#spectacular is definitely my favorite iteration of him | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

wonderfulworldofmichaelford · 3 years ago

Text

Michael in the Mainstream - Spider-Man: No Way Home

I’ve basically grown up with Spider-Man. I watched the original Raimi films with my dad, I saw both of the Webb films and did not particularly care for them, and I’ve seen Spidey’s appearances in the MCU. No matter the ups and downs, though, there is one thing that has always stayed true: Spider-Man is my favorite hero, and all of the actors have always done a fine job at breathing life into him. Tobey Maguire had that awkward dorkiness to his Peter that made him endearing, and Andrew Garfield had that playful “never shuts up” energy while in the suit. Holland is a bit of a mix of both and does a solid job himself. The point is, I love Spider-Man, and even at his Amazing Spider-Man 2-est I can still find something to love.

No Way Home is a film all about that love. This film embraces every bit of the Spider-Man lore so far, every single movie across three separate takes on the character, and brings it all together into the ultimate, amazing, spectacular experience that is one of the most ambitious crossover events of all time. This is a film that honors Spider-Man’s legacy, paints him an interesting future, and manages to fix so many of the problems with every other iteration of Spider-Man in film that it’s mind-boggling. Be warned, there’s mild spoilers in this review because it is impossible to talk about this film without them... but it is stuff I’m sure you can easily guess anyway. Still, fair warning!

This is definitely Tom Holland’s best performance yet. He gets to be awkward, charming, a hero bearing the weight of the world on his shoulders, a young man haunted by terrible traumas that he has to shoulder as he grapples with doing the right thing… In this film, more than any of his other outings, he feels like Spider-Man for the first time. And with the way this movie ends, that may be the point. These first three MCU films come off as a prolonged origin story for the Peter we all know and love, and in this movie Holland shows us that he can be that Peter and not just a Tony Stark fanboy.

The supporting cast is also fantastic here, though there are a few weak spots. Obviously Ned is not one of them, as he continues to be as great as he’s always been, and MJ continues being a great character as she was in Far From Home. Doctor Strange also isn’t the issue, and he easily could have been if he was allowed to be a mentor to Peter; however, the film uses him sparingly, mostly to set up the plot, provide some conflict in the middle, and then help resolve it, leaving the mentoring to go to a couple other characters who work much better as guides for Peter’s development. Surprisingly Aunt May is not either; she’s sort of been relegated to minor roles in all her appearances where her sex appeal is played up and Marisa Tomei doesn’t really get to show off her skills. Here, she gets a bit of an expanded role and basically sets Peter on the right path for the plot a few times, acting as a bit of an emotional core and guide until a shocking moment at the midpoint. It’s pretty impressive even if she still isn’t the strongest character. There’s also a really nice cameo from a certain blind lawyer who manages to completely clear Peter of criminal charges in regards to Mysterio’s death, which manages to be a highlight of the film despite being incredibly brief.

The weak spots here really are Happy and, shockingly, J. Jonah Jameson. Happy is just absolutely sidelined throughout the film and is hugely ineffective; by the end his life is effectively ruined and he didn’t really get to help at all, which really sucks. Good ol’ JJJ is played with gusto by J.K. Simmons as always, the man’s definitely still got it, but he’s a bit of a flat antagonistic character who seemingly just exists to kick Spidey while he’s down, with none of the emotional depth the Raimi iteration of the character had. I don’t think it’s bad per se, but I hope they expand on him in the future.

Now onto the villains! Spider-Man movies in the past have always struggled with juggling multiple villains, so there was obviously a fear that would happen here when there are five villains showing up. Thankfully, the movie knows which villain is the main threat and gives each one something. It sort of helps that the villains, while an antagonizing force in the story, are sort of side effects of the main problem of the plot (which is the bungled spell), and they come across more as a cherry on top. At any rate, each of them gets some great moments to shine: Doc Ock gets the bridge scene that was shown in the trailers, Electro gets a fight when he first appears which has Sandman helping stop him, and Lizard… Well, Lizard honestly gets the short end of the stick, but he does get some cool moments in the final battle. There is a problem where some of these guys feel a little underutilized, particularly Lizard and Sandman. This mostly comes from restrictions due to COVID, with Rhys Ifans and Thomas Haden Church only able to reprise via voice acting and so not getting the same physical presence as the others, but Sandman still manages to feel pretty in line with his persona at the end of Spider-Man 3 while Lizard gets to be mildly funny by going from his more tragic and complex nature in his film to a cartoonish lizard man with a posh British accent who seems overly enthusiastic about turning everyone into lizards. This is the closest we’ll probably ever get to seeing the Marvel villain Sauron adapted, so I’ll take it.

Electro and Doc Ock manage to get a bit more spotlight, and it’s great seeing Ock go through a turn and become an ally, because Alfred Molina is such a charming man and Otto in Spider-Man 2 was a good guy at heart anyway. It’s very deserved and satisfying here. Electro, meanwhile, gets to be an actual fun character here, with all the dopiness of his debut gone and replaced with some snarky cynicism courtesy of Jamie Foxx. They actaully make fun of the electric eel thing multiple times, and when the big final battle rolls around Electro gets to be the massive threat and the fun antagonist he deserved to be. It’s really great seeing Foxx in a truly great Spider-Man movie for once. Hell, it’s great to see everyone! Alfred Molina, Church, Ifans, all of them put in good work here. But there is one villain I’ve neglected to mention, mostly because he’s the most important of all, and the true big bad of the film: The Green Goblin.

Gobby is, as in the comics and the Raimi film, Spider-Man’s most evil and deadly foe, and no man could possibly put in a better turn as Osborn than Willem Dafoe. Dafoe manages to pull off the terrified old man grappling with an evil split personality that is Norman and the terrifying, cackling madman that is the Goblin just as well as he did back in Raimi’s first Spider-Man movie all those years ago, and honestly? He may actually be better. You see, it seems that they listened to Weird Al’s “Ode to a Superhero” and agreed with the line about how dumb the Goblin mask is and how “He’s scarier without it on,” because Dafoe gets to put his absolutely insane facial acting to work here when he shifts into Goblin mode. And yes, Dafoe is utterly terrifying without the mask, no doubt about it. He was always great, but now he truly gets to shine like never before, and cements himself as perhaps the greatest villain in the MCU with his actions here.

And now, time to talk about the worst-kept secret in Marvel history: Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield reprising their roles as their respective takes on Peter Parker. It’s actually amazing, but their appearances don’t overtake the film and outshine Holland, but they actually manage to complement him very well, acting as mentors and surrogate brothers to help teach him what it truly means to be a Spider-Man. Equally amazing is how they get a substantial amount of screentime, appearing as major players in the third act and sticking around until almost the very end. I don’t think I need to say that Tobey’s still got it; he’s just as endearingly awkward as ever before, as if he just stepped out of the Raimi films and into this one, and they actually managed to up his snark a bit. What I would like to highlight is how Andrew Garfield finally gets to prove he might be the very best Peter ever with how adorably dorky and self-loathing he is. This man really shows he has the true essence of Peter down pat, and I can’t believe it, but I actually want to see an Amazing Spider-Man 3 with him in it. He deserves it, like I always knew he did. Man just needed the right script and the right plot to shine, and boy does he ever get to here.

The plot does hinge on some stupidity on the part of Peter and Strange, but honestly there’s nothing too egregiously awful. It moves at a pretty solid pace, maybe a bit fast in the beginning but it soon finds its groove and keeps moving along steadily right until the end. The action manages to be really varied and creative, with all sorts of fun Spidey antics, and the characters never act overwhelmingly stupid or out-of-character. Yes, it all does end up feeling like a massive fix fix that addresses the problems of every single film Spider-Man and works to rectify them, but if you’re a fan of these films and these characters, who cares? Are you going to complain Holland’s finally free of his Stark connections and gets to really be Spider-Man? Are you upset Garfield gets to redeem himself? Are you mad that Tobey gets to be snarky and worked things out with MJ?

This movie is honestly just a dream come true. I always joked that I wanted the MCU to adapt One More Day, because if they could adapt Civil War and make it suck less surely they could do the same with Spider-Man’s worst story ever. And this movie really is essentially that, but more than that this is what One More Day could have and should have been: A massive change to Spidey’s status quo that brings him back to basics in a good way. MCU!Peter is in a spot where he can truly grow and embrace the Spider-Man mantle, and it has me very excited for the future. This is probably my favorite Spider-Man movie ever, and if you’ve grown up with Spider-Man like I have it might end up being yours too. This is definitely one of the few Marvel movies to break away from superhero fatigue as of late, so if you just want a really great superhero movie this is it. I’m not holding my breath that we’ll ever get a superhero spectacle on this level again, but at least I feel a bit safe in saying that Spidey’s looking forward to some great adventures going forward.

Fingers crossed they try and do the Clone Saga next!

#Michael in the Mainstream #review #movie review #Spider-Man: No Way Home #No Way Home #Spider-Man #Tom Holland #Andrew Garfield #Tobey Maguire #Alfred Molina #Jamie Foxx #Willem Dafoe #superhero movie #superhero #MCU #Marvel #Sony #Crossover

30 notes · View notes

rantsandsparkles · 3 years ago

Text

The Batman - Spoiler Review

Batman has always been my favorite super hero. What I’ve always loved about him as a character was his duality of being Bruce Wayne , the seemingly carefree billionaire playboy by day, and Batman , the dark brooding badass vigilante by night. This movie takes place two years into this Bruce’s turn as Batman, and this character is all Batman and no Bruce. I’m hearing a lot of “Robert Pattinson will be your favorite Batman after you see this” - I would disagree with that. To be the best Batman I think you have to be able to be both Batman and Bruce, and its almost like this Batman doesn’t know how to be an actual human person yet , let alone Bruce Wayne.

