also literally encapsulates itself with an artistic style that is definitive with Modernity, that which is the avant guarde style of abstract expressionism. Abstract expressionism is a style that developed in the 1940’s but originally derived from German Expressionism in the 1920’s, and was a style that was very rebellious in the fact that it challenged the conventions of the art world and also of its predecessor, surrealism.

A style that was often thought to be nihilistic, there is little wonder why abstract expressionism was chosen stylistically to be incorporated into the cinematography, as it incorporates the overall isolation and alienation that film noir stands for. The film has some very deliberate nihilistic undertones to it, which is why the city seems so unforgiving and lonely. Nihilism is brought in to the spotlight through the script in the scene in the Ferris wheel, when Harry Lime says: “Nobody thinks in terms of human beings. Governments don't. Why should we? They talk about the people and the proletariat, I talk about the suckers and the mugs - it's the same thing. They have their five-year plans, so have I.” and Holly Martins replies: “You used to believe in God.”

The Third Man has a balance of chaos and order as an underlying story throughout the film. There is the chaos of the war stricken city, buildings damaged and demolished, the chaos of Holly Martin’s story, arriving in a faraway country from America to see his friend, only to find he had died not long before, the winding unlevelled structure of the streets of Vienna, but order is also enforced by way of the police rule, the political restrictions inflicted on the inhabitants, the strict composition of every shot within the film, and the diagonal and strict shards of light and shadow that resonate throughout the frames. This is reminiscent of the abstract expressionist art that was being produced at the time, metaphorically from the chaotic paint spattered works like Jackson Pollock’s “No. 5 1948” to the stricter, geometric works of the artist Mondrian, emphasising the cinematographic theme of using strict lines throughout the film.

From literally the opening credits, the film opens with a geometric shot of close up of the strings on a musical instrument, a ‘zither’, a popular and traditional Austrian instrument, immediately hinting about the ambiguous nationality of the film or the protagonists within it. The close up of the strings set the audience up immediately for this style of composition in the shots, a particular style which resonates the whole way through the film, including the famous scene on the Ferris wheel, where the framing appears rather graphic- like, with stark diagonal lines of the wheel slicing and the background and foreground around the protagonists. It is also echoed through shots on the bridge and the beautiful shots on the staircase when Holly Martins first arrives in Vienna.

Perhaps the use of these compositions is to give us a sense of order, and structure, amongst the chaos that Vienna has found itself in. Half of the shots are exactly the opposite, they are tilted, a lot of the shots are stationary with the camera completely immobile, sometimes obscurely cropping the protagonists’ faces, which gives the audience a disorientated disposition, the feeling of not belonging and unease. An example of this is when Holly Martins first introduces himself to Anna, the framing of the doorway is at a very obscure angle, and the whole image appears rather tilted.

This is typical to the genre, as throughout film noir it is usually vital to the composition of the framing that the camera is stationary and the characters move throughout the space of the city, rather than the camera moving and actually following the characters around the space, emphasising the city, the urban. As the city has been savaged by war, crime thrives which is typical to the film noir genre. In The Third Man, it is the fact that there is a booming black- market (of which Harry Lime we find out is involved with) which is another example of how the film emphasises the ‘urban’ theme.

One of the most interesting aspects of The Third Man is the spectators gaze throughout the film. There is an increasing sense of unease in Vienna, not only because it has been hit extremely hard by the war, but because it feels increasingly like a city that doesn’t belong to its native inhabitants, another example of the modern beaurocracy that has been forced upon the capital.

Viennese people in the beginning of the film are seen not being allowed into one of the military quarters of the city. Throughout the film there are constant little looks from behind shutters or through gates, which Holly is unaware of. The audience is reduced to watching a race watch different races patrol the streets of their city, as outsiders that no longer belong in their rightful home. Holly is oblivious to the fact that while he is observing a foreign city, it seems the city itself is characterised and is also observing him, the sporadic shots from cranes help to create an uncomfortable sense of voyeurism. The eeriness of the situation is highlighted, because, although he does not realise that he is actual fact being watched by so many people, he finally gives the audience and indication that he can sense their presence, when he proclaims that he will soon return home to the United States : ‘It’s what you always wanted, all of you!”

In conclusion, identity is framed by modernity in many ways in the urban context of The Third Man. The visual references throughout the film almost personifies the city itself as an important protagonist within the film. The set gives us indications, not only to the historical and urban context of the film but also references in to the shady characters that thrive amongst the cities where film noir is set.

The Third Man uses strict, geometric artistic compositions in order to emphasise the modernity of the film. Through a cleverly interlaced narrative, the film also hints at modernity and the changing politics of the lives of Vienna’s inhabitants the racial segregation, alienation, and claustrophobia, which is what film noir as a genre is notorious for.

-The Blip

#essay #thethirdman #filmmaking #art #film noir

12 notes · View notes

niamsuggitt · 7 years ago

Text

The Ides Of August 2017

Yo! What’s up? I’ll tell you what’s up, and it’s the goddamn Ides of August! Yeah, that’s right, I’ve written some words about all of the various media I’ve been checking out for the past 30 days. It’s been a bit of a rough month personally (hence this being late), but that does mean I’ve had a lot of time to watch a lot of films, including, for the 2nd month in a row, a trip to the actual in-the-RL cinema.

There’s also the small matter of the return of Game Of Thrones, more Nintendo fun and an intriguing fantasy novel from one of my new favourite writers.

Let’s do this thing.

—

Movies

Lots of movies to talk about this time around! I’ll start with more of my Universal Monsters Box-Set, as I watched 2 of ‘em. First up was The Invisible Man (James Whale 1933). I thoroughly enjoyed this film. The special effect of making Jack Griffin ‘invisible’ were very impressive for the 1930s, and it was refreshing that the main character was basically just an unrepentant dick with his power. He really is a darkly human monster and Claude Rains is a lot of fun and gives a great performance, especially as you never see his face until he’s dead. It was in line with my only previous experience with the character, Moore and O’Neill’s League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen, which takes it even further (that rape sequence is horrific). I was also very pleasantly surprised to see Henry Travers, Clarence from It’s A Wonderful Life appear as Dr Cranley.

I then watched Bride Of Frankenstein (James Whale 1935) which was also very good. I really liked the opening sequence, which shows us the real world origins of Frankenstein, as Mary Shelley tells her story in the Villa Diodati. It’s a great moment when it’s revealed that the same actress, Elsa Lanchester plays Shelley and ‘The Bride’. I was less keen on the scenes that basically undo all of the ending of the previous film, as both Frankenstein and the Monster survive, but once Doctor Pretorius appears and the story really kicks in, I was back on board. The main thing people talk about when it comes to this film is the queer subtext, and it really is strong. Pretorious is a very gay-coded character, and you really can read a lot into his and Frankenstein’s relationship. Boris Karloff’s performance as the Monster is just as iconic as ever, and it was great to see him do a bit more in his scenes with the blind hermit. They were like an extended version of the little girl in the first film. I was actually surprised by how little we see of the title character, she appears, screams and dies. But still, it’s another iconic horror moment and an all-time great look. I would say overall that the first film is better, but I can see why some people prefer this film, if you like the auteur theory, there’s a lot more of Whale in this one.

