Thursday, December 2, 2021

Matrix Resurrections trailers


The trailers are looking fantastic. They suggest heavy themes (Neo in therapy!), of lost loves and realities and lives (Chance meeting Trinity in a cafe!), and then goes whole hog into action jackson. 

The second trailer mixes footage from the first films with the new one: realities are mixing, new versions overwriting the old. 

Could be amazing, or... it could be like Lucas' story rhyming, where he blows up a Death Star every other stanza. 

Which way will it go?

Fingers crossed...


We know Morpheus has been replaced by a younger, better looking actor; the formerly suave Merovingian is now a bum, and Neo has an extra thick chord sticking out of the back of his head when he was in his battery pod.  

But what does it mean? Not a clue. 

My guess? The new Matrix is nearing collapse and requires a reboot, yada yada, unexpected complications. Then suddenly everything is subverted in the best possible way. 

We know the machines are keeping an eye on Neo this time with Doogie-therapist, and keeping him pacified with big blue pills. Which means... the machines may not be onboard with Neo doing his choice/reboot thing. 

Morpheus 2.0 is back provoking Neo again in the fight simulator, more annoying than ever. 


Peace between humans and machines has broken down.

Maybe the Oracle, seen reading Alice in Wonderland in the trailer, can shed some light. And if she's back, so is... The Architect?

We will see! Fingers crossed it will rock!

I have to say I loved all four films in the original Matrix trilogy.

You did not read that wrong: I love the whole set, not just the first film.

Everyone says it derailed, that it went to hell, that the sequels were failures.

They are like Jon Snow: they know nothing.

They’re challenging in ways that action flicks aren’t. No, they aren’t perfect, but what is?

Macho dudes shooting macho guns across macho realities

To me, they were engaging on both the superficial action level and a deeper one. 

The Wachowski's had something to say with the trilogy and their Trinity: Neo (One), Trinity and… Smith. 

Neo is tied to Trinity by the bond of love, whereas Smith is tied to Neo by hate. 

Neo's faith and hope, while Smith is cynicism and faithlessness. 

The Matrix simulation contained millions of minds. The ‘real’ world, however, was never real: it was a catch basin for those minds that the matrix rejected. Why? As the simulation progresses in time, the number of rejects rises, destabilizing the system and making a reset necessary.  

We have never actually seen the real real world, whatever that might be.

Business douchebag in the first trailer gets the no-mouth treatment in the second
 
That’s why Neo has super powers in both. 

Smith’s cynicism infects the whole matrix simulation, turning it into a bleak landscape of inescapable mono-thought, hate filled and cynical, until Neo returns daylight.

Robot harvesting 'eggs' (human pods)

The Wachowski’s are smart, ambitious filmmakers. They take big risks with their films, and sometimes they don’t work out as well as one might have liked. 

I’m hopeful that the new Matrix film, Resurrections, has something to say. 

The first trailer starts out incredibly strong, then descends into spectacular action rehash. Maybe they don't want to give too much away...

Merovingian is back, and he's looking worse for wear

Going by Lana’s comments, which tie the new film to personal events, suggest that yes, it’s going to have meaning beyond cash grab. But it also likely won't be what we expect.

"Maybe this story is not the one we think it is..."

Wachowski also told EW: "Art is a mirror. Most will prefer to gaze at the surface, but there will be people like me who enjoy what lies behind the looking glass. I made this movie for them."

Sounds good to me.

Ruins of a future city


Wednesday, December 1, 2021

Final Season of The Expanse inbound!




I love 
The Expanse

It’s gritty and uncompromising. Reminiscent of Ronald D. Moore’s Battlestar Galactica, it has a very down to earth (in space!) feel to it. 

Like BSG, there's a large cast of characters, and initially the Expanse cast is a little harder to get into. Hell, it’s difficult to tell who the main characters even are. That sorts itself out quick, but it can still be a barrier to getting into the show. 

I highly recommend sticking it out for at least 4 episodes before deciding to drop the show. Trust me. It’s worth the investment.

One advantage The Expanse has over BSG: it does have a plan. The whole program is one great overarching story, beginning to end, a grand narrative that’s been plotted in advance by a series of books (which are not actually finished yet… deja GOT). 

I have faith they’ll be able to bring the whole thing to a satisfying conclusion, although how I have no idea. So many threads! So many mysteries! Again, a little deja GOT. 

I’m not sure how much I can even really say about the program without giving important details away. 

I can say that the books were written in a highly unusual fashion. Also, the characters prove themselves to be awesome. They act intelligently, with solid motivations. 

The two are connected.

The reason why they have greater integrity? They're based on RPG player characters.

I shit you not: the book(s) were written based on role playing game sessions.

A writer (I believe it was Daniel Abraham) joined sessions being run by a fellow who was developing his own sci-fi game (and universe) named Ty Franck. Abraham thought it a blast,  that it would make a really good book series, and a collaboration was born (along with James S. A. Corey, their combined pen name).

My understanding is that there was originally going to be one more main character (the healer/doctor/medic), but he dropped out of the game (too busy to play). As a result, his poor character was unceremoniously decapitated while sitting in a prison cell during a space battle. 

That'll teach him.

What an interesting idea, though! Using the combined brain power of a team of players to test your plot. To show what people in that situation (or imagining themselves in that situation) would do. 

Brilliant! 

There are many shows where characters devolve into plot plotters, shuffling around not because they have any character need, but because the plot requires it. This creates unsatisfying stories, and I know (as an attempted author) it can be a real problem. 