The tone of this movie is heavy AF, which is fine we can get heavy , but my main criticism is this movie is too damn long. Its a good 30-45 minutes too long imo. I found myself looking at my watch a bunch and there were a few times when a scene would cut and I would think it was the end of the movie, but then it just kept going. I mean I know they told everyone it was a 3 hr movie, but I personally really felt those three hrs.

Highlights of the movie though were the performances. Zoe Kravitz as Catwoman was just.... chef’s kiss. Spectacular. She was raw, she was fierce, she was sexy ; the fighting choreography was amazing. She was definitely one of the highlights for me. And she had undeniable chemistry w/ Rpatz which is just a testament to how powerful she was because this Batman was completely incapable of connecting with her. I loved Jeffery wright as Gordon. The scene where he is talking to the batman and it looks like he’s interrogating him but he isn’t , was one of my favorites. Andy Serkis was really really great as Alfred, much better than the last Alfred that our last iteration with Jeremy Irons.

For the villains I was kinda disappointed with the fate of Carmine because I really enjoyed John Tutoroo in this gangster role. I would have loved to see him some more in a potential sequel. in a major hollywood blockbuster. It was a little strange for me because I’m also watching Severence right now and he’s in that too, and I always remember him from O Brother where art though (his “dat don’t make no sense” line is something I’m always quoting lol) , so its kind of a trip to see him do this but I’m happy to see him in this kind of movie. He’s one of those character actors that I wish was a bigger star because he’s always so fantastic in everything he does.

The riddler - I know this sounds crazy but I found myself smiling the whole time that he was being crazy lol. Idk I just love watching deliciously crazy villains be deliciously crazy. I thought Dano was fantastic - creepy , dark , crazy as hell , zodiac on the loose vibes. A little bit of overacting, but was enjoyable.

If you have the opportunity to see this in an IMAX or Dolby Cinema special format you defiantly want to do that for the main action piece with the bat mobile. But overall I thought it was pretty good. I wish I loved it as much as everyone else seems to but it was just missing something for me. 7/10

#batman #robert pattinson #zoe kravitz #paul dano #thebatman #review #spoiler #film

4 notes · View notes

halftametigers · 4 years ago

Quote

I took a walk today. And the air was a little crisp and I could feel it in my lungs even though my back hurts from trying to lift everything, even though when I breathe in through my nose I can feel the moistness of my own breath under my mask. The worst part about growing up is realizing that you never stop growing up. I wish that someday I would make it somewhere, reach some sort of plateau, some easy gradual downhill, and begin to coast, but that is not what it means to be human. I have been thinking about this a lot, what it means to be human. What it means to be human sitting next to my dog on our favorite couch, him twitching in his sleep, content for the time being, even though he knows it is almost time for dinner. He knows exactly what time it is, whether from the waning light through the windows or the way the smells settle around our apartment, or maybe just the rumble in his own belly. He knows exactly what will happen next. Walking today I put one foot in front of the other, and I was sure about so many things. Sure about the weight on my back but also the air in my lungs. Sure that I would get where I was going, because I've been there before. The opposite of anxiety is being sure. Sure that the sun will shine and the cars will stop when I cross the street, and that my dog will eat at 6 oclock. I think about what it means to be human and all the ways we defy my definitions. All of the things that make us spectacular and all the ways in which our spectacle becomes a firecracker, too bright, too fast, too loud. To be human, which means to think and worry and care, but also to be funny and careless and completely irreverent. All the ways we rewrite ourselves, in a thousand different iterations that we grow towards and grow into and grow past. I realized the other day that I used to be so many things that I am not anymore. But I also realized that doesn’t mean I couldn’t be those things again. Only the choices laid out in front of me decide what happens next. There is no master plan. It’s just one foot in front of the other. It’s just breath in and breath out. The weights on our backs get heavier and lighter as the years go on. Or maybe we just get better at carrying bigger weights. Either way it never seems to really end. There’s never a moment when you really get to put the weight down. I guess it’s just those moments when you stop for a friend, or you hitch your backpack up with your thumbs, or you stop to sit on your couch next to a dog who knows it's almost dinnertime. And then you realize that the weight isn’t so bad. Maybe you could carry it a little longer. You’re almost there, anway. Even if you don’t know what there is.

What It Means to be Human by Molly Byrne

#poem #art #walk #dog #breath #pandemic #anxiety #poetry #poet #prose #writing

2 notes · View notes

creepykingdom · 5 years ago

Text

“Scary Stories To Tell in the Dark” Review

By Kayla Caldwell

To preface this review, let me just tell you I had high hopes for Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. I have fond memories from childhood of being at slumber parties with friends, sitting in a circle, holding a flashlight, and taking turns reading scary stories from the Alvin Schwartz book, literally in the dark.

The Stephen Gammell images - which were removed in re-releases for being too scary - were haunting. So haunting, in fact, that when I recorded a recent episode of my podcast, High Crime, two of my friends recalled the terrifying visage of the woman from a story called “The Haunted House,” nearly 20 years later.

Any time Hollywood takes on a beloved story from childhood, it’s hard not to become a little nervous that they’re going to ruin it. (Looking at you, The Golden Compass). But I’m here to say - they did Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark right.

It’s not exactly surprising, seeing as Guillermo del Toro wrote the screenplay and acted as a producer for the film. The man knows how to make a good monster. And lucky me, del Toro even stopped by the screening, along with director André Øvredal, to introduce the film.

He called Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark a “gateway movie” for those who are not quite horror buffs, “like us.” And, he noted, laughing and gesturing to director Øvredal, “It’s creepy, because Norwegians are creepy.” Øvredal kept it short and sweet, saying that he hoped everyone saw the film as a “horror movie that has a heart and a sense of fun.” And I believe it did.

Now, let’s get into the story. It takes place in Mill Valley, Pennsylvania in 1968. The protagonist is a shy, aspiring writer named Stella (Zoe Margaret Colleti), who has a flair for the macabre. On Halloween, she and her friends - nerd, Auggie (Gabriel Rush), and goofball Chuck (Austin Zajur) - invited town newcomer Ramón (Michael Garza) to check out a local haunted house.

Not haunted house in the theme park attraction, clowns holding chainsaws, Universal Studios way - but an old, abandoned house that had its own local legend. See, the once beautiful manor was home to the Bellows family, who started the paper mill that brought the town to life, and filled their pockets with money.

But the family had a nasty secret: their unwanted daughter Sarah. Rumor had it that there was something wrong with Sarah, something that made the family want to keep her hidden in the basement where no one would ever lay eyes on her. But, as they say, curiosity kills - and so the children of the town would come to the house to hear Sarah tell scary stories through the wall… and then they would never be heard from again. * Spoiler alert ahead *

But those were just stories, right? I mean, how could Sarah have killed anyone when she was trapped behind those walls? The group was about to find out, because, in their exploration of the house, Stella and Ramón stumbled upon Sarah’s old bedroom, and her book of stories. Auggie and Chuck - who was so spot-on as the smart aleck sidekick that if this had been filmed in the 80s, he would have been played by Corey Feldman - warned Stella not to touch the book, but it was all for naught.

Not only did Stella touch the book, but she opened it, ran her fingers along the pages, and as if summoning her by some unknown spell, softly spoke the words, “Sarah Bellows, tell me a story.” In a move very reminiscent of Labyrinth, the words held more power than Stella realized. The book came to life and brought Sarah’s evil spirit with it. It wouldn’t be long before children would start disappearing as their stories were scrawled on the old tome’s pages in blood.

This movie was a lot darker than I thought it’d be. For some reason, I didn’t imagine anyone would actually die, since it was being marketed as sort of a “kid’s movie.” But I was wrong. Town delinquent Tommy goes down in spectacular fashion, with a pitchfork to the gut that turned him, gasping and gagging, into his own grotesque scarecrow.

And there were some real jump scares. I found myself hesitantly averting my eyes here and there, bracing for the moment of terror, while I noticed the woman in the seat next to me jumped at least three times. Of course, as a bit of an arachnophobic myself, I found “The Red Spot” to be the most horrific part of the film. Watching the one twitching leg poke out of pore Ruth’s (Natalie Ganzhorn) face was not only painful, but a little traumatizing, too, as I inadvertently spent the rest of the movie swiping imaginary spiders off of my legs and arms.

But Ruth wasn’t the only one to get the Scary Stories treatment. Tapping into everyone’s childhood fear of a bogeyman under the bed, Auggie got dragged away, leaving cringe-inducing scratch marks along the floor.

And Chuck, well, Chuck’s disappearance was troubling. He was captured by the “pale lady,” an impeccable recreation of the haunting Stephen Gammell image from the book’s tale, “The Dream.” This strange and unsettling monster seemingly hugged Chuck to death, pulling him into her grotesque form until he disappeared.