I stuck with the monsters, but got a lot more contemporary next, with Kong: Skull Island (Jordan Vogt-Roberts 2017), which was a lot of fun, if flawed in some ways. I am a big fan of King Kong, going back to some GCSE coursework I did comparing the original film to Peter Jackson’s remake. One thing I appreciated about this film was that it wasn’t a remake, but instead used everyone’s favourite giant Ape to tell a new story, and in particular, an anti-War story. The decision to set this during Vietnam is a great one, and it gave us some fantastic imagery of Kong fighting helicopters. The action scenes here really are great, very stylish and fun. The Vietnam setting also provides a truly great soundtrack that thankfully doesn’t go full-on Suicide Squad in terms of needle-dropping. The main flaw with this film is that some of the characters, in particular Tom Hiddleston and Brie Larson, who are ostensibly the leads are boring and don’t actually do that much. You probably could have removed Hiddleston entirely and it wouldn't change much. Thankfully, the rest of the cast helps to elevate things, with Samuel L Jackson, John Goodman and particularly John C Reilly, who plays a WW2 soldier who’s been trapped on Skull Island for decades delivering great performances. But the real star here is of course Kong, who not only looks real, but is fucking huge, way bigger than other versions. Any time he’s on screen is brilliant, and the fights are, as I said, incredibly cool. I was initially a little wary of this being a shared universe with Godzilla, especially as the tone of this and Gareth Edwards’ film are very different, but I can’t deny that the end credit sequence was cool and the prospect of this Kong and that Godzilla fighting each other is tantalising. I suppose it’s the same as the Marvel and DC cinematic universes, just the idea of Batman Vs Superman or King Kong Vs Godzilla is enough to at least pique my interest. So far the so-called ‘Monsterverse’ is better than the DCEU, but far off the MCU. But it’s only 2 movies!

Speaking of Marvel, I then watched Logan (James Mangold 2017) and was absolutely blown away. It’s not only the best X-Men movie by far, but also one of the best superhero films I’ve seen, and I have seen pretty much all of them at this point. I think what makes Logan so good is that it really has that weight of history that the best superhero stories have behind it. We’ve seen Hugh Jackman as Wolverine and Patrick Stewart as Professor X on our screens for 17 years, nearly 2 decades now. Some people who were able to go to see Logan in the cinema were not even born when X-Men came out. So seeing these characters and actors age and (eventually) die really has an impact on us as a viewer. It also allows Jackman and Stewart to deliver far more nuanced and powerful performances. I can’t see it happening, but Stewart deserves awards recognition in my eyes. His senile Professor X is just heart-breaking. The other great performance in the film comes from Dafne Keen as Laura/X-23, who is fantastic, despite not saying much at all. Her action scenes in particular are excellent and surprising. That applies to much of the film, which really does have some impactful scenes, I really don’t think Logan’s claws caused so much blood to spray in previous films! The story here is refreshingly simple and light on mythology, but it works, and helps tie the story and character into the classic Westerns Mangold is drawing on. There’s a reason why they watch ‘Shane’ in the motel. Wolverine is comics’ original ‘Man with no name’ and this film really is true to those roots, delivering some truly iconic images of the character for me. I really can’t wait to watch it again, but Logan really is a great reminder of how great a character Wolverine is. I love that in 2017 the X-Men franchise, which has given us a fair amount of pablum is, with this and Legion and even Deadpool are stretching the kinds of superhero stories we get on screen.

One director who also stretched the superhero genre is Christopher Nolan, and up next I took a trip to the cinema to see his latest film, Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan 2017) which really gave me a lot to think about. I’m still mulling it over weeks later, which to me is the sign of a good film, and whilst I am conflicted about some of the messages, I really think it’s an incredibly profound and effective experience that really got across the horror of war and the Dunkirk evacuation in particular. Everything, from the soundtrack to the cinematography really put you in the shoes of the soldiers and I felt incredibly tense throughout. I particularly liked that this was a WW2 movie where you don’t see a single Nazi soldier. You see some planes, but that’s it. The threat they pose is all-encompassing, and you don’t know where they are coming from. All you get is the bombs, or the bullets coming through the hull of the ship. It really helps the paranoia and isolation the men must have felt, and means you can buy the scene where Harry Styles thinks Aneurin Barnard might be a spy (he turns out to be French). The way Nolan shot the aerial battle sequences and the sea also contributed to that feeling, where they are actually rather empty. At times, the English Channel looked like that endless ocean planet from his previous film, Interstellar! I thought the performances from everyone were very strong, whether from acting heavyweights like Branagh, Rylance and Hardy, or the younger actors. I mentioned Harry Styles earlier, and he’s actually very good here, and I think his casting works on a meta-level as well, because if Styles were to have been alive back in 1940, he wouldn’t have been able to become a popstar, he would have gone off to war. It really made me think about, despite the many problems of 2017, how lucky we are to be around today as opposed to then, something I was already thinking about given that the 100th Anniversary of Passchendaele happened the same week. My great-grandfather fought there when he was younger than I am now! That’s why I think the message of Dunkirk is a powerful one, it shows that even in retreat, we hailed these soldiers as heroes and eventually regrouped and won the War. It’s not jingoistic like many war films, contrary to what Nigel Farage may tweet! My only real issue is that it took me a while to work out how all of the storylines were taking place at different timescales and not at the same time, so when Cillian Murphy interacted with Fionn Whitehead’s character I was very confused, but I think that’s more on me that the film! Overall, Dunkirk worked for me, and is probably my favourite Nolan film since Inception.

Things are getting a bit heavy, so let’s lighten up with Moana (Ron Clements and John Musker 2016), another thoroughly delightful Disney musical from the same team that gave us Frozen and Tangled. This was a funny and fun romp with some great animation and a very strong vocal performance from The Rock as Maui. One thing I appreciated about this film is that it bucked the trend of Disney Princess stories and didn’t feature any romance at all really. Moana’s journey is to help her family and her people, not to fall in love, which is a modern touch I appreciated. The music was good, nothing here is quite as immediately iconic as ‘Let It Go’, but I found ‘How Far I’ll Go’ and ‘I Am Moana’ to be powerful songs. I’m obviously not the target audience for these films anymore, but this is certainly one of the better kids cartoons I’ve seen lately. There are enough jokes to get you through, and like I mentioned, the animation and look of this is brilliant. At times it reminded me of The Legend Of Zelda: The Wind Waker, and there can’t be much higher praise than that!

Nearly done! I then watched The Incredible Jessica James (James C. Strouse 2017) on Netflix, and found it to be a very strong, modern romantic comedy with a truly great central performance from Jessica Williams. I had liked Williams as a correspondent on The Daily Show, but she really shows she can act here, as she really shines in every scene of this. She’s not only very funny, but able to handle the more dramatic parts of the story too. Not that this story is incredibly dramatic, it’s actually very straight-forward, and I imagine that many people are sick to death of hip sexy young people falling in love in Brooklyn. For me though, the performance of Williams elevates this above those familiar elements. The supporting cast is also strong, Noel Wells from Master Of None is great, and whilst I still find it weird that Chris O’Dowd is getting so many Hollywood Rom-Com roles, he’s great too. And of course Lakeith Stanfield is good as Jessica’s ex, he’s showing up in more and more lately, and he’s always good. It’s going to be a long wait for more Atlanta. I also liked how this film used social media. So much of modern romance is done online, and making Tinder, or unfollowing your ex on Instagram a plot point was intriguing, and something I want to see more of. It felt much more true to life than many films, and hopefully won’t date things too much. This isn’t ‘You’ve Got Mail’.