Sometimes characters take on agency of their own, and disobey and derail your plot, all without needing external people to actually embody them. So... just think how much more authentic actions would be if taken by… real people! 

That’s just one of the unusual angles in The Expanse.

The science in the show is far more rigorous than in Star Trek (which isn’t difficult, admittedly, Trek is more sci-fantasy), and (possibly) a bit more than BSG. Except when you bring in the, um, yeah, stuff later in the series... but even then it's presented really well. 

So it's not entirely realistic. Travel time is compressed (oh, GOT) and some mundane concerns have been glided over, as there’s a lot to consider with space travel and colonies. Still, it takes a lot more into consideration than I’m used to in run of the mill sci-fi.

You get the sense that the people behind the show really Give A Shit. 

This show has a dedication to craft and authenticity that is unrivalled in sci-fi. It's the best sci-fi TV show on television, hands down. 

Thoroughly engaging, highly recommended.

And there’s still time to get a go on it before the final season arrives. Give it a try, you won't be sorry. 

I’m stoked!



Saturday, November 27, 2021

Space Babes, Seven of Nine and Magnum Thrax

Saviour of Voyager: Seven of Nine in silver catsuit and corset

Scantily clad, buxom women have been a part of sci-fi since its inception, often crassly so. A recent exhibit of film posters was filled with images of beautiful women imperiled by vampires, werewolves, tentacled aliens and even ancient mummies. 

The posters for The Day the Earth Stood Still, Forbidden Planet, Invaders from Mars, Invasion of the Saucer Men, Tobor the Great, Satan's Satellites, Creature from the Black Lagoon, Revenge of the Creature, Attack of the Crab Monster, Robot Monster and many, many more show monsters carrying a shapely damsel in distress. 



On the flip side are alien seductresses in human guise, predatory succubi and femme fatale sirens. 

I don't think that even begins to delve into truly exploitation cinema. Grindhouse is even more explicit. 

Why? We know why. The three main drivers of human behavior are: food, sex and fear.


A preying mantis woman hybrid monster would hit all three. Has that been done? Call my agent!

Seven of Nine, from Star Trek: Voyager, follows in the footsteps of space babes going back to even before Barbarella. Seven was brought on to Voyager due to flagging (har har) ratings. And what do you do when your ratings are collapsing? Bring in a busty woman clad in catsuit, corset and high heels. 

This did not sit well with Captain Janeway's Kate Mulgrew, and I can't say she was wrong, especially as the first woman to lead a Trek show. You'd think the ideals behind Trek would elevate it beyond such crass pandering. Nope. When your show's going to be cancelled, you don't stop to question. And after Seven of Nine joined the show, ratings spiked. Her figure hit magazine covers everywhere, and was prominently featured in promotional materials.

There's an argument to be made that she saved the show from an early cancellation. 

Here's the thing: there was no in-universe reason for her to be dressed like that. None, other than the Doctor's (understandably) pervy male preferences. But that's not enough of a justification in-universe: Janeway would never have stood for it. She'd have Seven dressed as a member of the Voyager crew, same as the former Maquis, in a Starfleet uniform. That, of course, would not show off Jeri Ryan's wonderful figure or boost ratings (quite as much). Bottom line, Trek is a commercial TV show; push comes to shove, any in-universe ethical integrity gets trumped by ratings, especially when cancellation looms.

Remind you of anyone? Bueller?

Seven was so successful at drawing attention that they added the shapely T'Pol to Enterprise right from the get go, also in a figure hugging catsuit. Was there any in-universe reason for this, other than it appeals to male viewers? 

Not that, on a certain level, I object. But such pandering to male sexuality can irk and alienate female viewers, who feel the effect of the male gaze everywhere males go. Mulgrew felt the pandering was beneath Trek, and I honestly felt kind of the same when Seven appeared. What franchise was I watching?

Don't get me wrong! As a male, I appreciate female beauty as much as the next guy. It's awesome! But such button pressing is often more than a little on the nose, and our male susceptibility to this is amusingly, if annoyingly, human. But there's a time and a place, too, and Trek I always thought to be inclusive, and from TNG on more sophisticated than TOS. Initially, it seemed like Seven would be more at home in Lexx, which never had any pretensions about what it was or where it was aiming. 


I don't think there was ever a reason in Barbarella for her to be dressed like that. Same goes for Heavy Metal, The She Creature!, Starcrash, Logan's Run, Cleopatra 2525, Queen of Outer Space, Barb Wire, practically any vampire movie (doubly so for space vampires) and endless others. None of them have a rationale for this. Look at the entire genre of superheroes, where women's outfits are anything but practical. 

A heavily armed and lightly dressed Barbarella

That was the inspiration for the satire that is Magnum Thrax. To satirize and the whole phenomenon, the underlying drives, while on another level eating its cake. The book does have an explanation for scantily clad and heavily armed 'space babes'. It's quite specific about it, the reasons are very pointedly satirical, and the book goes on to explore many themes, topics and tropes in a tongue in cheek way. 

This is our nature, as human beings: both sublime and base. 

For example, the internet was created by scientists to help spur collaboration and accelerate research. The big joke? As songs on the internet say: the internet is for porn. Humans take our greatest scientific achievements and turn them around to fill our base desires. 


What? You were expecting something different? What species are you from, again?