But by far, the most generally scary monster, reminiscent of something you’d see in typical horror fare, was “the Jangly man.” Now, having just re-read all three of the Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark books, I can tell you that there is no story dedicated to him. He appears to be a combination of “What Do You Come For?” - which is about a lonely, old woman whose wish for some company was nefariously answered in the form of rotted body parts falling down her chimney and putting themselves together to form a “great, gangling man” who danced about her living room - and “Me Tie Dough-ty Walker!”

It’s interesting, because that was always one of my least favorite stories, because it’s completely nonsensical, with a disembodied head yelling gibberish at a scared, young boy for no apparent reason. But in this iteration, it definitely has the capacity to haunt your nightmares.

This might be a strange thing to notice, but the font in the Sarah Bellow’s book was perfect. An eerily beautiful script, it was still legible enough to creep you out on those close-up shots of the pages.

Sarah’s favorite song was “The Hearse Song,” a ghostly number with lyrics like, “Don't you ever laugh as the hearse goes by / For you may be the next one to die… The worms crawl in / the worms crawl out / The worms play pinochle on your snout.” It played throughout the movie, but especially when something bad was about to happen. It’s amazingly unsettling, like a dark lullaby.

Much like The Ring, and other such horror films, there’s a dark story behind Sarah’s madness. But I won’t spoil it for you, as it’s almost certainly not what you’re expecting.

But Sarah was not the only weaver of tales in this flick, as there was an offhand comment about one of Stella’s works, which involved a boy named Sam, whose new dog turned out to be sewer rat - not unlike, “Sam’s New Pet,” from the third installment of Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. Then again, Stella is just another “lonely girl who’s good at telling scary stories.”

Though the setting is the late 60s, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark gave me all the 90s nostalgia vibes, conjuring memories of Goosebumps and Are You Afraid of the Dark? marathons. And, it doesn’t end there. Guillermo del Toro himself said he’d be happy to make all three films, and the conclusion of this movie definitely set up a sequel.

As Stella, her father (Dean Norris), and Ruth drove off, the former repeated the phrase from the beginning, “Stories hurt. Stories heal,” before promising to never stop looking for her missing friends, Chuck and Auggie.

Time will tell which stories del Toro and Øvredal choose to bring to life next - if any. But I do know one thing: if they’re anything like what I just saw on the big screen, I’ll surely be there to watch.

IMAGES: CBS FILMS

#blogposts #Scary stories to tell in the dark

26 notes · View notes

traincat · 6 years ago

Note

speaking of mcu spidey weirdness, am i the only one who feels like they tried to fuse flash with a harry on a particularly bad trip? i remember him being brown in a comic timeline but never mean when sober. and after pheathers, making the bully a smart member of a minority group just feels tonedeaft

I think there’s a very good argument for Norman and Harry being mixed race in the main canon, because I think Norman reads best as a character if there’s something about him that he’s personally and to his detriment deeply ashamed of and repressed about and that he goes to great lengths to cover up. This could be that he’s mixed race --- the tight curl pattern of the Osborn hair, and Harry’s afro in Spider-Gwen’s flashback scenes could lend themselves to this -- or that he’s Jewish -- again, the tight curl pattern of the Osborn hair and Harry’s afro in the Spider-Gwen flashbacks, along with the extremely questionable decision to have Harry bullied for being rich by having kids call him “the Green Goblin.” (It is actually still antisemitic if you don’t actually go all the way there, Jason Latour.) The self-hating Jew aspect definitely becomes problematic in a canon where Peter Parker isn’t himself openly and proudly canonically Jewish, so I tend to steer clear of this one, though I do think it could be very interesting in terms of Norman turning himself into the ultimate stereotype of the wealth-hoarding evil Jewish business man through his own self-hatred. My current favorite reading of Norman is that Norman is a deeply repressed gay man. There’s plenty of subtext here to support this: the obsession with Peter Parker as the young and strong masculine ideal, the deeply campy original Green Goblin design with the fuschia purse and the huge fake eyelashes, Norman’s eschewing and disdain for his genetic descendants, the paralleling between Norman’s abuse of Harry with a father’s sexual abuse of his son in The Child Within, and the seduction and later the torture of Flash Thompson when Norman recruited him to be his assistant after his return from the dead. It’s all potentially, to use a word I hate, very problematic without a deft hand in the storytelling, but I think done right and balanced against some honest and positive representation any of the above could offer up some very good stories.

Anyway, all that Osborn stuff aside, yeah, the decisions made with Flash in the MCU truly baffle me. I like the casting of Tony Revolori, who I really enjoyed in Grand Hotel Budapest, but the decision to make him a nerd who verbally bullies Peter instead of a jock who antagonizes Peter is bizarre, to say the least. I think I read an article somewhere that said the change was made because jocks aren’t the “in kids” anymore, which, like, presents a weird picture of current American high school politics where all the nerds are just picking on each other now in an attempt to become the new pop culture ruling class. Then there’s the fact that Flash, now A Smart Kid, is routinely passed over in favor of Peter, kicked off the decathlon in favor of Peter, and, during the Washington Monument scene, depicted as a person who would rather save a trophy than help his classmate and in-comics high school girlfriend, Liz. So now that Flash is brown, the MCU has decided to portray him as a smart kid who is routinely passed over for the supposedly smarter white kid, and a materialistic coward beside. I’ve seen Homecoming get a lot of praise for its diverse cast, and I have to say I do like much of the casting, but the follow through in the actual movie is, I would say, far less progressive than it looks on paper. See also: this being the first Spider-Man movie with a black love interest and coincidentally the first Spider-Man movie without a kiss scene in it, and the erasure of Mary Jane’s identity by pasting her nickname onto a character the screenwriters have been very open about saying isn’t Mary Jane, a character who isn’t even given a last name within the film, following the massive racist backlash after rumors broke out that Zendaya was playing Mary Jane.

It’s also important, in my opinion, to note that in main comics continuity Flash Thompson’s childhood was marked by violent and repeated physical abuse by his father. The Amazing Spider-Man (2012) is the only film franchise to reference this, even though Flash Thompson is a character who has appeared in all three Spider-Man film franchises. The Thompson family in 616 is depicted as extremely blue collar: Flash is a high school football star whose father is a cop and an alcoholic who beats his son and ridicules his wife. They live in a modest apartment. MCU Flash, by contrast, is depicted as a nerd who drives a very expensive car and gets ousted from the academic decathlon by Peter, who doesn’t even care about the decathlon and just needs an excuse to go to DC where -- conveniences of all plot conveniences -- the decathlon is being held. I mean, they just bussed my dad out to Brooklyn when he was a mathlete, but whatever. (Spider-Man: Homecoming has a deeply weird undercurrent about financial status; almost everyone in the movie is either depicted as comfortably middle class, including the Parkers, or as rich.) I’m going to admit: the scene where Peter steals and wrecks Flash’s car made me deeply uncomfortable in the theater, knowing Flash’s comics backstory. Absence of on-screen or referenced abuse is not, in and of itself, a lack of that abuse within the story, or rather an erasure of the contents of the work the story was adapted from. If we assume 616 is the main universe, and that everything leads out of there, then from my perspective, unless other evidence is offered up, there’s no reason to assume things don’t line up, i.e., without direct evidence otherwise I have to assume Flash is still a victim of parental abuse. Expensive gifts like a car isn’t direct evidence against that. Flash being a nerd now isn’t direct evidence against that.

(Spectacular Spider-Man #-1)

(Amazing Spider-Man #574)

(Venom (2011) #27)

So I think about scenes like this and then I think about Flash being the butt of the joke in Spider-Man: Homecoming over Peter stealing his car and at the very least, I have to say, I’m not happy with the lack of nuance presented, or the implication that the MCU’s Flash couldn’t be a victim of abuse because he’s a rich nerd in this iteration. It is, now that you mention it, a bizarrely Harry Osborn-esque take on the character: the expensive car, the rich background, smart but not as smart as Peter, a bit of a jerk to Peter in their early acquaintanceship in a verbal rather than a physical way, not exactly the bravest crayon in the box. But there’s an issue in that too because, like Flash, although rarely depicted as physically, Harry was also abused in his childhood by his father. So we’re back to square one with the car scene and some troubling implications, turning a character who bears the name of one abused character and wears the traits of another into the butt of a joke so Audi could fit another car into the movie.

Like I said, I do like the casting and I think Revolori is a great actor and did his best with the part he was given -- I just wish the character had been handled by the writers and director with any compassion. A big part of me wishes that instead of pasting Ned Leeds’ name over Ganke Lee, Miles Morales’ best friend, the MCU had compressed the timeline and just let Flash Thompson inhabit his future rule as Peter Parker’s best friend. Instead, we get Flash Thompson, The One Note Bully: Nerd Remix.

#flash thompson #*replies #traincat talks comics #traincat talks homecoming #mcu negativity/#mcu criticism/#long post/#child abuse cw/#also i keep seeing fics now where the avengers publicly humiliate flash to get revenge for peter and like yikes #Anonymous

103 notes · View notes

gdelgiproducer · 5 years ago

Note

What’s been your favorite staged version of JCS? (Non-concert)

First, a list of the staged (non-concert) versions of JCS I’ve seen: two high school productions (about which you’ll hear nothing in this post; it’s unfair to judge them in competition with pros), the closing performance of the 2000 Broadway revival, two performances of the national tour that followed said revival (one of which featured Carl Anderson as Judas and Barry Dennen – Pilate on the original album, Broadway, and in the 1973 film – as Herod), and four performances of a national tour initially billed as Ted Neeley’s “farewell” engagement in the role of Jesus. In total, discounting the number of performances of each, five productions, only three of which we will consider here.