And finally, I re-watched Get Out (Jordan Peele 2017) again on DVD and enjoyed it just as much the second time around. Particularly how knowing the twist allows you to see earlier scenes in a new light. Like when you first see Allison Williams convince the Cop not to check Chris’ ID, you think she’s being cool and not-racist. But then you realise… she doesn’t want the Cop to know Chris was with her so they can trap him! Genius.

Television

There’s really only one place to start with TV, and that’s the return of Game Of Thrones (HBO) for it’s penultimate season. I am sort of conflicted about the season so far. On the one hand, GoT remains the best-looking, most lavish TV show on the air right now, and it’s gotten even bigger this year. The Dragon attack on the Lannister Army in Episode 4 was one of the most epic things I’ve seen on the small screen, and can probably rival most movies in terms of the CGI on the Dragons. It’s also been fantastic to see so many long-awaited moments and reunions, it’s been literally years since the likes of Arya, Bran and Sansa have been in the same place. The same goes for Tyrion and Jaime. And it’s been a lot of fun to see Daenerys actually interact with characters she’s never ever met before like Jon Snow and to see the series really cut to the meat of the story there. But therein lies my big issue with the season, and I think it’s because we really are ahead of the books now and we lack that wider context for these bigger moments. Because the show moves at a much quicker pace and has changed a lot of elements, previously, when they did that, we as fans knew the wider context and meaning because we had seen it in the books. But now, we haven’t, so things are just… happening. Awesome things for sure, but I can’t help but think that George RR Martin’s original versions will be better. The books have always been more humane and had more heart than the show, which takes the cynicism and darkness a bit too far. It’s odd, initially I thought that the show getting ahead of the source material would lessen my excitement for Books 6 and 7, but it’s having the opposite effect, I now want to read The Winds Of Winter more than ever. It’s certainly going to be different, especially because the show has cut so much meat off the bone. But I’m supposed to reviewing the show, not hypothetical novels. What else? I think the show has taken another step up in terms of editing and directing, I think that freedom from the novels has allowed them to do different things, like the toilet cleaning montage with Sam in the Citadel. That was a great sequence, and one I think they should do more of. Not the shit, but the montage, especially since so many people are complaining about how quickly people seem to move across Westeros now when compared to previous years. I don’t mind that too much, but it does add to that feeling off things just happening. But nevertheless, Game Of Thrones remains one of the best things out there in any media. I can’t quite believe there’s only 2 episodes to go this year. Hopefully by the time Season 8 rolls around my issues will have been resolved because I’ll have ben able to read that book!

Also in terms of new stuff, I watched the premiere of the revived DuckTales (Disney XD) and very much enjoyed it. Like most people of my age, I watched the original when I was a kid (even though it ended in 1990, UK Kid’s TV still repeated it a lot), particularly the movie where they get a Genie Duck, and as an adult I’ve gained a new appreciation of the Duck Family thanks to learning about the importance of the Carl Barks and later Don Rosa comics. I try to fight against my own nostalgia a lot of the time, but when that classic theme tune hit, I was hit with a proustian rush of it, it was great. But even as an adult, this new show has a lot going for it. It’s funny, the animation is strong and the voice acting is great across the board. David Tennant as Scrooge McDuck is one of those choices that is almost too good and having Danny Pudi, Ben Schwartz and Bobby Moynihan play Huey, Dewey and Louie is also great fun. It is a bit weird that Donald Duck is the only one to speak in the classic way, but I think it works because Donald really is a unique weirdo. The show isn’t back properly until September, but I’ll certainly watch it, if only to hear Paul F. Tompkins appear as Gladstone Gander.

Now for another cartoon about kids going on adventures with an older relative that has an entirely different tone… Rick And Morty (Adult Swim) is properly back for Season 3 now after the premiere on April Fool’s Day. So far I’m really enjoying this year, because it’s just as insane as previous years, but also delving far more into the darkness at the heart of the characters. This week’s superhero episode was just fantastic, not just because the superhero parody element was so good, but also because of how Rick was just straight up the villain. Pickle Rick was also a standout episode. The violence was insane (I think the rat slaughter shocked me more than the Dragon War in the same night’s Game Of Thrones) and the discussion of therapy at the end was just incredibly bleak. I can understand why some people are thinking the show has been fumbling a bit this year, but I’m still digging it, and it’s certainly not going down the same path Season 3 of Community did. At least not yet. I hope Dan Harmon can break his cycle of going up his own ass, and so far, for me, he has. Perhaps it’s going up Justin Roiland’s ass instead? And that’s just a better ass?

In terms of continuing shows, Preacher (AMC) is still thoroughly enjoyable in Season 2. I am a bit disappointed that we aren’t actually getting to the road trip aspect of the show, and instead have spent most of it inside a dingy New Orleans apartment, but I suppose that’s budgetary. The actual story has been very good, with the threats of the Saint Of Killers and Herr Starr and The Grail being handled very well, and faithfully to the comics. The character work has also been very strong, Jesse, Tulip and Cassidy have all had to deal with some heavy shit, and it’s been very interesting. I’m particularly worried about what is going to happen with Cassidy and his son Dennis, who has become a Vampire too. It’s going to be tragic. This character focus is really the best thing about the show, because like I’ve said before, whilst, story-wise, it’s very different from the comics, in terms of characterisation and tone, it’s incredibly faithful to Ennis and Dillon. I think that’s why I don’t mind the divergences here as much as I do in Game Of Thrones.

Now for my catch-up viewing! I finally got around to the last 3 episodes of the first series of Inside No. 9 (BBC Two) on DVD, and thoroughly enjoyed all of them. It’s just great to have each episode be entirely different. ‘Last Gasp’ was perhaps the worst of the series, but it was still enjoyable and had a great performance from Tamsin Greig. ‘The Understudy’ was a great Shakespearean send-up and man, the final episode, ‘The Harrowing’ was a real shock. It was barely a comedy, just straight-up horror. I kept waiting for the comedic twist to come, and it never did! Brilliant stuff. I have Series 2 to watch and then I’ll have to buy the 3rd. I really can’t believe I didn’t watch this when it originally aired, what was I thinking?