Think about how banana split sundaes hack our desire for sweets. All hunter gatherers would be able to find in the wild is some ripe berries. Our sweet tooth would compel us to eat them all at once. Fair enough: it was probably advantageous to eat berries immediately, whenever we found them. Thanks to technology, however, we can create a dish that indulges our base cravings for sweets and enter calorie heaven... and sicken ourselves at the same time.

Healthy? Of course not! Not in the least! But very human.

The book explores how ridiculous we are, how our behaviour is shaped by our underlying desires, and how our greatest aspirations often become entangled in our base nature. 

That's part of the humour of it!

Films like Amazons on the Moon also takes satirical aim at our penchant for space babes in sci-fi.


A lot of people can't see beyond a surface level reading. They are appalled by the very idea of repurposed sexbots, and see no satirical value or subversion. Fair enough, it's not for them, the humour is invisible. Humour is extremely subjective and I've no doubt I've gotten some things wrong; I readily admit my sense of humour is a bit different. Okay, maybe flat out weird. I don't know.

Yet a lot of other mainstream sci-fi properties exploit female sexuality without any acknowledgement whatsoever of what they're doing, with Seven of Nine being a case in point. 

I should note that Jeri Ryan gave a fabulous performance in Voyager; she became a compelling and fully realized character who transcended the crass reasoning behind her initial conception to the point where character dominated. I don't think T'Pol ever rose to that level. 

And times are changing, too: a Star Trek film received a lot of flak for including a gratuitous bikini shot.

Taylor Swift's satirical music video Bad Blood hits a lot of the tropes on a banana split sundae level

If you find humanity's flawed nature itself funny, you might enjoy Magnum Thrax, warts and all. 

Because having warts is human, just like the characters in Thrax.

Now if you will excuse me, I'm going out for a double bacon cheeseburger, poutine, carbonated liquid sugar drink and a banana split sundae, followed by a nap and a triple bypass.


Friday, September 24, 2021

Marvel's What if...?

Cap's been on a diet

What if they had endings?

No, seriously, what if?

In terms of visuals, the show's gobsmacking! Drop dead gorgeous. Looks like they animated art deco posters from the 1920's. I gather it's all done with filters over 3D models, but DAMN. Super impressive filters.

The only thing that gives me pause visually is the lip syncing. It just feels off, like I'm watching Ashley Simpson. Mouth and sound don't match. The 3-D model mouths don't seem to form the proper shapes.  

All the more irksome when so much else is so breathtaking visually!

The action sequences are impeccably staged... and yet, I find the show oddly lacking in tension. The action is feels perfunctory, something you expect, like fries and a drink. 


Captain Peggy Carter and Star Lord Panther

Maybe I'm just jaded after so much super hero spectacle. 

The stories aren't grabbing me.

For a What if show, I'd expect mind blowing concepts, like Wandavision and Loki had. Again, I'm probably just jaded and need to go on a diet of independent art films made on a laundry change budget. 

Peggy's ending was okay; having her pop up 70 years later echoes popsicle Roger's return. But it didn't have emotional impact. The zombie one just petered out into nihilism. 

Dr. Strange's outing was dark, had the strongest finish, and the most emotional heft of the entire series, however awful. 

And there's the rub: all the other episodes have felt like fluff, with lacklustre endings and bland humour. 

A series without teeth. 

Of course, humour is like the very essence of subjectivity, so what do I know?

Maybe they need to do the basic scenarios before they really go full Twilight Zone and really start playing around. 

Visually, I love it. A full feature with this look would be amazing. The Rocketeer would rock the look. So would Superman or Wonder Woman. 

Whoops, wrong franchise!

I think I need to take a break from Marvel for a bit...



Saturday, September 18, 2021

The Great Deep Space Nine Rewatch

DS9 (Deep Space Nine) is excellent. I haven't watched DS9 in something like twenty years, so I thought the COVID-19 lockdown might be a good time to re-acquaint myself with the show. 

I remember seeing a good deal of it during the initial run, but I know I missed some episodes. 

I just finished all seven seasons (over 7 days worth of content spread over two months), and I can say it holds up. It has an epic arc with The Dominion War, a fabulous set of nuanced, compelling characters and some of the best villains to grace a Star Trek show. 

Like the other two late Twentieth Century Trek shows (TNG and Voyager), it changes radically in season three. 

The first two seasons of TNG were, let's face it, kinda rough. Lots of great ideas were there, but they didn't gel. Season two is more in focus than the first, but it's not until season 3 that it all really comes together. It may have something to do with the new uniforms, which were no longer causing extreme crotch discomfort for the male actors (seriously, this is why they changed the uniforms: Starfleets key personnel were being rendered infertile). 

Voyager spent the first two seasons, if memory serves, dealing with the Kazon, who were (for me) a rather lacklustre foil for the crew. Season three sees the ship hit Borg space, and introduces Jeri Ryan in her sexy silver cat suit. I have some quibbles around that as an act of pandering to the lowest common denominator, but admittedly no objection to Miss Ryan's unquestionably riveting appearance.

DS9 starts out like typical Trek, solid and episodic. The first two seasons are a lot better than TNG's first two and on par with Voyager's start. The characters, however, stand out more with DS9: while Voyager also has a mix of Starfleet and non-Starfleet cast members (the latter half Maquis terrorists), the cast of DS9 is more eclectic. 