The 2000 Broadway revival had basically all the problems of the video of the same production: I’m sure Gale Edwards is a fine director of other shows, but she missed the boat with this particular iteration of JCS. (Not having seen her original production at the Lyceum Theatre in 1996, which unfortunately never left that venue and was reportedly far better than the one that went wide, I can only comment on this version.) Her direction and the production design that accompanied it were full of the kinds of blatant, offensively obvious attempts at symbolism and subtlety that appeal only to pseudo-intellectual theater kids. In real life, there’s no such thing as obvious good vs. obvious evil (things just ain’t black and white, people), and any attempt to portray this concept on stage or in a film usually results in a hokey “comic book” product, which is kind of what the 2000 production was.

The first thing Edwards did was draw her line in the sand. “These are the good guys, and these are the bad guys.” The overall production design played into this ‘line in the sand’ feel as well, being so plain in its intentions as to almost beat you over the head with them. There may have been some good concepts mixed in, but for a show that runs on moral ambiguity, they were very poorly executed and did damage to the piece. Some examples:

Annas and Caiaphas were devoutly “evil,” seemingly designed to inspire fear. It’s easy to see good as so very good, and bad as so very bad; to want to have the evil in a nice little box. But it’s not that simple. As Captain Jean-Luc Picard (and now you know where my Star Trek loyalties lie, curse you!) once said, “…villains who twirl their mustaches are easy to spot. Those that clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged.” Evil isn’t always a clear and recognizable stereotype. Evil could be lurking inside anyone, maybe even in you, and you would never know. People aren’t inherently evil. Like good, it’s a role they grow and live into. And since history is basically a story of the developments and actions of humans over the ages, maybe it’s a mistake to view the characters who’ve played their parts in it so one-dimensionally. It doesn’t dismiss the evil they did, but it does allow one to understand that this potential to be good or to be evil is in everyone, and that it’s not always as simple as just doing the right thing.

Judas was an almost thoroughly unlikable prick (though Tony Vincent played him a tiny bit more sympathetically than Jerome Pradon in the video); in beating Jesus over the head with his cynicism and curt remarks, any sense of a fully three dimensional person was lost, leaving us with a total, utter dickhead. If the audience is to truly feel for Judas, and appreciate his fall, it’s imperative for them to see his positive relationship with Jesus. More importantly, it has to be readily apparent. It shouldn’t be the audience’s responsibility to assume as much. I never once saw any love, or even a hint of friendship, between Jesus and Judas in the 2000 production. Judas’ interactions with Jesus were a constant barrage of either completely in-your-face aggression, or more restrained (but still fully palpable) aggression. No hint of a conflict in him, or at least none the audience could see, and what use is a conflict or emotion if the audience isn’t privy to it?

And when not telegraphing an ultra-specific view of the story’s events, everything else about the design would’ve left a first-time viewer befogged. Young me liked the industrial, post-apocalyptic, pseudo-Gotham City atmosphere of the set. Older me still likes it (though I am firm in my opinion it works best on stage), but realizes what a mess the rest of it was. We’ve got Jesus and the apostles straight out of Rent, Roman guards that looked (with the choice of riot gear) like an army of Darth Vader clones with nightsticks substituting for light sabers, priests that practically stepped off the screen from The Matrix, a Pilate in generic neo-Nazi regalia, a Herod with showgirls and chorus boys that seemed to have visited from a flash-and-trash third-rate Vegas spectacular, a Temple full of ethnic stereotypes and a mish-mosh of dime-store criminals, and a creepy mob with a striking resemblance to The Addams Family that only popped up in the show’s darker moments. Lots of interesting ideas which might work (operative word being “might”) decently in productions of their own, all tossed in to spice up a rather bland soup. The solution to having a bunch of conflicting ideas is not to throw all of them at the wall at once; you look for a pattern to present itself, and follow it. If no pattern emerges from the ideas you have, it’s a sign you should start over.

You can see what my basic issue was: where other productions at least explored motivation, examining possibilities and presenting conflicting viewpoints for consideration, the 2000 production (when not utterly confused in its storytelling thanks to conflicting design) blatantly stated what it thought the motivation was without any room for interpretation – this is who they are, what they did, why they did it, so switch off your brain and accept what we put in front of you. Which, to me, is the total opposite of what JCS is about; it didn’t get famous for espousing that view, but for going totally against the grain of that.

The national tour at least had Carl and Barry to recommend for it the first time around, but for all the mistakes it corrected about the 2000 revival (swapping out the shady market in the Temple for a scene where stockbrokers worshiped the almighty dollar, with an electronic ticker broadcasting then-topical references to Enron, ImClone, and Viagra, among others, was a fun twist, and, for me, Barry Dennen gave the definitive performance of Herod), it introduced some confusing new ones as well:

For one, Carl – and, later, his replacement, Lawrence Clayton – looked twice the age of the other actors onstage. Granted, Christ was only 33 when this happened, but next to both Carl and Clayton, Eric Kunze (I thankfully never caught his predecessor) looked almost like a teenager. When Ted and Carl did the show in the Nineties and both were in their fifties, they were past the correct ages for their characters, but it worked – in addition to their being terrific performers and friends in real life whose chemistry was reflected onstage – because they were around the same age, so it wasn’t so glaring. Without that dynamic, the way Jesus and Judas looked together just seemed weird, and it didn’t help anyone accept their relationship.

Speaking of looking weird together, the performer playing Caiaphas – who was bald, and so unfortunately resembled a member of the Blue Man Group thanks to the color of lighting frequently focused on the priests – was enormously big and tall, while the actor in the role of Annas was extremely short. Basically, Big Guy, Little Guy in action. Every time I saw them onstage, I had to stifle the urge to laugh out loud. I’ve written a great deal about how Caiaphas and Annas are not (supposed to be) the show’s villains, but that’s still not the reaction I should have to them.

The relentlessness of pace was ridiculous. It was so fast that the show, which started at 1:40 PM, was down by 3:30 PM – and that included a 20-minute intermission. What time does that leave for any moments to be taken at all? A scene barely even ended before the next began. At the end of the Temple scene, Jesus threw all the lepers out, rolled over, and there was Mary singing the “Everything’s Alright” reprise already. How about a second to breathe for Mary to get there? Nope. How about giving Judas and Jesus two seconds’ break in the betrayal scene at Gethsemane? The guards were already grabbing Christ the minute he was kissed. I was so absolutely exhausted towards the end of the show that I was tempted to holler at the stage to please slow down for a minute. The pace didn’t allow for any moment in the show to be completed, if it was ever begun; it was just too fast to really take advantage of subtle touches and moments the actors could’ve had, and as a result, I think they were unable to build even a general emotional connection, because one certainly didn’t come across.

The cast was uniformly talented singing-wise, with excellent ranges and very accomplished voices. (In fact, the second time around, the woman understudying Mary, Darlesia Cearcy, walked away with the whole show in my opinion, and I am incredibly glad to have seen her career take off since then.) But, in addition to some being more concerned with singing the notes on the page just because they were there than imbuing them with emotion and motivation, the cast was undercut by the choices that production made with the music. For one, there’s a huge difference between singing “words and notes” and singing “lyrics and phrases.” When you have a phrase like “Ah, gentlemen, you know why we are here / We’ve not much time, and quite a problem here…” you sing the sentence, and if sometimes a word needs to be spoken, you do that. You don’t make sure you hit every single note by treating each like a “money note” (which you hit and hold as long as you can to make sure everyone hears it), dragging out the tempo to hang on to each note as long as you can. Generally, the actors were so busy making sure every note was sung – and worse, sung like a money note – that they missed the point of singing a phrase, and how to use one to their advantage. Caiaphas and Pilate were particularly egregious offenders. (I’ve never understood some of these conductors who are so concerned that every note written has to be sung. The result suffers from it.)

And then there’s Ted’s production. Of the three, it’s the one I liked the most, but that’s not saying much when it was better by default.

The production design was stripped-down, the set basically limited to a bridge, some steps, a stage deck with some levels, and a couple of drops (and a noose) that were “flown in.” The costumes were simple, the sound was very well-balanced, and the lighting was the icing on the cake. Combined, the story they told was clear.

The music sounded very full, considering the pit consisted of a five-piece band relying in part on orchestral samples.

Ted, for being of advanced age, was in terrific form vocally, if his acting fell back a little much on huge, obvious, emotive gestures and choices. (I love him and all, but his attempts at acting were kind of like a “Mr. Jesus” pageant, striking all the appropriate Renaissance poses. The film, through editing and close-ups, allows him a subtlety he just ain’t got onstage.)

And there were some beautiful stage pictures; for example, there was a drop with an image of a coin with Caesar’s head on it in the Temple scene, and it fell on the crowd when Jesus cleared out the riff-raff. In the leper sequence that followed, the chorus’ heads popped out of holes in the cloth, under which they undulated, pulsing to the beat, and rather than being treated as a literal mob scene, the sequence had a very dream-like effect, a mass of lost souls reaching out to Christ. It was rather like a Blake painting, with a creepy vibe in a different manner from the typical “physically overwhelm him” approach. He didn’t interact with them, didn’t even turn to look at them, until finally he whipped around with a banishing thrust of his arm, hollering “Heal yourselves!” Sometimes it was over-acted with annoying character voices (remember, I saw this four times), but when it wasn’t, the effect was chilling.