I’ve also finally tackled Vikings (History Channel) Season 3. I watched the first 2 seasons in fairly quick succession last year, but somehow never found the time to continue. Now I have that bit of time, and also an iPad so I’ve been streaming the shit out of Ragnar and his friends. I really enjoyed this season, Vikings has always been very consistent, but it took a step-up here I think. Travis Fimmel’s Ragnar remains a very underrated performance, you never know what he’s planning, and I also continue to thoroughly enjoy King Ecbert’s scheming. It’s going to be very satisfying if and when he finally gets his. I also like how the series continues to surprise by having events that you’d think would be save for a climactic finale happen at unusual junctures. Big characters that have been around since the first episodes die in the 3rd and 6th episodes of the season, and it really does keep you on your toes. So much so that I almost bought Ragnar’s ‘death’ in the finale, before realising it was just a ploy to get into Paris. The whole Paris storyline was great, in particular the battle scenes. The one that took up pretty much an entire episode, ‘To The Gates’ was just brilliant, and really bears comparison to some of the best battles in Game Of Thrones or Spartacus. The new French Villains are less exciting (Count Odo’s sadomasochism came a bit out of nowhere, and it was weird how only that scene in the entire series had nudity right?) but I imagine they will be fleshed out in Season 4. The same thing happened with The Saxons. The only real negative in this season was the weird appearance of Kevin Durand as a character who might be the actual Odin. In a series where the conflict between the Norse Gods and Christianity plays such a big role, having one side appear as ‘real’ just didn’t work for me.

Music

Only one CD to talk about this month, but it’s kind of a big deal, in that it’s the new one from Arcade Fire, one of the world’s biggest bands. So far I haven’t been able to listen to Everything Now (Sonovox/Columbia 2017) as many times as I’d like (though I am listening to it now as I type this. Right now. Right… now) but I think I like it rather more than what the general consensus seems to be, and certainly think it’s a return to form after ‘Reflektor’ which I never fell in love with. It’s not up there with ‘The Suburbs’ or ‘Funeral’, but frankly, few albums are. For me, this is a very enjoyable record with some interesting new developments for the band. Yeah, the title track does sound rather a lot like Abba, but I don’t mind that, and I would put ‘Signs Of Life’ up there with Arcade Fire’s best songs. You can really tell that Thomas Bangalter from Daft Punk produced those tracks, they feel much more dancey. I do think some of the meaning behind the songs and the cultural commentary is a bit wanky, but on the record itself, it doesn’t get in front of the music itself. I think Arcade Fire are kind of suffering from Jonathan Franzen-syndrome, where people focus way more on the interviews and news around the work, than the work itself. Who cares about fidget spinners and whether or not they enforced a dress code or if it was a joke or not. Just listen to the music and forget about ‘the discourse’. I know it’s hard, and I’ve certainly failed to do that here, but still, I’m going to make an effort.

Books

I’m going to keep this short because I wrote more general thoughts last week, but I really did blast through the back half of 33 Revolutions Per Minute: A History Of Protest Songs (2010) by Dorian Lynskey. It’s a fantastically readable book and even though it’s over 500 pages long, it never felt like a chore. I was up the the 1970s last time, and this month I read from then, through the 80s and 90s and up to Green Day’s ‘American Idiot’. The focus of the book spreads a bit wider, as the focus of the protest movements becomes harder to define and the culture as a whole became more diffuse. So the chapter that is nominally about U2’s ‘Pride (In The Name Of Love)’ is actually more about Bruce Springsteen and Live Aid than those loveable lads from Liverpool, and the Steve Earle track becomes about the musical response to 9/11 and the Iraq War as a whole. It’s still interesting, but does lack the immediacy of the anti-Vietnam and Civil Rights songs from earlier. If anything, that’s my only criticism of the book, in that Lynskey’s history only goes up to 2003, and is a bit too much a part of the ‘end of history’ neoliberal consensus era. With recent events showing that to have been completely wrong-headed, this is one history that will certainly benefit from an update in a few years, once we’re able to see the true impact of Trump and Brexit and all of the other huge events. That’s if there any good protest songs to come of the current climate? Last month I said there aren’t any and that’s still the case. Maybe Lynskey could sub in a podcast and write about Chapo Trap House?

I then took a turn back into fiction, in particular fantasy with Saladin Ahmed’s Throne Of The Crescent Moon (2012). I picked this up after being very impressed by the first few issues of Ahmed’s Black Bolt, which he does, along with the amazing artist Christian Ward for Marvel. He’s giving new life to the Inhuman King, and it’s probably the best comic to come along as part of the big Inhuman push we’ve had over the last few years (I sort of don’t count Ms. Marvel or Moon Girl as Inhuman books, even though I probably should). This novel is a fantasy, but what sets it apart from the standard is that it isn’t set in a quasi-medieval European setting, but in a Middle Easternish universe. A lot of fantasy novels have these oriental settings, but most of them are set apart from the ‘real’ action, like Game Of Thrones’ ‘Essos’, but here, the main focus is the magical Arabian Nights, and I found the setting to be very interesting, and something cool and different. But setting is only a part of it, the characters Ahmed uses to populate his world are well-developed, and I found Adoulla to be a very strong central character that went against cliche. He’s not a young chosen one, he’s a middle-aged magician who can’t really be bothered. I think the closest comparison I can think of for Ahmed’s book is Scott Lynch’s ‘The Lies Of Locke Lamora’, as both are not sprawling epics where people go on quests, but tighter stories where the action mainly takes place in a bustling metropolis. The scope of this story is a lot smaller than I expected, but that just means the focus is sharp. You can certainly tell there is a wider world going on, and I am excited to see how that is developed in future novels. If you like modern fantasy and what something with a little different spin on it, this is definitely worth a read, and it won’t take 3 months to read like a lot of others. And seriously, pick up Black Bolt, it is great.

Games

I feel like I’m finally getting into the real meat of The Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild (Nintendo Switch 2017) as I’ve actually started to do the main quest instead of randomly dicking around Hyrule. I’m now doing one of the ‘Great Beast’ stories having accidentally ran into a Zora during some of that aforementioned dicking around. It’s a bit of an adjustment going to a bit more of a traditional Zelda structure here, but I do welcome it. At times, the sheer scale of the game can be a bit overwhelming and I can't decide what to do. I wen through the same thing with GTA V if I recall correctly, before eventually knuckling down and completing the thing. I don’t have anything else to really say about how good this game is though, it’s superb and at this stage I’m just going to be updating you on my progress. I hope it doesn’t take too long, it took me over a year to beat Ocarina Of Time, and that’s a much smaller game! But then again, I was 12 then.

I’ve also played a bit more of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe (Nintendo Switch 2017) as my Cousin is back from China and wanted to play. It’s so much fun, particularly on multi-player and I’m enjoying slowly but surely unlocking more cool vehicles and extra stuff to play as. I also really like the fact that some classic tracks from older games are on here. I didn’t realise how well I remembered Mario Kart Super Circuit from the GBA, but it’s been buried there in my sub-conscious all this time.

And finally, I bought an Apple iPad this month! I’ve been meaning to get one for ages and I had a bit of a cash surplus so decided to be spontaneous. So far I’ve mainly used it for streaming video and surfing the web, but I do have one game, Football Manager Touch 2017 (iOS 2016). So far I’m very impressed, it’s exactly the same as the classic Football Manager… only on the iPad! For me, FM has gotten a bit too fiddly on the computer in the last few years, so this slightly more streamlined version is welcome. I just hope I don’t get too addicted like I have to past incarnations. I’m thinking the portable nature of the iPad will help with that, I can’t play for hours on end because the battery will run out! I’m only in pre-season with Sheffield Wednesday so far, but I did win one friendly 5-0, I’m definitely going to smash promotion, I can tell.