The big initial twist with DS9 is that it's set on a space station near Bajor. The crew isn't going anywhere, which means the villains and extras stick around, and the consequences of earlier episodes aren't so easily evaded. In the first episode, a wormhole leading to the Gamma Quadrant (far far away otherwise) appears beside the station. This opens up a whole new region of space to play in and populate. 

Planet Bajor was set up in TNG: it has just been freed from a long and oppressive Cardassian occupation. Initially the TNG character Ensign Ro was going to be the station's first officer, but she turned down the role, and it turned into the equally feisty Major Kira.

Kiera (Nana Visitor), a core cast member, is a spiritual former terrorist and understandably hates Cardassians. She's combative on every front, both personal and professional. It takes a little while to discover her softer side. Her struggles nicely nuanced right from the start: she's not needlessly violent, but like the French Resistance (and the parallels are deliberate) she'll fight and kill (including civilians) for her people's freedom. 

DS9 is headed up by the bold Commander Benjamin Sisko (Avery Brooks), who's suffering from PTSD after losing his wife at Wolf-359 (where the Borg slaughtered the Federation fleet). He's immediately proclaimed The Emissary by the Bajorans, adding an interesting mystical subplot to the show. 

He's joined on the station by his young son, Jake (Cirroc Lofton), who's an ordinary kid, unlike the almost superhumanly capable adults in Starfleet. 

Quark (Armin Shimerman), an openly, defiantly avaricious Ferengi, runs the station bar; his character is rounded out by flashes of empathy from time to time. Not that he'd ever admit to it. His brother Rom works with him, and is a peripheral character initially, but takes on new dimensions starting in season three, where he emerges as a gifted engineer. 

Rom's son Nog (Aron Eisenberg) is paired with Jake, and the two form an unlikely interspecies friendship. In fact, interspecies friendships abound on the station. 

Odo (Rene Auberjonois), the shape shifting station security chief, is an island, preferring not to have any close connections, but he has an antagonism with Quark, who's always got some illegal scheme going on, that has a fun interdependent angle to it. They're like the coyote and the sheep dog from the Warner Brother cartoons: friends but also enemies. 

Bashir (Alexander Siddig) is the brash young station doctor, who's a bit of a legend in his own mind, and he rubs the other crew members the wrong way at first, especially O'Brien. Bashir proves to be both brilliant and genetically enhanced, which is revealed around season three, and that adds a whole new angle to his character.

Miles O'Brien (Colm Meaney)is the station's chief engineer and responsible for keeping the aging Cardassian station operational, which is no small feat. He's put upon and disgruntled a lot of the time, besieged by requests and demands, and storylines regularly subject him to great suffering. In fact, this becomes something of a joke in the writer's room, where they have the saying: "O'Brien must suffer". And man, does he. In one episode, they actually kill him off, only to replace himself with an O'Brien from another timeline. 

O'Brien is a man down in the trenches, and Julian Bashir's attitude and endless chatter drive him bonkers. Over the course of the show, the two become fast friends, although there are some hilarious barbs exchanged between them over the years. 

Dax (Terry Farrell) is the station's sexy Trill science officer; she's had multiple lives, including several as men (Curzon, a former male host, was fast friends with Sisko). She's a little nebulous at first, character wise: early on she's very chill and balanced. Later on, they bring out her party hearty side, like a kind of space age science hippy. 

Garak (Andrew Robinson) is the station's tailor; an ex-Cardassian spy, he's endlessly dissembling, and mixes lies with truth so much you can't tell what's real and what's not. He develops a friendship with Bashir, and the two have lunch once a week together for almost the entire run of the show. There's even a little sexual subtext to their connection. 

Conflict is the order of the day on DS9. Character's are built to conflict, but they also work through their differences, which is a big theme of the show: that people with very different points of view can ultimately get along. 

Kiera (Nana Visitor) is a window into Bajor, Julian can explore all sorts of medical themes, Sisko gets both command and spiritual themes as The Emissary, Quark is a window into Trek's underworld, Jake and Nog into youth in the Twenty-fourth Century, Dax into balance, tolerance, change, and difference; while Odo is law and order, topped by his fabulous shape shifting, a topic that is mined extensively. In later seasons, it is revealed he is one of The Founders, the shape shifters who run The Dominion, the arch-foil of The Federation for the later half of the show's run. 

What's great about DS9's first two seasons of episodic shows is that it lets you get to know the characters really well before throwing them into the grand narrative arc of The Dominion War. 

This builds up over season three and then becomes a dominant aspect of the show all the way through to the finale. 

The show intersperses the Dominion Arc episodes with one-offs until towards the end of season 7, and it's jarring sometimes. You go from a life and death struggle with a relentless enemy one episode to funny problems in Quark's bar the next. You get a bit of whiplash with this. On the other hand, if all the one-off episodes were taken out, I think the show would get too dark. It's nice to still have side jaunts that explore the lives of the station's quirky characters. 

One thing the show does very well is convey a sense of a larger universe. The writers will seed clues to larger events in episodes earlier on in the season, or even whole seasons earlier, and then hit you with a big payoff that's all the bigger for the build up. You can look back at the clues and they all add up, which is awesome. I'm sure there's a lot of ad lib stuff, and retro fitting, going on as well, there always is in such a complex, ongoing narrative, but enough of it is so well planned out you can really invest in the show's reality. 

There are quibbles, of course, but they don't seriously detract from the show. Considering the scope and scale of it, and the likely onerous demands of higher level executives, I'm amazed it all holds together as well as it does. 