My main beef with the show was, oddly enough, on a similar line to my beef with Gale Edwards’ production: it drew lines in the sand. But in this case, it drew them with respect to Jesus’ divinity.

As written, JCS deals with Jesus as if he were only a man, and not the Son of God. The show never suggests that Jesus isn’t divine, but neither does it reinforce the view that he is. Portrayed in detail in JCS is the mostly-unexplored human side: ecstasy and depression, trial and error, success and regret. He agonizes over his fate, is often unsure of his divinity, and rails at God. Not so in this production. Aside from “The Temple” and “Gethsemane,” there was never any room for doubt that Jesus was the mystical, magic man portrayed in the Gospels.

At the top of the show, after a fight between his followers and the Romans during the overture (a popular staging choice I’m not a real fan of, but you’ve got to do something during that moment in a fully staged version, and I understand why it’s an easy choice to make for exposition purposes), Jesus made his majestic entrance, spotlit in robes that looked whiter than Clorox bleach could produce, and raised a man from the dead. Well, where’s the room for Judas to doubt? Clearly “this talk of God is true,” we just saw it! If this guy is actually capable of performing miracles, and more than that specializes in necromancy, good luck telling him that fame has gone to his head at the expense of the message and he’s losing sight of the consequences! Try explaining to anyone that that person is “just a man”!

If that weren’t enough, Jesus went on to have a constant connection with God throughout the show, speaking to a spotlight that focused only on him and often served to distract him from anything else happening onstage, and at the end, during “John 19:41,” his body separated from the cross, which fell back into the stage, and he ascended to heaven.

Now, though the former was admittedly played to excess (some reviewers unkindly compared Neeley to a homeless man with Bluetooth), there are arguments to be made in favor of both of these choices: a Jesus who constantly seeks a connection with God that isn’t reciprocated, searching for guidance or at least a friggin’ clue, is great foreshadowing for his eruption – and acceptance – in “Gethsemane.” As for the ascension, depending on how it’s staged, there’s room for argument that it could be interpreted more metaphorically than literally, as the moment when Jesus’ spirit is born, as Carl Anderson once put it (meaning, to me, that his message is given life and strength when his body fails him). But this production didn’t have that level of shading and layers to it, and coupled with the resurrection at the start, it defeated the rest of the story.

None of ‘em’s perfect, and I don’t think I could create the perfect one. Thus, concert.

#AMA

5 notes · View notes

brakken-spideyverse · 6 years ago

Text

Answering some recent asks below the cut <3

@gabedoesstuff asked:

So! What did you think of Venom? I personally loved it!

‘Ey, that’s good to hear! I have no plans to see it in theatres, but might check it out on home release. They unfortunately didn’t pull me in enough with the trailers, which I went into a bit more here. Glad people are finding things to enjoy from it though!!

Anonymous asked:

heyo! i was at the stream last night, and i finally got my photoshop up and running, and i was wondering if you could repeat your brush settings? it was SO NICE

For my sketching, that was the simple hard round brush with opacity on pressure. Then a big soft brush also with pressure-opacity (and slight pressure on the size) to faintly erase parts that need correcting/refining. Then back with the hard round, but at a smaller size for further details! Pretty simple, but gets enough down that I can use it as messy lineart for my looser stuff. Once I add my colour layer, I also like to put the sketch lines on a clipping mask over the flats so that any excess brush strokes get cut away from the silhouette! I can go over this in a future stream if ya like :)

Anonymous said:

All I can think of is your peter meeting the PS4 version of Spider-Man. And when your peter asks who he is, your MJ comes in and says, “He’s you but whiter.”

Haha, pretty much. I seem to recall something like that with Ultimate Nick Fury. I definitely see my Peter being fascinated by PS4 Peter′s lens technology. I hope the two MJ’s would get along!

Anonymous asked:

Which cartoon was your favorite? Any thoughts about the new one?

Spectacular Spider-Man Season 1 is my fave cartoon (and one of my fave Spidey iterations, period). I like some of the style in the new one, but I wasn’t taken by their webisodes setting up his origin, so I gave the show a pass. Felt like they were playing Peter’s nerd card way too excessively. I might check it out with enough at some point, but with Spidey PS4 DLC and Into The Spider-Verse on the horizon, I’m more than content on Spidey-content currently!

Anonymous asked:

Does Peter end up with Gwen or MJ? Do they all stay friends?

With current plans, MJ is endgame some ways down the line. I wanna get Peter and Gwen together before that, as I’m interested in developing how her getting spider powers affects things. But I’m not interested in pushing any relationship drama too far, and I gotta say I get such a kick out of writing them all as friends. Friends are good.

Anonymous asked:

thanks to you Brakken you inspired me to try make a Spiderman story but im having bit of a problem on how to end it any tips?

Ahh, that’s so awesome!

Hmm, if we’re talking a short story, I like to end my comics with some kind of callback ’beat’. Pulling a reference from earlier and either re-contextualising it or adding emphasis to it.

In ‘Makeover’, MJ off-handedly describes Cap as looking like a dancer, and then the comic closes with her arranging dance lessons for Peter. This intends to surprise the audience, but we’re also seeing his next step into hitting that big-level hero status.

In the middle of ‘Problems’, we get Johnny laughing at Peter’s predicament, and then after the pep talk, Peter manages a small chuckle. If we’d ended as Johnny flies off, we wouldn’t have enough info to assume that the scene changed anything for Peter! So even though he starts and ends the comic in the exact same position, I’ve aimed to emphasise his newfound headspace by having him mimic Johnny’s reaction.

And ‘Secrets’ is a little bit different. It pretends like it’s going to end with the callback by having them joke around, but then it slams down hard with the final page. That last moment wouldn’t be as effective without the optimism just before it. (Also I specifically had Harry and Peter talk about the new suit and have a bit of a laugh to reflect the previous two stories, so Peter is thrown back into doubt as he realises it’s not all so easy.)

So generally, I think about what I’m wanting to say - what the whole comic is saying, and find the ‘beat’ - the phrase, or action, or moment, that best exemplifies that. And then remind the reader of it through repetition or development. Hope that makes sense! Have fun working on your stories ^_^

And I’ve seen peeps’ requests for certain characters! Will work on those as I get time to - maybe another stream soon? Thanks for checking out the ‘verse, y’all!

33 notes · View notes

lichlover · 7 years ago

Note

3, i wanna say 12 but lup doesnt count, 13, 14, 15, 21, 23, 25, and 27 but im not forcing you to answer that last one that shit is hard

fanfic end of the year asks!

3. favorite line/scene you wrote this year

gosh, that’s a hard one. no spoilers for anyone who wants to read it still, but the last half of the first chapter of the other side of paradise turned out really well? i’m really proud of how harmonic the dialogue and descriptions are, particularly because i tend to struggle with that sort of thing, and i feel like i have merle and magnus’s voices pretty solid. it was also super fun setting up for the big twist at the end of the chapter!

12. favorite character to write about this year

god dammit, eden.

okay, it’s no secret that taako is one of my absolute favorites, and just looking at the sheer wordcount i’ve racked up for him alone, i know the numbers are well in his favor. but i will also cheat a little and say this, because i want to tease an upcoming special something: ren is so much fun to write. she’s a doll with a good heart and a wonderful vibe, and writing from her perspective gives me the best of warm fuzzy feelings.

13. favorite writing song/artist/album of this year

this playlist, for sure! there’s something about the warmth and rhythm of 20s-40s jazz that never fails to be inspiring.

14. a fic you didn’t expect to write

most definitely rise, thanks to someone and their absolutely stellar fic, just saying, eden. the idea was completely impulsive and self-indulgent, and i was originally just planning to do a little drabble in response, but the longer it went on, the more invested i became. i’ve never been happier to be in umbra staff angst hell and—psst—if you liked rise, just know it isn’t the last you’ll be seeing of lup sassing an umbrella.

15. something you learned this year

i’m a good writer.

no, really.

like, i’ve always known that i’m above average in grammar and spelling, and i can certainly put together some clever sentences when i want to. but this is the year i learned that not only do i have talent, i can do some pretty great things with that talent. this is the year i stopped making excuses for myself and started taking compliments when they came. it’s been hard, and i still catch myself self-deprecating more than i’d like to admit, but i know that i’m a good writer. even on my worst days, i excel in my craft unlike anybody else does, and that counts for something.

21. most memorable comment/review

okay, i swear this isn’t just me sucking up, but you left a comment on rise about how my lup voice is “incredibly original and fittingly charismatic” and it’s really stuck with me. lup always struck me as a very charismatic person through wit, intelligence, and compassion alone, and i’m so, so happy that i was able to convey that through a fic that’s solely dialogue.

also, all iterations of “I WILL JOIN THE LUP CULT” on obtaining a cult following (and other essentials) were an absolute delight and i just want all of you to know that you are now formal, admitted members of the lup cult. congratulations. please pick up your red robes and “best of lup” compilation cd at the door.

23. fics you wanted to write but didn’t

ugh, i have a taakitz ice skating au (not that one, the other one) that i just cannot do right now, not with eoae and cyberpunk au ongoing. patience is a very difficult thing for me, but i forced myself to set it on the back burner for now. maybe next year.

aaaaand… there’s another reaper squad bonding fic i have in its conceptual stages! a very silly, self-indulgent thing that ends with krav, lup, and barry getting tipsy and telling stories. i’m very excited to write it.

andasequeltorisebutthat’salongtimecominglmao!!