—

So there you have it. I’ll be back in September. Dunno what I’ll have to talk about, I’m in a bit of a funk so probably just… ‘I played Football Manager for a month straight and now it’s the year 2040 and everyone’s a regen’. I saw an article on Vice the other day where 2 guys played a Management sim for a thousand in-game years. This is my goal.

See you then!

5 notes · View notes

fancypantshoodlum · 7 years ago

Text

ALBUM REVIEW: HAIM ‘Something To Tell You’

The wait is over! HAIM's second album is here, but it's not like they've been completely off the radar.

There was that collab single with Bastille which was fun, 'Pray To God' with Calvin Harris - a leftover from the 'Days Are Gone' sessions that I'm hoping the original pops up on an anniversary reissue in, gosh, 2023, 'Holes In The Sky' from the soundtrack of the 2nd Divergent movie that I wasn't feeling at all, and their cover of Tame Impala's ‘Cause I'm a Man' which is BETTER than the original (sorry Kevin).

While all this was happening, they were making an indelible but overlooked mark on the pop and cultural landscape - which I’ll elaborate on in seven topics

TRENDSETTING

I started hearing their inventive brand of polyrhythmic synth guitar pop crop up in tunes like Shura's 'Touch' (lowkey soulful icy synth HAIM), 'Emotion' by Carly Rae Jepson (Latin Freestyle HAIM) and most recently Paramore's 'Told You So' and 'Forgiveness' (all of the above).

Just like The Strokes East Village thrift was hugely influential back in the day on Mens fashion (what Spin magazine hilariously described as “part Bowery Boys, part CK One hotties”)

HAIM definitely popularized a uber long hair, leather jacket and cropped shorts LA boho look that was practically everywhere in 2014/5 (or maybe just in the hipster places I hang :P )

There is an actual website called What Would HAIM Wear?

DAYS ARE GONE MARK II

Now here we are with 'Something To Tell You' - not a repudiation but builds on 'Days Are Gone' - a sequel and clear step forward that's more confident and audacious in its approach and teeming with new musical ideas and different sonic textures.

While still largely stuck to love songs, the lyrics represent a quantum leap in terms of thoughtfulness and maturity.

THE INTERPRETATION GAME

The first glimpse of this record we got was 'Right Now' which came in the form of a video filmed as they recorded a take - giving an instant impression of muso credibility. a down tempo, foreboding ballad, not really a summer jam but hot on it's heels came 'Want You Back' the euphoric banger if there ever was one.

Lyrically they could be two sides of one story, 'Right Now' a tempestuous rebuke against an dishonest ex whose come crawling back. Like an argument that evolves into a full on row , the song builds and builds with each incrimination like thunder, a guitar squalls, Taiko drum patterns rumble - and then it all explodes. 'Want You Back' the ex, having gone back into the dating world, realises that they miss the narrator, apologises '' I’ll take the fall and the fault in us. I’ll give you all the love I never gave before I left you''.

'Want You Back' has the wistful wisdom of a folk song which makes complete sense when you learn that it was originally written as a much slower song on an acoustic guitar. I remember John Lennon saying on The Beatles Anthology Documentary (or it could've been from Ian MacDonald's Beatles book 'Revolution In The Head') that whatever instrument a song is written on influences the flavour of the song, and its defo left its mark.

I really love 'Night So Long' though. The desolate blend of echoic harmony, ambient guitar twang & weeping melodies gives it a real nocturnal, countrified, dark night of the soul vibe to it. a lovelorn hymn that's really evocative of post break up, being lost in quiet despair, resigned to another crack around the merry-go-round of Love - for the narrator Romantic Love is a Sisyphean act

I could get really SAT English Literature with my interpretations of these songs but I'll spare you the pain lol

STUDIO AS AN INSTRUMENT

One of the common critics of HAIM albums, especially this sophomore release is that it's over produced. To be honest it's no more heavily produced than a classic Neptunes track or Timbaland one a decade before and Trevor Horn back in the 80s.

The Daddy of them all being Phil Spector whose Wall of Sound approach was a dense aesthetic that included an array of orchestral instruments—strings, woodwind, brass and percussion—not previously associated with pop music, characterizing his methods as "a Wagnerian approach to rock & roll: little symphonies for the kids".

Brian Wilson, a huge Spector fan, used a similar recording technique, especially during the Pet Sounds and Smile eras of the Beach Boys, the most recognizable examples being "God Only Knows", "Wouldn't It Be Nice" and especially, the psychedelic "pocket symphony" of "Good Vibrations"

Wilson says "Before Spector, people recorded all the instruments separately. They got great piano, great guitar, and great bass. But he thought of the song as one giant instrument. It was huge. Size was so important to him, how big everything sounded. And he had the best drums I ever heard."

‘Something To Tell You’ (and ‘Days are Gone’ too) is very much in the spirit of Spector but with a modern vernacular. ‘Ready For You’, ‘Want You Back’ and the title song are really sonically dense and defly work in a lot of elements.

The dichotomy of the synthetic, adventurous interpretation of the songs on the record compared to the more reigned in, organic live version isn’t unique to HAIM.

Led Zeppelin live were, as legendary rock critic Lester Bangs described them, 'a thunderous, near-undifferentiated tidal wave of sound that doesn't engross but envelops to snuff any possible distraction' or in Robert Plant's words it was a "very animal thing, a hellishly powerful thing,". In contrast Page's production on the records gave their songs a sense of auditory cinema to what could have been, in a less-imaginative producer’s hands, simply bombastic rock songs.

There’s all sorts of panning and added the effects, echo-chambered voice drops into a small explosion of fuzz-tone guitar, including using Low Frequency Oscillators on tape machines that was really startling to hear at the time.

I had qualms about the use of pitched vocals that are at the start of ‘Little of Your Love’ and in the call back in the chorus of ‘Right Now’, because in the latter I thought it undercut the poignancy by having something so alien sounding in something so human, and the prior I thought a synthetic touch in something so throwback was jarring – like T Pain at the start of Springsteen’s ‘Hungry Heart’ – but maybe not a teenager who hasn’t grown up with sounds being rigidly compartmentalized in genres the way people did in the 20th century.

SIDE NOTE: In fact it could be argued that auto tune / vocal pitch shifting (techniques for deliberate misusing of programs designed for correcting pitch as a way of colourizing the human voice with distortion) is the musical signature of the 2010’s the same way a Wah-Wah pedal makes you think of the 60s or the sound of a Fairlight CMI is very 80s. Which if true makes Cher’s ‘Believe’ ridiculously ahead of it’s time – the pop equivalent of what The MC5 were to Punk?

SPOT THE INFLUENCES

Critics love to play ‘Spot the Influences’: X sounds as if The Reminder-era Feist fused together the acoustic riffs of ‘I Don't Want to Know’ and ‘Never Going Back Again’ – it weirdly reminds me of families gathered around a new-born baby talking about how it has it’s mother’s eyes but grandfathers nose – all these are just cosmetic judgements that are useful to introduce the uninitiated to artists they’ve never heard about but music, like babies, are more than the sum of their parts.