This is Trek as never before: no other Trek show at this point has had such strong, ongoing narrative threads. No other Trek show fleshes out it's villains as well as DS9, and they are worth mentioning: 

Gul Dukat (Mark Alaimo), the former leader of Cardassia's Bajor occupation, is a reptilian, Machiavellian schemer who likes to preen and pose as virtuous. He has enough of a conscience to need to justify his villainy to himself and others. What's great about him is that the writer's will let him be decent for a stretch, to the point you wonder if he's changed, if he isn't really villainous, but then he'll do something truly dastardly. It ties back nicely to a quote from Jean-Luc Picard: "Villains who twirl their moustaches are easy to spot. It's the ones who cloak themselves in good deeds who are the real threat." Or something close to that. 

Speaking of villains cloaked in virtue, Kai Winn (Louise Fletcher) is the epitome of this. She's one of the most vile characters I've ever seen on Trek, and I can't stand to watch her oily condescension and passive aggression. She keeps things just civil enough, masks her snide barbs just enough, to avoid direct confrontation. She lies and denies as well as Garak, perhaps even better, but with non of his charm. That said, the show will allow slivers of decency to show through from time to time. 

Later on there's Weyoun (Jeffrey Combs), the unctuous and smarmy Voorta diplomat. He's exceedingly polite and complimentary when he wants something from you, and turns snide, demeaning and sadistic when he doesn't. 

No other Star Trek show has ever explored villainy with such depth and nuance. It's great stuff!

The Founders are presented as deeply xenophobic, ruling an empire of solids out fo fear of them. The lead founder is motherly towards Odo, and seems decent and reasonable at first, but as push turns to shove, becomes monstrously punitive and genocidal. 

Speaking of which, DS9 introduces Section 31, a secret organization within The Federation that is dedicated to protecting it at any cost, including creating a plague to exterminate The Founders. Their methods are antithetical to everything the Federation stands for, the stick to the Federation's soft speech, and they run into conflict with DS9's crew. 

This is an area of contention with fans of Trek: many see it as undermining Roddenberry's hope for a better, gentler humanity. And to be fair, they have a point. Section 31 delves into the nasty side of international (interstellar) politics and implies they're necessary. It's disheartening that the Federation's decency is a lie, and that deceit, murder and even genocide are necessary for survival. That The Federation continues to exist at all could indeed be thanks to Section 31's hidden perfidy and mass murder. 

On the other hand, the storyline does pose the question loudly and effectively, and it pits the crew agains this viewpoint, to a degree (as we shall see next). Star Trek has always glided past how it's economy works, and how they've solved all of today's pernicious social and economic issues. Perhaps it is childish to view the future through rose coloured glasses. The show's writers are more hard nosed realists when it comes to interstellar politics. 

The important thing here, I think, is that the question is raised, and we are poised the question: at what price survival? What are we willing to countenance from our military and spy agencies? Where does one rightly draw the line?

This leads nicely into In the Pale Moonlight, for me the most memorable of all DS9's episodes. One of the hallmarks of great drama is characters making truly difficult choices: not between right and obviously wrong, but between lesser evils. Here Benjamin Sisko enters into a deception, aided by Garak, to bring the Romulans into the war with The Dominion, which The Federation is currently losing. Distressed by the weekly casualty lists, Sisko is intent on doing what he can to save his beloved Federation. With Garak's help, he concocts a fake hologram tape of The Dominion's agents plotting an invasion of Romulus. He passes it on to a Romulan senator, who discovers it is fake. Before he can get back to Romulus and expose Sisko's hoax, his ship explodes. The damaged data rod is then recovered by the Romulans, it's flaws hidden by the explosion, and they duly declare war on The Dominion. This is what Garak planned all along, and Sisko is complicit in the deliberate murder. 

The episode is presented in flashbacks as Sisko recounts events in his log, which he then deletes. He questions whether or not he can live with what he's done, with the compromises he has made, and in the end, he decides he can. 

Unlike TNG, DS9 never sugar coats, and moral absolutes are quickly muddied into shades of grey. The best thing I can say about it is that it's truly thought provoking. You can argue about Sisko's choices (as you can about those made by many of the other characters) because there are multiple sides to the issues. Where do you draw the line? Was Sisko justified? Why and why not? 

What Sisko does condemns millions of Romulans to death, but also saves the Alpha Quadrant. Does he have the right to make that decision? And yet, with your own civilization on the line, what would you do to survive?

It reminds me of The 100, which (before it flew off the rails and into orbit) was relentless in presenting it's characters with painfully difficult choices that would stain their souls. 

Some things don’t track if you think about them too much, and I’ll list a couple quibbles just to be pedantic:

Starfleet asking Sisko to plan the invasion of Cardassia strikes me as odd. He’s a field officer, not a staff officer. D-Day was led by Eisenhower, who was a five-star general, and he was supported by a large dedicated staff. Invading a planet is many orders of magnitude larger than D-Day; there’s just no way they’d give that responsibility to a captain. It’s beyond their pay grade and role. At very least, Sisko would be promoted, transferred to HQ, and have dozens of new characters assigned to support him. Sure, they could make DS9 their HQ, but where are Sisko’s staff officers? This is a monumental task!

Earlier, they had Sisko lead a fleet of six hundred ships (six hundred!) against the Dominion. Such a vast fleet would be broken down into sections, each commanded by an admiral, with at least a rear admiral commanding the lot. There’d be admirals coming out of your behind with that many ships. It certainly wouldn’t be led by a captain. 