25. a fic you read this year you would recommend everyone read

i’m going to cheat again because holy heck, yall, there are so many amazing fics out there that you need to read.

permanence by @raininginadelaide is one of my absolute favorite fics. ever. it’s a gorgeous taakitz modern au and it’s been hugely influential in how i’ve developed my writing style.

bury the lead by @marywhal is the best feel-good high school au you’ll read all year. it’s narratively and emotionally satisfying in the best of ways, and it also has one of the most solid taako povs i’ve ever read.

hold together by @transdavenport is chilling and visceral and utterly gorgeous. it pitches you headfirst into some grade-a eldritch imagery and amazing reaper-centric concepts with excellent writing to boot.

and i recommend absolutely anything written by @inkedinserendipity, but i will link a quiet refrain in particular. this, everybody, was one of the first taz fics i ever read, and what spurred me to start writing for the fandom. it’s heartwarming and utterly spectacular in every aspect of characterization, and it’ll always hold a special place in my heart.

27. favorite fanfic author of the year

well. guess i’ll die.

no, honestly, though, i’m going to give a shoutout to the entire taz fic writers discord right here. this is a groupchat full of the most fascinating, brilliant angst liches i have ever met, and it’s the oddest family i’ve ever joined, but i’m so, so glad i did. i’ve read so many stellar fics over the year just thanks to them alone, and every day is just a constant flood of support and inspiration. thank you, all of you. you’re uniquely wonderful and i’m sure i wouldn’t be where i am in the fandom without you.

that said, i have to give another shoutout to @inkedinserendipity for literally inspiring me to get involved with the taz fanfic scene. seren’s writing is accessible and stunning—visually, character-wise, plot-wise, in absolutely everything she does. seren, i swear i’ll get through your entire fic archive one day. i might burn through all the emotions i have on reserve, but by god, it’ll be worth it.

#helloyoubeautifulsoul #ask #writing tag #oh boy i sure did have several emotions here #ily eden <333333

14 notes · View notes

themosleyreview · 8 years ago

Text

The Mosley Review: King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

Aside from Robin Hood, the one legend that has had sooooo many different versions, iterations and retellings is King Arthur. Time and time again stage productions, television series and filmmakers have all tried their hand in telling a defining version of the legend and surprisingly the general audience and I have not gotten bored so far. I believe the reason why is the fact that it’s one of the most epic and engaging stories ever told and there is so much material you can mine from it and twist around. My 2 favorite films that focus on King Arthur and his favorite companion Sir Lancelot, are First Knight and Antoine Fuqua’s King Arthur. Just those 2 films alone give you a difference in tone and where you can go in the timeline. You can stay lighthearted and focus on the love stories while still delivering the classically epic tone or you can focus on a more grounded, bloody and realistic version. Well one of my favorite filmmakers Guy Ritchie, decided to take the latter approach by reworking the origin of Arthur and for the most part it worked. The story this time is darker, grittier and edgier which is exactly what you’d expect if you’ve seen the director’s past works. I really liked that right from the badass opening prologue, this version fully embraces the magical part of Arthur’s legend and we get to see the dark side of magic which blows open the doors to endless possibilities. The scope is great and the visuals are outstanding, but like most of the recent films Guy Ritchie has made, they all suffer from the same thing: All style and no substance. We are treated to some amazing visual effects set pieces with Excalibur and the magic being unleashed by a Mage in the film, but the story itself felt empty, cliché, chopped to pieces and at times incoherent tonally.

The cast all around is full of talented people and sometimes it felt like a few cast members were plucked right from the set of Game of Thrones figuratively and literally. Charlie Hunnam has made his way into leading man status and he was an excellent choice to play a more street smart bruiser version of Arthur. To see him go from that type of man to what looks to be the beginning of a younger and tougher version of Arthur, was something fun and could be promising in the future. Djimon Hounsou has been popping up all over the place and he is always fantastic to watch and he was great as Sir Bedivere. Astrid Berges-Frisbey was cool as The Mage in the film, but sometimes I felt she was just really monotone through many scenes. I was happy Eric Bana was Arthur’s father King Uther because I don’t think there has been an on screen appearance of Arthur’s father that I can think of and he was excellent and it always good to see Bana on screen. Jude Law is also one of my favorite actors and he was good as Vortigern, but I felt that there was not a real compelling or redeeming quality to him. If you’re gonna have a good villain, then make him relatable instead of the cliché jealous brother who wants power.

The score by Daniel Pemberton was badass and epic. The visual effects in the film are excellent and when the power of Arthur’s sword Excalibur gets to show off its capabilities, it is spectacular. All of Guy Ritchie’s trademark editing in the action and in telling a story in comedic fashion is all there and it’s great. Like I said before, though his style is there in every major action scene or dialogue scene, it doesn’t help the fact that the story itself feels so stretched thin and just filled with visual noise. I liked the grittier tone, but it all gets washed away towards the end and gets a little too fantastical. Overall, I like the new direction they are taking the legend of King Arthur, but I really think the story needs to be a little more grounded next time around and more defined and a way better villain needs to be introduced. So should you go see this in theaters? I would say yes because it’s still entertaining, but I would definitely lower your expectations.

#king arthur legend of the sword #charlie hunnam #jude law #eric bana #astrid berges frisbey #djimon hounsou

2 notes · View notes

rate-out-of-10 · 7 years ago

Text

DESTINY 2 REVIEW

Here we are. Three years later and Destiny 2 is finally in our hands. Bungie has put a lot of work into building Destiny into the goliath it is today. With three raids, a dozen strike missions, a bunch of DLC content, and a ton of loot, Destiny was objectively massive. Destiny 2 has a lot riding on it, with it being the sequel to a game that many thought didn’t need a sequel, just a consistent stream of DLC and updates. What exactly did Destiny 2 build on? Is it a vast improvement from the first game? What will returning players find new and exciting? Is it a big enough draw for new players, or even players that abandoned the first game?

REVIEW NOTE: This review of Destiny 2 is based off of my experiences with the game on Xbox One.

Destiny 2 seeks to up root all that Destiny built from the get-go. The game begins with a brilliant cinematic of The Tower falling at the hands of a special Cabal force called “The Red Legion”. This was a very divisive start and I appreciated it a lot. It gave returning players a sense of loss (our loot! No!), and new players a fresh start, not feeling at all left behind from the first three years of this universe. Our Light is taken away and for the first time in centuries, humanity and the Guardians are vulnerable. I was excited to see how this new dynamic would play out through the campaign, but it only lasted a quick 2 or 3 “missions” until you are given your power back. It was a bit underwhelming. Sure, I have a lot of fun with my Super abilities, but the campaign seemed to be afraid of delving deeper into more groundbreaking territory. There is a line spoken by one of the characters in a side quest that really sums up how I feel about the campaign: “Don’t venture further than you have to, Guardian.” The encounters you’re faced with through the story feel very barren and recycled quite a bit. There are some new pieces, yes, such as the involvement of cinematic cut-scenes that fleshed out some of the returning characters, as well as the new ones a bit. But these weren’t enough to make the story feel authentic. The game often falls into the same traps the first did. Wave combat, mini bullet sponge bosses, or all too convenient plot points. It was nice to have a real villainous face to latch onto, and Dominus Ghaul was really great to look at, but he still felt bland. The final boss fight against him, where he has harnessed the power of the Light, could’ve been a spectacular one, capping the story mode off nicely. But it was short, too easy, and didn’t feel like a nice staple to this story. Throughout the story mode, the general feeling of troughing through it comes up quite often. Though, it’s not a bad campaign, I’ve played much worse before. Luckily the voice work from the cast keeps it from feeling too trivial (yes there are some annoying cheesy one-liners here and there). You can play through the campaign and get comfortable with the controls, all the new gameplay dynamics, get a feel for all the different enemy types, and also acquire some pretty nice loot (that may be the most significant draw to finishing the story mode).

Now the “end game” content is clearly the reason why we devoted players sink countless hours into the game. The loot system is very competent now, which should be a no-brainer compared to the trash heap that Destiny was at launch in 2014. By the end of the first game’s tenure it was a mammoth of content and loot and the loot system was fixed dramatically through that time, and it’s essentially moved right over into Destiny 2. This is the copy & paste stuff I don’t mind at all. The loot system needs to feel competent and rewarding and we need to feel the time invested in the game reflects back with the armor we wear and the weapons we have. Exotics don’t feel all too much locked behind closed doors as they once did. In fact you’ll snag a couple through the story mode. Destiny 2 gets players off to a fast start with acquiring some great gear early on. Some things are definitely welcome additions, like the in-game maps of the areas you can explore, lost sectors (aka mini-dungeons), and the ability to travel where you want, or from activity to activity, without having to go to orbit every single time. Thank you, Bungie, but these are things that many come to expect from exploration centric RPGs and MMOs.

