Artistic Pursuits in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

   

 

I enjoy watching Red Letter Media. They are probably my favorite channel on YouTube and have been in that position since about 2018 or so. In one of their most recent discussions about artificial intelligence in content creation, a thought struck me that, surprisingly, hadn't since A.I. has become more prevalent in the public consciousness the past two years.  At least, not as fully realized a thought as I had previously considered.

    My experience with this technology so far has mostly been in the domain of education. Specifically, I recently worked at a private school where the conversation and general discourse around the topic has been shiftily quickly. As is often the case in education, but perhaps more so with this example, teacher viewpoints on this are in a very transitional and amorphous state. Initially, when Chat GPT came to our attention officially, there was some resistance to it, with the main objective being ways to create a barrier preventing its usage for students cheating.

    To be honest, I've been experiencing a bit of a creative crisis lately. For those who know me or follow me, this probably will induce eye rolls. I go through these sort of things almost daily and have for years, with variations of intensity. As the months have rolled into a new year, I've found myself questioning (for the umpteenth time) why I do what I do. Many of the same questions and criticisms many creatives experience roll in: 

Who cares about what you write? It's not good enough anyway. You're no genius. Everything that's been written has been done before and better. What impact will you have? You want to be rich and famous? Give me a break. Why can't you just keep it to yourself? You're embarrassing yourself. You're wasting time. If it doesn't make money, it's not worth it. You're stuff is bad. It's cliché. It's cringe. You can't reveal too much or you'll be judged and you'll accidentally offend someone or something. What is the point? Why can't you just give up and stop kidding yourself?

You get the picture. Perhaps some of these phrases are familiar. Maybe they all are. If you are reading this, you may wonder what that (albeit moderate version) sample of my self-doubt has to do with concerns of artificial intelligence. Well, I've recently decided something in regards to generative A.I., specifically generative ones like ChatGPT. All these models really do is add an extra barrier to the difficulties independent artists face every day. As much as I think these models can negatively impact how we receive, process and analyze information, I'm not sure how much it really changes in terms of creative writing, specifically with traditional publishing. All it really does is make things even harder than they already are, but only a little bit. That is to say, slightly more impossible. That makes me chuckle. It didn't initially though.

So, after months pondering this idea, I had a bit of realization. In regards to trying to put your creative works into the world monetarily, the introduction of generative AI doesn't change that much. At least, it doesn't for me at the current stage of my life. Basically, these AI models simply add another barrier to an already very difficult process. After realizing this, I found the typical crisis of AI on creatives just adds another layer onto the asterisk of creative writing. The starving artist almost seems to be a required cliche with anyone who dreams of pursuing art as their main profession.

I know that it's certainly a bit different depending on the medium. Fine artists, digital artists, and filmmakers are all affected by these factors to some degree, though I'd imagine the struggle remains similar in a general sense. I can only really speak from my experience as a writer, primarily of fiction, pop cultural commentary, and personal reflection. 

This is is where I will shift to sort of the "part two" of this blog entry. As I alluded to, the generative AI conversation caused a bit of a creative hurtle for me. That's not really surprising, as it doesn't take much to derail me from pursuing my writing endeavors. The problems of ownership, theft, copyright infringement, job losses/shifts, and general loss of quality and integrity have probably all been covered by people more knowledgeable than I am. This has been discussed regarding various areas in our society and will probably be for years to come. I can only really speak from my own experience. The strongest perspectives I have to offer are from my experiences as an educator and my own creative pursuits.

In both these arenas, I think the main question relates to the importance of writing in general. I've seen it noted how important the process of writing is. This is essential for focus and critical thinking, both of which have probably suffered due to the input of various screens and social media damaging attention spans years before generative AI became so available.  I worry that these things have affected me as well. I'm sure they have, but that's not really what I want to talk about today.

I started writing this entry in September of 2025, started again in November, before stopping again and picking it up in April of the following year. While life is often full of distractions, I've been struggling with my sense of identity as a writer and ChatGPT added another hurdle in recent years.