Sisko is being screwed: his admiral managers are off loading tons of THEIR work onto him without proper compensation or recognition! Planning the invasion of a planet, leading a thousand ships, that’s what admirals are for!

Of course, the show is on a budget, and for narrative reasons they want a main cast member at the head of the story (ie. invasion plans, etc). 

Something else that irks is the ire Sisko gets from Starfleet for trying to be The Emissary and a star fleet officer at the same time. Hello?!? Surely Starfleet knows that the whole reason they have not lost the Dominion War is because The Emissary asked The Prophets very nicely to evaporate the Dominion fleet and prevent more from coming through the wormhole. 

Yet The Admiral keeps riding Sisko for trying to get along with The Prophets. Is this man oblivious? The greatest contribution to the war effort, by far, was made by The Prophets. They’re the only thing standing between The Federation and utter, total defeat. But you won’t allow even a little leeway for Sisko to deal with them, to keep them happy? 

It’s so monumentally short sighted, so transparently artificial, such a bit of drama for the sake of drama, that it knocks me out of the narrative a little. 

Then again, Starfleet admirals have a history of being boneheads, traitors, megalomaniacs, batshit insane or controlled by alien parasites. 

C’est la vie.

The Dominion is repeatedly shown to be crafty and resourceful, setting traps and starting wars between their enemies. They aren’t merely a bunch of tin plated imbeciles running into laser guns in order to aggrandize the heroes. They have agency, an instincts for self-preservation (well the Voorta do, not so much the Jem Hadar), and they can and will adapt to our hero’s plans. All of which makes them excellent foils.

On the progressive front, the show is no slacker: it tackles inequality, excessive greed and racism repeatedly. Of particular note is a two-parter in which Sisko goes back in time to 2023 and gets embroiled in a historic riot, as well as a dream episode in which he’s a writer in the 1950’s and is forbidden to publish a story about a black space station captain. Quark and the Ferengi are used to criticize the excesses of capitalism. 

Worf joins the show in season three, and has numerous episodes exploring Klingon warrior/honour culture.

DS9 also has a wonderful extended wrap up: the latte half of the seventh season is one big long story, and most of the story lines are suitably tied up with bows. 

Sisko sacrifices himself to destroy Dukat (who's the evil Pah-wraith's chosen one) and ascends into the wormhole in the sky. He tells Cassidy (a freighter captain he marries in season seven) that he may one day be back. The one quibble i have here is that he doesn't talk in a vision to his own son. But that's just a quibble. 

There's a great arc for Nog, who's joined Starfleet, only to be badly injured in battle (losing his leg), and finally returns to duty as a lieutenant. 

Rom becomes Grand Nagus, Odo merges with the Great Link, Kiera becomes station chief, Dax and Julian get together, O'Brien goes off to earth to teach at Starfleet academy and Worf becomes ambassador to The Klingon Empire. 

Of all the Star Trek shows, this one has the best wrap up. 

Thanks in large part to the ongoing narrative and nuanced, multi-dimensional (and compromised) characters, it feels the most like an evolving family, and it's the most sorely missed when it concludes. 

What show runner Ira Steven Behr, and talented symphony of writers, actors & crew, accomplished with DS9 is truly special. Thank The Prophets Paramount executives were too focused on micromanaging Voyager to notice the brilliance happening in the background. 

Count me a fan.

Try it, you may like it. It's the most approachable, immersive and innovative (after TNG initial setting up of the franchise's New Wave) of all the Trek iterations for me, thanks to a diverse cast of characters, including ordinary civilians. It shifts from episodic to serialization, explores spirituality/religion, war, morality and capitalism. 

It also has a bar. 

Friday, April 16, 2021

Post-apocalyptic cinema: Love & Monsters mini-review


Love & Monsters
is a ton of fun. 

Probably the best, over-the-top post-apocalyptic adventure romp that I've yet seen. It mixes heart, comedy and ridiculous creatures. Road Warrior and Fury Road look positively down to earth by comparison. 

The actors all do a stand up job, the dialogue is solid, and there weren't any narrative missteps that took me out of the experience. 

It's not super deep. It won't change the world. But it's not intending to.

The monster designs are great, a fun mix of horrific and cute, and despite the light, breezy tone, there are genuine moments of cringe inducing suspense. 

And the giant leeches are gross.

The hero is a goof, but his evolution into hardened badass flows nicely and feels natural.

Two thumbs up, as they say. 



Tuesday, March 30, 2021

Ranking the Star Wars films: worst to best

I thought I'd rank all the films in the Star Wars series, just for the heck of it. Hasn't everyone else? It's a wonderfully imaginative and realized universe in many ways, but some of the movies are stronger than others. 

So let's get to it!



11) The Rise of Skywalker

Rise is such a frenetic assault on the senses, I wanted to walk out of the theatre. Partly a sign of age, I'm sure; movies have been getting faster paced for awhile now but this was crazy. Incredibly, the Emperor is brought back off screen, in the text scrawl at the start, and delivered his 'Message to the Galaxy' in... a video game. Say what? 

Abrams tries to cover the senselessness with a manic pace and throwing constant distractions at the audience, like shouting 'Space squirrel!' whenever we are starting to question what's happening.

Finn is given little to do, neither is Poe, and the newest member of the gang, Rose, is so abruptly and unceremoniously sidelined it'll give you whiplash. The narrative through line between these movies is non-existent, the changes in direction are jarring and derail the audience and take the viewers out of the movie.