When critics would name check Fleetwood Mac in reference to HAIM in 2013 it always felt tenuous though I knew what they meant – the songs didn’t sound like Fleetwood Mac in the autonomy of the song structure but in the emotional resonance. People hadn’t heard a guitar pop band sing about relationships like that, in a style like that for a long time – since probably Fleetwood Mac and so made the connection – but the fab ‘You Never Knew’ completely pastiches the gossamer textures of Tango In The Night era Fleetwood Mac in its production to its detriment I think because every time it starts I’m half expecting Christine McVie to come on and tell me sweet little lies.

NO GENRES

I once stumbled on a useful insight about art criticism from an article that the writer and journalist Janet Malcolm wrote in response to vitriolic critiques on J.D Salinger's writing made by literary luminaries such as Updike and Didion: ''negative contemporary criticism of a masterpiece can be helpful to later critics, acting as a kind of radar that picks up the ping of the work’s originality''.

Now, I’m not saying this record is a masterpiece - It's really good - but unpacking and investigating the critiques have lead me to some interesting places, like this douchey one from the Guardian.

‘’…Haim were swiftly co-opted by the world of mainstream pop, which seems less interested in their place within a lineage of classic Californian rock than their way with a honeyed melody.’’

From the off this is not true because they did tour with Florence and The Machine and play the big pop extravaganza that was Chime For Change before they even dropped an album. This smells more like a Luddite Gen Xer hang up about transgressing the dividing lines between musical genres.

Music critic Lizzy Goodman on the promo trail for her excellent book ‘Meet Me In The Bathroom’ a thrilling 600-page oral history of New York’s Rock renaissance of the 2000s - brought up a fantastic point on a podcast about the analogue kids of The Strokes generation and their Post Napster successors Vampire Weekend, Grimes and HAIM etc.

Listen to that podcast here (it’s brilliant)

https://soundcloud.com/the-watch-podcast/lizzy-goodman-on-the-rebirth-of-rock-n-roll-in-new-york-city-from-2001-to-2011-ep-153

but here’s the paraphrased version of what I want to highlight:

Interviewer: The time between ‘Is This It?’ and Vampire Weekend’s self-titled debut is 7 years – one was the beginning of something and one was the end of something.

LIZZY GOODMAN: You could imagine The Strokes debuting in 2008 but you could not imagine Vampire Weekend happening in 2001 because there is no Ezra brain without the internet.

Interviewer: When I interviewed Ezra for Spin, I became the most oldest man in the universe! I was so angry, I was like: ‘’how dare you go to an Ivy League school, be white and like Hip Hop’’ says the guy who went to an Ivy League school, was white and loved Hip Hop, but how dare you talk about it (so well) and have fluency in all these different worlds and jump between things and never break a sweat.

LG: He’s literally like ‘I don’t know what you mean?’

This is normal to a Millennial but to a Gen Xer that level of musical sophistication is unheard of because they didn’t have the access to everything ever recorded pooled together in one space that the internet is. This Age of Musical Plenty has freed people up from the rigid lock of genre and toward an eclectic palette which is also reflected in the music they make.

BAND BY IT'S COVER

I LOVE ALBUM ART! (I'm also a keen linear notes reader *did you know there's a Grammy for best linear notes? musicians take note lol*) when done right they're great windows into the tone of the record inside. 'Days Are Gone' & 'Something To Tell You' are really cool to contrast.

'Days Are Gone' was the start of a huge career for the band. The album offered listeners a look into their sunny, romantic lives and the cover art too reflected HAIM's bright prospects. Seated in three fold-up chairs on a big green lawn (suburban kids) the heads of the HAIM sisters are turned to the left, eyes averted and covered in shades (future's so bright, I gotta wear shades)

They followed the Spice Girls’ template of being a charismatic group, whose individual styles all added to the bigger picture - their meshing of high street and storied, thrift store pieces gave them an indie rock relatability. They looked like regular joes with great personal style.

On the flip-side 'Something To Tell You' is the glam fulfillment of that promise. It's like a souped up version where the pastoral suburban LA setting of 'Days Are Gone' gives way to more traditional iconic rock images of LA interspersed with glam fashion editorial-like images and (my fav) the quirkier bold coloured zoot suit-y David Byrne-esque stuff.

'Something To Tell You' is a clear step forward, artistically and career-wise. You can hear adventurous enthusiasm in how they approach every song and from the lyrics you get that too that the uncertainty that was a motif in a lot of the songs from their last LP is gone and not only do they finally know what they want from life but are racing towards it. Record #3 is going to be an exciting listen.

3 notes · View notes

thesausagequest · 8 years ago

Text

Increasingly disappointing sausage

At this stage on my unlikely sausage journey, you would think that I’d have become impervious to feeling let down. I have eaten what looked like nightmare vomit on a moving boat, I have eaten a sausage covered in cheese in 38 degree heat (the sausage was covered in cheese, not me, but I was pretty well covered by the end of the meatpipe encounter let me tell you) and I have experienced a hidden sausage in a bread cloud very recently.

Yet still, I retain the capacity to be made downhearted by an experience with a sausage. I am not sure I worded that fantastically but there’s a gist in there so let’s all move on. I recently treated myself to a trip to the cinema to see the new King Kong movie, in which John Goodman hunts the only animal alive that is larger than him, and Samuel L. Jackson shows once and for all that there is only one old African American man working in Hollywood today.

Part of my cinematic treat was going to be one of these delicious treats that you can clearly see on display here, at a height that is either meant for children or knees.

My knees were screaming candy. My eyes, however, were drawn to this.

Do I know better? Yes. Does that mean I refrained from buying a Nathan’s hot dog at a cinema where I couldn’t see a refrigerator or any hot dogs anywhere? Also yes. Wait, no. I didn’t refrain.

Since I was running late, I asked the lady how long the hot dog would take. She said ‘two minutes’. ‘That’s a worryingly long and strangely specific time, surely it should be a case of just grabbing one from the rotating thing they have and putting it in a bun, why would that take specifically two minutes? This doesn’t sound right,’ I thought, and with that thought in mind I said ‘ok perfect, thanks’.

She disappeared into the back.

Whereupon I saw her put a sausage in this.

Disappointment creeping in, my old friend sausage remorse making him or herself comfortable. Why is the microwave in view of the customer? I don’t need that! Could they have chosen a less terrifyingly unsteady impromptu outdoor event table to hold it all up? Where’s the rotating thing hot dogs come on?

I hear a ‘ding’ and this comes at me.

How on earth – on god’s actual green earth – can a sausage sweat like that? What has happened in that microwave? If this is all about the beef as the earlier poster claimed, then I have some apologies to make, starting with this sausage and ending with every cow currently alive.

I covered the sausage juice up with sauces. Call the judges at the ‘most disgusting sentence ever written awards because I think we now have a winner.