The Leviathan Raid is massive and action-packed. And this is the sort of thing where Destiny 2 shines. Rewarding loot, interesting encounters with changing dynamics that stress teamwork and a game plan, and grand epic scenery and scope. It’s not my favorite Raid that we’ve seen, but it’s still jam packed with content and rewards. The strikes in Destiny 2 feel and play mostly fresh, with some new gameplay elements added to them (but that might certainly be because I haven’t played them to death yet). But my general complaint about all the “end game” is that there isn’t enough. A handful of strikes, repetitive public events, and a raid isn’t enough for me to feel the game is full. It feels much more populated than the launch of Destiny, but that’s not really saying much. Destiny 2, in terms of content doesn’t feel like a real step up. We’re given dates for the first two DLCs for year 1 of Destiny 2, but honestly it irks me to think that Bungie plans on keeping content hidden from us until they decide to sell it to us later. The micro transactions in the game are deplorable. Why do I want to pay for “Silver”? Why wouldn’t you, Bungie, just have all the content you can muster in the game at launch, and have us earn the gear through challenges and more strikes and quests? Don’t lock away stuff from the get-go and make us buy a season pass right from the start. This was one of the biggest complaints we had for the launch of Destiny.

Now, the menu and character pages were revamped somewhat. Instead of a “Primary, Special, Heavy” load out, it’s now a “Kinetic, Energy, Power” loadout. This allows for some more varying weapon combos. For instance, I can equip a kinetic Scout Rifle, a solar damage Auto Rifle in the energy weapon spot, and one of the new grenade-launchers in the Heavy spot. It’s an interesting change of pace for the game, but not a needed change. I would’ve much rather Bungie add some of the new weapon types that they did and keep the old loadout system, and maybe focus on adding a bunch more weapons and gameplay dynamics. There are new subclasses for each character type as well, and most of the old subclasses return. I’m still a bit sad that my favorite class for Warlocks, Sunsinger, is gone. I may just go back and play the first game to relive the glory days of my self-revive. But each class now has different subsections that cater to players who are more defensive/support oriented, and others who are more offensive/attack oriented. I’m very excited to find my favorite build for all my characters. As of right now, my favorite Warlock build is Voidwalker with the Attunement of Hunger subset. The leveling system that Destiny introduced in The Taken King expansion essentially returns intact, but a few slight differences. Now, engrams drop with a set power level when they drop, so decrypting them immediately is the best way to go, rather than sitting on them until you get to a higher level and open them up to a higher level. Factions work slightly differently in Destiny 2 as well. Instead of aligning yourself with a faction and leveling up to get gear from them, there are different factions on each explorable planet and completing activities (public events, adventures, lost sectors, etc.) there grant you Tokens, for the faction of that planet, you can turn in for gear. It’s a nice change I think and gives me reason to go and patrol the planets and complete the challenges on each planet. For some reason, Bungie thought “one time use” shaders were a good idea, and it costs currency to apply them to your weapons and armor. It wasn’t a good idea.

Perhaps the most significant change to the Destiny layout is the introduction of in-game clans. Players can now form clans and keep track of their clan activity and achievements in game. This is much needed improvement to the playability of the game. Now clan members can share loot when they finish certain activities. Like if your clan mates complete the Nightfall strike without while you were at work, all you have to do is go the Tower and meet with Hawthorne and she’ll give you some loot for your clan completing that activity. It’s a nice add that promotes more people being a part of groups and playing with more people. However, solo players aren’t left out. With the addition of Guided Games, solo players can find fireteams, in the game, to help them play activities that require more than one player. How it will work with the Leviathan Raid, we will see, but it’s a nice thought nonetheless.

PvP doesn’t get much of a touch up in Destiny 2. The team sizes switch from 6v6 to 4v4. New maps and new game modes don’t really make the game standout from the previous entry. The PvP is still remarkable well-balanced, and the loot you can acquire from The Crucible can be great. It’s fun to play for a little while, but its simply not my style of play. Other PvP oriented players may find a lot to enjoy from The Crucible since it's a very easy game to pick up and learn very quickly. It also can be very rewarding as you get better and play more competitive modes and Trials makes its return.

Destiny 2 isn’t an overhaul of the universe, it’s not a giant leap forward for the series; it’s simply just another iteration in the franchise. Returning players will have enough to latch onto to keep them going for hours on end, new players will find something worthwhile here for sure, since the game feels a bit more streamlined to appeal to a wider audience, but perhaps those players who gave up on the first game at any point will feel that Destiny 2 is just more of the same. Some areas of the game shine and are spectacular, and other drag on and feel bland or precarious. Graphically, the game is one of the best looking titles right now, the same was said for the first game, and the sound system and score is impeccable. Bungie knows what they’re doing in these regards, for sure. Whether you’re a returning faithful Destiny player or a newbie, there’s a lot stuff here for everyone, however some may feel there’s more than enough, and others may feel it’s all the same and not enough.

FINAL RATING: 7/10

#destiny 2 #destiny #bungie #gaming #video game #xbox #xbox one #ps4 #playstation #review #game review #video game review

0 notes

kayawagner · 7 years ago

Text

What Am I Playing Right Now?

Since my GM hiatus started back in June 2017, I used the opportunity to play in as many games as possible. For a very long time I was basically the go-to GM for many of my friends, but I didn’t get to play as often as I liked. Being the GM is fun, and it’s something very dear to me, BUT sometimes you just need to stay on the other side of the GM’s screen for a while. So, what games have I been playing during these almost 12 months?

Mutant Year Zero & Gen Lab Alpha If you’ve followed this blog for a while you know that I am a fan of post-apocalyptic settings in general and the Mutant games by Free League in particular. Mutant Year Zero is definitely one of the most exciting and immersive games I’ve played so far. Since I am playing one of the bosses in our Ark (which is a derelict aircraft carrier), the game is sometimes pretty political. My character, Washington, is an idealist, trying to build a new civilization on the ruins of the past. He strongly believes in compassion, reason, and justice. In a way he sometimes feels like an anachronism. I have to admit that Washington shares a lot with myself, aside from the fact that I don’t have the Mind Terror mutation in real life.

MY0 has all the elements I love: drama, politics, intrigue, exploration. Matthias, our GM, is also doing an awesome job running the game. He even manages what usually fails spectacular: while he’s running the game, he also plays his own player character. This is usually a recipe for disaster, but in Matthias’ case it works great.

I’ve already wrote about our Genlab Alpha game in my review of the core rules, so I will skip it here.

Shadowrun 3rd Edition This is a game I’ve been playing for years now. And even though I think that the rules are a mess, the game itself can be a lot of fun. Planning runs, trying to get to our goals without even raising an alarm is a lot of fun, and sometimes we even managed to have some flawlessly executed heists. But usually things go terribly wrong and everything ends in a messy fight. Since we usually ignore some of the more tedious rules (like bioware stress etc.), our characters got very powerful, very quickly. While some games might break down with characters that powerful, our GM just raises the stakes a bit. Our Shadowrun campaign is over-the-top and great fun, but all good things must end eventually, so we decided our current adventure will be the last. We’re dealing with dragons and their machinations this time, which is IMHO very fitting for our last bow.

Numenera Numenera is one of the games I enjoyed running the most. It perfectly suits my GMing style and improvising whole scenarios was perfectly possible. From a lazy GM’s perspective the Cypher System is just a joy to work with. But I also fell in love with the setting. It’s fantastical, wild, weird, and fun. When I first picked it up I hoped someone else would be willing to run it, so I could play it myself. So I was overjoyed when my Shadowrun GM invited me to his Numenera game which he has been running for a small group of friends for a while. After leafing through the Character Options 2 book, I quickly decided to play an Artificially-Intelligent Seeker Who Speaks to the Datasphere. Unfortunately scheduling has been a bit of an issue, so we haven’t played more than once since I joined, but I had a blast!

Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition When our Traveller GM told us that he wasn’t able to run as often in the future because of an increased workload at his job, one of the players stepped up and offered to run “Curse of Strahd” for us. So we decided to pause the Traveller campaign for a while, so that we can play some D&D 5th Edition in the coming months. Ravenloft is one of my favorite D&D setting and I think the latest iteration of D&D is probably its best. I had mixed results actually running it, but the prospect of actually playing it made me quite excited. I eventually decided to play a Moon Elf Warlock with a Celestial patron, with a custom background: Detective. Think of an Elven Sherlock Holmes. One of the other players even decided to play my sidekick, so in a way he’s the Watson to my Holmes. Together with a Human cleric and two Dwarves (one sorcerer and one ranger) we were sent out to investigate Wolf attacks in Daggerford, which turned out to be caused by Werewolves. While following the tracks we were suddenly engulfed in Mists which brought us to a different plane… While I was looking for inspiration for my character I noticed that a lot has happened since I last looked into D&D 5th Edition. There’s a lot of homebrew and 3rd party material available, which is usually of high quality. I got also quite interested in Matt Mercer’s campaign setting again, and currently I am tempted to buy a copy – just in case I want to run D&D 5th Edition again.

Star Wars Edge of the Empire The most regular game I currently play in is our Edge of the Empire campaign in which I play probably my most quirky character. Zid, or Captain Zid, as he usually calls himself, is a Gand Fringer who recently discovered that he has some connection to the force. After an exploration of the Jedi temple of Tython he started to follow the path of the Jedi, which sometimes comes in conflict with the realities of the hard life on the Outer Rim, and his naiveté. While I was pretty skeptical about the games’ mechanics at first, I quickly fell in love with it. It might not be as simple and straightforward as WEG’s Star Wars which still has a special place in my heart, but interpreting the dice rolls can lead to some pretty cool results sometimes. While we have dealt with some pretty grim and serious issues in the campaign so far, the mood at the game table is usually quite light-hearted and fun, sometimes bordering on the silly, especially when Zid is doing one of his weird dances again.