The fake out with Chewie supposedly being blown up is ripped from Raiders of the Lost Arc, where one of two trucks explodes and Indy thinks Marion is dead. She isn't. It worked there, it doesn't here.

It's obvious with Rise that if there ever was A Plan for this clusterf*ck of a series, it's not just been abandoned, but dynamited, chopped up, set on fire, and then packed with weights and sunk in the deepest crevice of the Marianas Trench. 

They had a huge task in trying to wrap up the series, but even accepting that it would never live up to fan expectations (likely true), this movie is just bad. 


10) The Phantom Menace

Oh, geez, Wizard! Are you an angel? Awkward and hobbled by stilted dialogue (some of the worst in the entire series, although Attack of the Clones gives it a run for it's money), it does introduce new ideas. It doesn't use the original series as a template to rip off, although it does have a big battle at the end that resembles Jedi's ending (a simultaneous battle on the ground and in space). The lightsaber fight with Darth Maul is particularly stunning. Unfortuantely I never really connected with Qui Gon Jinn. 

There's a huge problem dramatically with putting a stoic Jedi together with another stoic Jedi (even if he is younger). They don't play off each other well. 

The collection of characters in the first film had a wonderful dynamic; they were easily recognized archetypes, and very different people, which added conflict and spark. Here, as Red Letter Media has noted, the characters are hard to describe other than by using their clothing or job. 

And then there's Jar Jar. 


9) Attack of the Clones

I tried to watch this one again, and was stunned by how badly some of the effects work has aged. 


8) Rogue One

Flat characters and an overly convoluted plot don't help this (to me) unnecessary prologue to the original film. I like leaving some things to my imagination. The story felt fragmented and repetitive, like a video game: they go to find the pilot, they then go to find her father, then they finally go to try and steal the plans. People pop up the instant the plot requires: stormtroopers flood into frame to be shot down like ten pins. 

The plot was pushed forward with such clumsy brutishness it reminded me of The Truman Show, while the climactic scene in the data storage facility recalled the engine obstacle course from Galaxy Quest, only it's played straight—more than a couple decades after Quest's satirical take. 

The action scenes lack emotional investment and went on way too long. 

On the positive side, the cinematography is absolutely stunning, and the film is chock full of iconic shots. 


7) The Last Jedi

The most controversial and divisive film of the set, Last recycles The Empire Strikes Back: it opens with a battle and then becomes a long spaceship chase contrasted with training sequences. It throws in a side plot with a visit to Gambling Planet which added nothing, other than to show how the ubiquitous by-the-seat-of-our-pants schemes cooked up by plucky heroes are reckless and destined to fail. Finn and Rose trust the fate of the recycled Rebellion (sorry, Resistance) to some guy they meet in a holding cell. Part of the reason we watch this genre is to see improbable schemes succeed. How much do we really need a finger poked in the eye of the genre's tropes?

On the plus side, it surprised me a couple of times, such as with the perfunctory killing of Snoke. That perked me up! On the down side, I did not find Kylo compelling as the new Big Bad. Hux? Even worse.  

The possibility of Rey and Kylo teaming up? Interesting direction! Also quickly discarded. 

Everything set up in Force Awakens was discarded or undermined. New directions were set up, only to be discarded in turn. WTF?

The original trilogy had awesome villains: Grand Moff Tarkin, Darth Vader, Boba Fett, Jabba the Hutt, and the wonderful, delightfully evil, scenery chewing Emperor. 

Even the Prequels had some half-decent villains: Darth Maul, Count Dooku, General Grievous.

The sequel trilogy? Snoke (killed off before we knew him), Kylo, Hux. I understand Rian was not interested in Snoke as a villain, and was more intrigued by the conflicted Kylo. Fair enough. I wasn't really, and any pay off to this focus was lost in the third film with the non-sequitur reintroduction of the Emperor.

Star Wars is opera in space. It needs good villains and (for me) the sequel series failed to deliver.

Some say this film makes The Force egalitarian. That's nonsense. Attack of the Clones introduced restrictions on Jedi having relationships and kids. So if Jedi aren't having kids, where are all the new Jedi coming from, if not random families throughout the universe? 

Even then, it's not egalitarian: people are still BORN with Force ability. It's not something they develop with hard work and training, as people in Star Trek progress. 

Star Wars is Chosen Ones and feudal mythology tropes (Dark Lords, Princesses, Knights, Royal Family Drama, Sweeping Battles, Magic). 

Being born with a special ability or power is John Wyndham's The Chrysalids for God's sake: you have two classes of people, those with Force powers and those without. 

And we all know the destiny of the people who don't (I'll give you a hint: it's not pretty). 

If you want a series that really promotes egalitarian values, watch Star Trek: TNG. 


6) The Force Awakens

Likeable new characters, supported by old favourites, and fun banter help float this rehash of the original film. 

On the other hand, it turns our original beloved heroes into losers: Han is a desperate bottom feeder and incompetent smuggler, Luke is in hiding after catastrophically botching the rebuilding the Jedi Order, and Leia has failed utterly as a politician and general to stop the First Order, which quickly obliterates the New Republic. 

Logan did terrible things to poor old Xavier, which I didn't like, and yet the story was so good and powerful, it was worth it. With Force Awakens, the pay off isn't. And it only gets worse.