And ran away into the theatre. In the theatre I tried to be all fun and zany, taking photos of my sausage enjoying the trailers. Oh just me and my terminally ill sausage, taking in a movie like a couple of buddies comfortable enough in each others’ company not to have to hold conversation all evening, just here to enjoy a movie, maybe a couple of beers afterwards discussing Kong’s motivation and where his genitalia is in this movie.

Then it slowly dawned on me that I was watching a trailer for a movie about the Holocaust.

There I am, merrily snapping photos of a fucking sausage with the backdrop of the worst human suffering in living memory.

Took me a while to notice as well.

This sausage didn’t have a great day with me I don’t think.

CURRENT LENGTH - IT WAS DARK AND I DIDN’T WANT TO LOOK AT IT BUT LET’S SAY 12CM GIVING ME 475CM

SAUSAGE RATING - IT’S A HUGE SIGH OUT OF TEN

#sausage #sausages #kong skull island #hot dog #cobble hill #brooklyn

4 notes · View notes

twh-news · 8 years ago

Link

Director Jordan Vogt-Roberts clearly has an affection for a kind of all-out monster movie mash that is given new life in an A-plus production of a B-movie concept. As I say in my video review (click the link above to watch), this reminded me of the kind of Jules Verne adventures I loved, such as Journey to the Center of the Earth or Mysterious Island, mixed with a dab of Jurassic Park and of course every Kong or Godzilla flick you have seen.

But unlike the most recent big-screen take on the big ape, Peter Jackson’s overcooked 2005 entry Kong, this one gets right to the action and the heart of the matter. Moving to a post-Vietnam War ’70s setting also makes it a different kind of animal, and we would have to throw in a movie from that era, Apocalypse Now, as further inspiration for Vogt-Roberts and his screenwriters Dan Gilroy and Max Borenstein and Derek Connolly from a story by John Gatins.

The storyline is simple, and it’s a nifty device just to get to the chomping by Kong and a disparate group of other creatures lurking in the dense, foggy environment of Skull Island. Secret op Bill Randa (John Goodman) leads an expedition of scientists, military and others to the previously thought-uninhabited island in order to get answers to long-held questions about what it might hold. Among those along for the ride is SAS Black Ops officer Captain Conrad (Tom Hiddleston); an embittered Lt. Col. Packard (Samuel L. Jackson), who is determined to right what he considers the wrong of losing the Vietnam War; and of course the obligatory female, in this case a combat photographer played by Brie Larson. Several others also are along, many there to have their limbs taken apart in novel ways or serve as snacks for Kong and his cohorts.

As they traverse the island, they come upon an affable human named Hank Marlowe (John C. Reilly), who as it turns out survived a World War II crash-landing there and has learned to live peacefully among the natives and creatures ever since. He is a real live wire and steals acting honors in the CGI effects-driven movie. He also shares warnings to these intruders that they need to be cautious — warnings that aren’t heeded, especially by Packard, who is the type who shoots first and asks questions later. Jackson plays him with his usual brash gusto. Hiddleston doesn’t make as much of a good impression as he has less to do. Larson, in the kind of role that made Fay Wray a household name in the 1933 original King Kong, is basically there as eye candy for the audience — and later Kong.

And that is exactly as it should be. The real stars here are the special effects wizards who have delivered a fun, no-holds-barred, old-fashioned monster movie with CGI work that truly is state of the art. Kong himself is as imposing as he has ever been on film, and the dino-like other creatures are highly inventive creations. For those who love this sort of thing, Kong: Skull Island does not disappoint. Producers are Thomas Tull, Mary Parent, Jon Jashni and Alex Garcia. Stay to the end of the credits or you will miss an intriguing setup for the inevitable sequel. Warner Bros releases the film Friday.

#kong: skull island #kong skull island #film review

10 notes · View notes

jschaeferreviews · 8 years ago

Text

Kong: Skull Island (2017)

The order was just given: the United States Army is pulling out of Vietnam. Everyone is ready to go home, except for Packard (Samuel L. Jackson) who graciously accepts taking a detour back home to escort a team of scientists to an uncharted island to collect geological data and the possibility of monstrous lifeforms. Accompanied by crack-pot theorist Bill Randa (John Goodman) and adventurer James Conrad (Tom Hiddleston), the ragtag team successfully navigates to Skull Island; a land which time forgo. A land where Kong is King.

“Kong: Skull Island” marks the second installment of WB’s “Beast” universe. Not to be confused with beasts of a more “Fantastic” nature, this franchise was launched by the knock-out success of 2014’s “Godzilla” reboot. Structurally, the two films are very different in that “Kong” lacks the tempered unveiling of Edwards’ title creature, but that is not necessarily a bad thing. By not teasing us with the reveal, director Jordan Vogt-Roberts can thrust us right into the action without restraint.

To sum up “Skull Island” it is everything you would expect from a ‘Nam and Kong flick which ultimately results in a satisfying and exciting film. There is a play on the iconic airplane fight early in the film and Mason Weaver’s (Brie Larson) arc ultimately pays homage to the “beauty” of the 1933 classic. Coupled with the fraternal camaraderie found in any party-boy Vietnam film, “Skull Island” feels familiar while still telling a fresh take on the Kong lore.

What makes “Skull Island” work is that there is also a lot of character development going on in addition to just the action. Much like in the Godzilla stories, it is revealed that Kong is not so much the enemy of humanity, but rather its protector. Also like the King of Monsters, Kong assumes this role more out of necessity than any free will or working conscience of his own. On the more human scale, in the man vs. man story, we have a three-way butting of heads between three leading character actors playing the roles we all know, love, and have come to expect from them (Goodman, Jackson, John C. Reilly). It goes without saying that this film will not be recognized for its acting though don’t take that to mean that the cast is hamming it up. There are solid performances all around, just nothing groundbreaking.

That being said, there is one supporting character whom I admired and was whose development I was invested in from start to finish. The young son of a mechanic, Slivko (Thomas Mann), has the biggest war of conscience in the film. With a strong allegiance to his commander, Packard, but an equally strong desire to get his feet back on good ol’ American soil, this young man finds himself constantly torn between following orders and doing what is best for his own survival. He plays the role well and gives us a good look into the mindset of the survivors as they work their way across the island to the exit point.

Looking at the script as a whole, it is very well paced and thought out. It volleys between the action and the development with expert precision and in doing so makes the casualties faced along the way actually mean something. I struggle to even say that the action was stereotypically mindless for a movie such as this as in every major showdown there is a microcosmic Chekov’s gun which leads to a satisfying and inventive payoff. Without give away any major deaths or details, “Skull Island” has a great sense of population control; whittling down the survivors little by little but not before allowing us to get invested in them. It was refreshing to see a film, especially one with a cast as vast as this one, not rely solely on a run of cheap deaths of no-name characters for emotional impact.

It also helps that the action sequences move the plot along. By and large, the CGI employed is well done. There are a few instances where it became a bit glaring, but I can also chalk that up to having seen it in 3D and there is a bit of forgiveness that must be shown when viewing CGI in that format. The monolithic monsters, Kong himself included, are all impressive with a few exceptions. The ones that are grounded in animal design work the best, but there are a few creatures where more creative liberties were taken and in the overall environment of the story, they do not quite fit in. Thankfully, the Skull Crawlers do not fall in to this category, but a strange log/turtle hybrid about half way through and the reoccurring bird creatures do.