Jovian Chronicles Last but not least there’s the Jovian Chronicles game I recently joined. It seems I am not the only person out there who loves the hard-science mecha RPG by Dreampod 9. An old friend of mine introduced me to this GM who was dying to run this fine game, and I immediately took the opportunity. What I am not too fond off are the rules of the 2nd Edition (which is the one were using). While the basic dice mechanic is quite simple and easy to understand, the overall system feels a bit quirky and has a lot of fiddly bits to it. From what I remember (I haven’t read it in a while) the 1st Edition made more sense to me. But I can live with this as long as the game itself is fun. And so far it is! My character is basically the Jovian equivalent of Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan. At least that’s how I conceptualized the character, we’ll see how he turns out after playing him for a while. In our first session we ended up in the middle of a terror attack by unknown forces and my fellow player characters were “volunteered” for the Jovian intelligence services in order to help me investigate the incident. Unfortunately for my character this feels more like a job for a chaperone. I am currently extremely excited about what the GM will throw at us next.

First Look: Barebones Fantasy Role-playing Game

Savage Worlds, playing The Wild Hunt (and a long winded retrospective…)

Is Anyone Still Playing Alternity?

What Am I Playing Right Now? published first on https://supergalaxyrom.tumblr.com

0 notes

wonderfulworldofmichaelford · 5 years ago

Text

Psycho Analysis: Van Pelt

“A hunter from the darkest wild, who'll make you feel just like a child.”

Jumanji is already one of Robin Williams’s most enjoyable films, being a fun dark fantasy adventure film based around a supernatural board game, and while the board game itself is technically the main antagonist, its desire to test its players is given form in the maniacal hunter Van Pelt. And while I certainly would not argue that Jumanji is the deepest film ever made or anything like that, I think there is a bit of unique symbolism and interesting character quirks that make Van Pelt an enjoyable antagonist.

Actor: Johnathan Hyde portrays Van Pelt, and interestingly enough, he also plays Alan Parrish’s father. This bit of casting is honestly brilliant; think of the description of Van Pelt quoted above, used to announce his arrival from the game into the world - he is said to “make you feel just like a child.” And who above all others makes Alan feel just like a child at this point? His father. Van Pelt thus becomes symbolic of Alan’s parental issues, which makes his overcoming Van Pelt in the end all the more poignant and powerful. On a more meta level, it is an amusing coincidence Robin Williams starred in a film where the father and the antagonist share an actor, something typically the case when it comes to Captain Hook/Mr. Darling in theatrical adaptations of Peter Pan, whose eponymous character Williams had played five years prior to this film. It was likely unintentional, but it is an amusing thing to note.

Motivation/Goals: Van Pelt is clearly a creation of the game, a hunter conjured up by whatever poor schmuck draws his card and given a form that will cause the most psychological damage as well as the most physical damage. To that end, he relentlessly pursues Alan with the intent of killing him, with nothing stopping him and very little actually slowing him down. In fact, Van Pelt seems to be indestructible, likely a side effect of his supernatural nature. Nothing short of beating the game is enough to defeat him, and his goal is just to make that as hard as possible by targeting the one who brought him out. It’s a simple motivation, but it’s pretty effective and allows room for all the other insanity of Jumanji to take the stage without him overshadowing it entirely. He ends up feeling more like an extension of the game’s will than anything, and that’s honestly for the best.

Personality: Relentless, implacable, and clearly very bloodthirsty: these are the traits that define Van Pelt. Considering he’s just another manifestation of the board game, he didn’t even need a personality, but as the game tends to exaggerate real life dangers of the jungle, so too did they exaggerate the stereotypical “Great White Hunter” character into its perfect form. An interesting thing to note about him as that he seems to have a certain respect for Alan, and despite being incredibly dangerous and skilled never seems to land a single hit. An interesting idea is that perhaps he is intentionally missing as part of some ploy on the game to help Alan overcome his father issues and truly mature; of course, it could just be that Van Pelt enjoys the chase more than he does the kill.

Final Fate: Alan calls out “Jumanji,” ending the game and causing Van Pelt to be sucked back into the board. This version of Van Pelt would never be seen again, for obvious reasons; using someone else’s symbolic antagonizing force would be a bit weird, no? Van Pelt does show up in a different form in this film’s sequel, with some more intriguing powers but a lot less plot relevance and personality.

Best Scene: In an amusing and darkly comical scene, Van Pelt decides to forego any form of background checks while attempting to purchase a fancy new gun, instead opting to dump a pile of gold right on the gun shop clerk’s desk. Thankfully it is not this ridiculously easy for mentally unstable lunatics to buy dangerous weapons and perform horrible crimes with them, and this sort of thing only happens in fiction… Ahem.

Best Quote: His introductory quote: First, a bullet from offscreen whizzing by Alan’s head, followed by: "You miserable coward! Come back and face me like a man!"

Final Thoughts & Score: Van Pelt is definitely more of a living setpiece, an obstacle to be overcome much like the other supernatural critters the game unleashes, but he’s one with a lot of dramatic and thematic weight to him, seeing as he represents Alan’s conflict with his father that is set up at the film’s start. He’s quite similar to the T-800 in a lot of ways, seeing as he is a hyper-competent implacable and unstoppable assassin sent by a fantastical force to ensure the continued existence of its creator, with a dash of Captain Hook thrown in for personality and the little bit of symbolism present in theater adaptations of Peter Pan.

Van Pelt is a solid 7/10 for the level of symbolic brilliance he brings to the table, but I can’t justify rating him any higher because, ultimately, he is just another figment crafted by Jumanji to make the game more entertaining, meaning he has no real backstory, goals, or motivation and exists only to cause trouble. Still, for what he is, he’s more entertaining and intriguing than he has any right to be.

But you know who isn’t entertaining or intriguing?

Psycho Analysis: Russell Van Pelt

Ok, so that was unnecessarily dismissive and harsh. I actually think that the iteration of Van Pelt from Welcome to the Jungle has some pretty interesting concepts going for him. Ultimately though he’s kind of done in by the fact that he is the villain in an 80s video game, albeit a supernatural one. And 80s video games were not exactly known for their intriguing, complex villains.

Motivation/Goals: So this Van Pelt actually has a backstory, and it’s kind of interesting too: he was once a determined archaeologist who just wanted to have some proof of the Jaguar Shrine... unfortunately, said proof was the Jaguar’s Eye, which is the Chaos Emerald seen in the picture above.

Here’s the problem: as he is a generic antagonist created to oppose our heroes, he has no motivation other than that he wants to use the jewel for nebulous nefarious reasons. He kind of just exists to be a threat, and yeah, it makes sense, but it is a bit of a letdown compared to the original. In fact, he’s very much a non-action villain and doesn’t even really directly confront the heroes until the very end, and even then it’s not like he has some spectacular throwdown. You’d think the guy with the one magical glowy eye would put up a better fight, but maybe Dr. Sivana and Sans Undertale just set the bar too high for glowy-eyed super battles.

Final Fate: The heroes return the eye, and he collapses into a big pile of rats and bugs. Why does he do this? I’ll get into it more below. Needless to say, he’s beaten in a way that lines up with all unsatisfactory 80s video game endings.

Final Thoughts & Score: I definitely don’t hate Russell Van Pelt, but I think that he ultimately fails to even come close to recapturing the magic the original Van Pelt had. This is despite of, amusingly enough, having just about everything the original lacked: he has a backstory, he has intriguing powers, and he looks genuinely intimidating. The problem is that nothing is done with him and his motivations aren’t explained at all, and he ultimately lacks any sort of personality to try and glean some entertainment from.

It stings all the more because he utilizes one of my favorite tropes: The Worm That Walks. Essentially this trope is when a character is, in actuality, a mass of worms, bugs, or whatever other creepy critters you might want in there. Oogie Boogie is one of cinema’s shining examples of such a villain, and something of the gold standard; these sorts of villains are fun and creepy when utilized correctly. As you might of guessed, with Van Pelt... they don’t. It’s kind of just there to add to his creep factor and doesn’t much come into play very often. When he does utilize this strange power to store animals inside himself and add them to his hive mind, it’s suitably disturbing and eerie, but it’s not a major focus.

Still, I don’t think I’d give him more than a 4/10. Yes, he is a generic doomsday villain, but at least in this instance there’s actually a legitimate in-story justification for that. And even if they don’t use it to its full effect, I do think that his powers are really cool and the backstory he has is pretty neat. I think I would have preferred if they just tossed aside the backstory stuff and go for the more psychological approach of the original, but I guess that wasn’t exactly in the cards. Ah well, you can’t win them all I suppose.

#Psycho Analysis #Van Pelt #Jumanji #Johnathan Hyde #Welcome to the Jungle #bobby cannavale

29 notes · View notes

kayawagner · 7 years ago

Text

What Am I Playing Right Now?

I’ve already wrote about our Genlab Alpha game in my review of the core rules, so I will skip it here.

First Look: Barebones Fantasy Role-playing Game

Savage Worlds, playing The Wild Hunt (and a long winded retrospective…)

Is Anyone Still Playing Alternity?

What Am I Playing Right Now? published first on https://supergalaxyrom.tumblr.com

0 notes