The map to find Skywalker never made any sense (why would you leave a map if you don't want to be found?) and another, even bigger Death Star... was tedious and creatively bankrupt. History occurs first as tragedy and the second time as farce. What's the third time?

That being said, the performances of the new leads (Finn, Rey, Poe) were all great, and their interpersonal energy made the film watchable, despite the stories' relentlessly repetitious nature. 

But they didn't build on it.


5) Solo

Unnecessary (I never needed to know how Solo got his last name) but different enough from the other films to hold my attention. It had some good banter, but honestly I never bought the lead as Han Solo. Anyone else in the Star Wars universe, sure, but he wasn't Solo. 

The overall tone struck me as... dreary. 

Somethings are better left to our imagination. 

At least they didn't blow up another Death Star.


4) Revenge of the Sith

There's a big, gaping chasm between the original trilogy and the rest, just as there's a gap in quality between the first two and the third, but Revenge is the best of the Prequel trilogy. 

One thing that I'll give the Prequels: Lucas had something he wanted to say. Or at least, it seemed to me he had something to say, even if he didn't say it as well as he might have. The Sequels? I never felt there was a driving artistic vision. Just the desire to make lots and lots of money. 

You always have to be careful what you wish for. 

When I was a kid, I wanted to see more Star Wars films. As an adult, in retrospect, I believe it would have been better to stop at Return and leave it at that. 

Live and learn.

I do find The Mandalorian fun (the effects are incredible), and I have also enjoyed watching episodes of The Clone Wars.


3) Return of the Jedi

Lucas originally planned for the Empire to fight Wookies in the final film, as a commentary on the recently concluded Vietnam War. But he'd already included Chewie as Han's co-pilot, so he thought he had to come up with another creature instead. Being a very good businessman, Lucas also wanted something cuddly that could be marketed. He took Wookies, cut out letters and halved their height. Voila: Ewoks are born! 

As a parallel to Vietnam, I don't think it works. Not because high tech military forces are never defeated by less technologically advanced armies: this has happened often, and I would have bought into Wookies defeating the Empire. 

The problem to me is that the Ewoks have stubby little legs and arms, can't move quickly, and can't get much force behind their weapons. Their arms are too short to throw with any real force (which is why I imagine they resort to sling shots), and they have no reach in hand to hand combat. 

Sure, maybe they could lull their opponents into a false sense of security, like the little child like blue aliens in Galaxy Quest, and then pounce and devour them. 

I don't think they made the Ewok threat very believable. 

That being said, it's fantasy, and the film buys a LOT of good will with the first two, with the wonderful characters and effects and the sweeping adventure angle. It is still a weak point for me in the series though. 

Luke's scheme at the beginning seems... really really badly planned, and I imagine if Rian had gotten his hands on it, it would have failed. 

The final battle, and the confrontation with the Emperor, are just splendid, and they carry the film. The space battle, at the time, was beyond breathtaking. Nowadays, you see that in episodic television! 

Progress?

2) The Empire Strikes Back

A fabulous follow up to Star Wars, although it is dependent on the first film and requires Jedi to conclude it. It's a very much a 'to be continued' middle chapter, albeit an awesome one. I don't have much to say about it: it's awesome.

1) Star Wars

As I wrote in an earlier post

When the first Star Wars hit the screen it was like a hurricane of fresh air. Nothing like it had ever been seen before. Well. Okay: except Flash Gordon. But this was such a huge leap forward, such a refreshing take on the earlier space pulp material that it transcended its point of inspiration and became something else entirely. It became a phenomenon. People went to the theatre over and over again to see it, and cinema has never been the same since. It was the beginning of a four billion dollar franchise, and it was still unhindered by mounds of marketing crap weighing down the original creativity.

I recently heard some of the music from the first film, out of the blue, and out of context. And I was struck by the feelings it dredged up. It felt fresh, hopeful, wistful, like a beautiful lost dream. Just without all the additional hackneyed crap that got stuffed into the franchise over time by dozens and dozens of different, disconnected creators, marketers, writers, artists, and toy and game manufacturers.

As Jonathan Price's High Sparrow might say–if I may mix my franchises–there was something clean and pure about the original 1977 film. Strip away all the bells and whistles and CGI and toy tie ins, and you're back to the first film and something that might even be described as edgy. Daring. Hopeful. It was made by dreamers, invented on the fly, innovated while it was being shot with whatever could be found. No one was saying 'no, you can't do that,' and 'no, you can't do this'.

It was pulp art, but it was art, nonetheless.

A joyous flight of imagination.

Now it's a bloated, multibillion dollar behemoth, and some of that lithe, elegant purity was lost along the way.

It was probably sold off in a value meal.

Star Wars begins with a farm boy, a couple of fleeing droids and some stolen plans. We end with a space station the size of a small moon blowing up just before it was about to vaporize another planet.

Talk about stakes! Talk about tension!

Will Luke save the rebel base and all his friends, or will the Empire be triumphant, destroying not only the Rebellion HQ, but the stolen plans along with it?

The villain here isn't just Tarkin and Vader, but the Death Star itself. It's a menace to the entire galaxy, a mobile doomsday machine. And it's already killed a planet full of people!

And what do they attack this planet sized peril with?

Teeny, tiny fighters.

Drama is about conflict and contrast, right? Scale makes things epic. Well, here we have the greatest, most dramatic difference in scale in pretty much the entire history of cinema: man vs. planet.

Goliath has nothing on the Death Star.