My biggest gripe about the film would be the final shot before the ending production credits start. Without giving it away, the action shown does not fit in well with the way the story was charting to finish and an argument can easily be made that it almost lessens the gravity of the ending. It is a bit of fan service magnified by an end credit scene that sets the stage for the next installment in the franchise.

“Kong: Skull Island” was a very satisfying action/adventure film that feels like a summer blockbuster. It has its fair share of faults and tropes, but that does not lessen everything that the film got right. “Skull Island,” I can confidently say, has a lot of re-watch potential which is about the highest honor I can give a film. A well-paced, two-hour experience; do what you can to see it on a screen as big as Kong while you can!

#Kong Skull Island #Tom Hiddleston #John C Reilly #Samuel L Jackson #Brie Larson #Thomas Mann #Jordan Vogt-Roberts

3 notes · View notes

ashtonkutchermustdie · 8 years ago

Text

TOP 10 BEST & TOP 5 WORST FILMS OF 2016

BEST FILMS OF 2016:

1. HUNT FOR THE WILDERPEOPLE Following the unexpected death of his Foster Aunt, chubby, rebellious foster kid, Ricky Baker runs away into the New Zealand Bush, followed by his cantankerous Foster Uncle (Sam Neil). They presently get lost and a nationwide manhunt is organised to track them down. Since its release I have watched this film a few times and it gets better on each viewing. Director Taika Waititi has produced a work that is a wonderful concoction of dry humour, farce, pathos, charm, sweetness and heart. Hunt for the Wilderpeople is truly “majestical”.

2. THE REVENANT In the 1820s, frontiersman, Hugh Glass (DiCaprio), sets out on a path of vengeance against those who left him for dead after a bear attack. Immersive, beautiful and masterful filmmaking from a director at the very top of his game. Backed by an Oscar winning performance by Leo and Oscar nominated performance by Tom Hardy (who was robbed, by the way). Very edge of your seat stuff from beginning to end. Two hours of overwhelming visual and sensory brilliance.

3. SING STREET An uplifting and heart-warming (I know, I’m sorry!) coming of age tale set in Dublin during the 80s. A young outsider starts a band in order to impress an older girl, along the way learning about The Clash, Joy Division, The Cure, New Order et al. The soundtrack was enough to entice me but the film goes beyond expectations and is a beautifully crafted triumph and a return to form for writer/director John Carney.

4. THE HUNTING GROUND Whilst it may not be my best film of the year, The Hunting Ground is the most important. A startling expose of rape crimes on US campuses, their institutional cover-ups, and the devastating toll they take on students and their families. This shit happens. And more people need to realise it and do something about it. Affecting, alarming, distressing and frustrating. A must watch for everyone. This stuff needs to be heard and discussed.

5. 10 CLOVERFIELD LANE Waking up from a car accident, a young woman finds herself in the claustrophobic bunker of a man (John Goodman) who claims that the outside world is now uninhabitable. The reliably brilliant Goodman gives a career best, is he/isn’t he, performance. A fantastically tense, thrilling and almost flawless little movie that is thankfully not quite ruined completely by the ill-advised last five minutes. Other than that though, wonderful.

6. THE LOBSTER Greek director Yorgos Lanthimos' The Lobster is one of the strangest comedies in recent memory but also one of the best. In a dystopian near-future, a single man (Colin Farrell) checks into a hotel where, by law, all singletons must find a mate within 45 days or be transformed into the animal of their choice. A hilariously deadpan examination of love, relationships, marriage, and the basic human need for connection. Not for everyone’s tastes, but certainly for mine.

7. SWISS ARMY MAN To say that Swiss Army Man is not going to be for everyone is an understatement. However, if the concept of Daniel Radcliffe as a loveable, flatulent corpse is something that sounds somewhat appealing then there is an awful lot to truly enjoy in this bizarre, unique and idiosyncratic film. Equal parts low brow and high brow, stupid and touching. Just go with it.

8. GREEN ROOM In the aftermath of a murder, a young punk rock band find themselves trapped in a secluded venue run by neo-Nazis. The most hardcore and relentless thriller in years, and exercise in extreme, nail-biting suspense, anchored by a terrifying and understated performance from Patrick Stewart as head honcho Nazi man. Lean and mean B-movie brilliance.

9. CREED Nobody was really crying out for a seventh film in the Rocky saga. Certainly not one that would replace Stallone with a younger model. It would never work! Creed, however, certainly does work and works wonderfully. Never straying too far from what made the original Rocky films great but also adding in grit, heart and true power. Stallone’s Oscar nominated return is affecting, Michael B. Jordan continues to exude charisma and ability in every performance and I am becoming increasingly impressed with director Ryan Cooler, who after Fruitvale Station and now this, is proving to be a true talent.

10. I, DANIEL BLAKE The lives of two people struggling on benefits in modern Britain intertwine as the help each other to simply get by and get on. I, Daniel Blake’s depiction of life on the dole makes for a brutal, often uncomfortable watch. As well it should. But it is also full of humour, hope and wit. At 80 years old Ken Loach has still very much got it.

WORST FILMS OF 2016:

1. GHOSTBUSTERS When this film was initially released I held off reviewing it for political reasons; there was so much furore around the fact that the cast was all female that anyone who spoke out against it was immediately labelled a closed minded misogynist. Now, I think enough people have seen it to realise that this is just a really, really terrible movie. The fact that the cast are all women is of no consequence, the fact that they are the WRONG women along with the WRONG script and the WRONG director, kind of is. Headache inducing, depressing and maddeningly dreadful.

2. SAUSAGE PARTY I like me some Seth Rogen, though the films he puts effort into and the films he makes while stoned are becoming increasingly obvious. This is clearly the latter. A dumb concept can’t cover the fact that this is simply not funny or entertaining. How it got made in the first place is beyond me.

3. SUICIDE SQUAD It should have been easy. David Ayer, Jared Leto and Margot Robbie? They should have knocked it out of the park! What happened?! As it is, Suicide Squad is barely a movie. With so much to work with and so many characters everything is glossed over and the whole thing comes across as a 2 hour trailer for a film that we are never getting… and doesn’t look that great anyway.

4. INDEPENDENCE DAY: RESURGENCE When I was 11 or 12 one of my best mates at school was very much into video games, I never really have been. He always had the latest consoles and games. When I went round to his house after school, if it was raining or dark outside I used to have to sit quietly and watch him play on this PlayStation, or whatever, for hours on end. Politely staring blankly at the shapes, colours and noise whilst actually taking very little enjoyment from the experience. This is what Independence Day: Resurgence is like. That they managed to gather the majority of the old cast is incredible. This is really an embarrassment for all involved and everyone should be thoroughly ashamed.

5. LIGHTS OUT A horror movie should be scary right? That’s kind of the point? An interesting concept (ghost can only been seen in darkness and disappears in the bright) is bogged down in unnecessary context and exposition. Dull.

4 notes · View notes