You see, at least in regards to being a novelist and short story writer, the dream of being traditionally published (an already daunting task) has become perhaps even more unsurmountable. How many people will try to have these models write most if not all their books to submit to publishers? How long will it be before the generative AI is able to make works so convincing they would be undistinguishable from a talented human hand? This carries over into other creative avenues, naturally. I know some say that AI will "never" be able to replace the human mind. That may be true, but I'm sure it will continue to be get better and better at replicating it. Perhaps there will always be something missing from the nuance of the individual human experience. An emotional component that a robot can't experience. I think of those odd emotions that may not have a defined name, some element an AI can't fully bring to the table. Who knows what the future will hold?

I'm actually pretty optimistic about AI in terms of the job market. Oh, I have no doubt it will cause myself and other struggles over the years, but I think we'll adjust. I consider history and think of how steam engines, the telegraph, assembly lines, digital photography ect. have been introduced and caused many to bemoan technological progress. Overall, many of these technological upgrades have improved our lives. I doubt many would volunteer to give up their tools from the past 200, 100, or even 50 years ago. Generally, our technological pursuits have benefited us. Unfortunately, there is always a potential dark side. How many people are hurt in the wake of these advancements? I'm not sure how many of the rich and powerful care for the masses. Then there are of course the affects of things like smart phones and social media I  mentioned earlier. Is our society the better or the worse for all of these apps and TikTok videos? Is it perhaps that the younger generations are developing in a way that is simply new and different compared to my generation and previous ones? Is this perhaps not such a bad thing?

I've worried much more in recent months that some of the worse science-fiction scenarios we've been warned about in so much of our fiction are becoming eerily real. Opinions you can disagree with, but at least you know that opinion comes from a person and their own experience. I would prefer that to a calculated article with text, images, and video which may not be based on actual events and ideas. How much is carefully orchestrated by an algorithm to feed me something based purely on what it thinks I want to hear, with no suggestion of expanding my mind or offering me a different way of looking at things. 

Oh, there I go, off on a rant again. As you can tell, as hard as I've tried to keep this focused, clearly this stuff has been on my mind.

Before the recent AI boom, I've been wrestling with the "why" of writing and other artistic endeavors. So much of our society (and to some degree how I was raised) has informed my view on what is worthwhile. Much of this equates to how measurable your impact is. Mostly this equates to money. If something doesn't get the "official" recognition of being accepted by a major publication (or even a minor one I suppose), then is it really worth the time and effort? Is it really good? Is it really worth it? It's also related to other concepts like fame, attention, and legacy. With all the AI writing out there, the market will be oversaturated with people who are essentially plagiarizing or at the very least simply having the AI do it for them. This idea of taking the credit for something you didn't do, even if it's wildly successful, just doesn't sit well with me. I don't see the point. 

So much of this comes from external value. I'm trying to shift my view to making value more intrinsic. This means leaning more into the "art for art's sake" perspective, which I feel like I've lost in recent years.

Part of me never really sat well with the idea, as I've long thought (though I tried to present otherwise) that art isn't really good unless it's in the widely accepted "great" category. To use an example, if you're not in the sphere of Spielberg or King, that's what you should pursue. My view has moved beyond this to some degree, but I still have some that very limiting perspective deep down. This is what I'm trying to battle with. 

Being creative can be a helpful way to process your own thoughts and emotions. If we choose to share these things we create, we may be able to connect, inspire, entertain, or inform. What's most important is to find joy in that process, even if it isn't always easy. So, regardless of how difficult it still is to send your work out into the world now bombarded with more AI generated simulacrum, I would encourage creatives that it is still worth it. It's perhaps only slightly more difficult to be recognized for it, but a fixation on these self-imposed goals often leads to unhealthy levels of disappointment.  

When I write, the most exciting part for me is in the process of being surprised by what my subconscious brings up. These stories that I write are mine, even if they are inspired by many of the stories which have informed me through my life. They are filtered through my particular lens during a specific time. Honing this into something more polished is often more difficult, but is usually a very satisfying and simply cool sensation, long before I share it with anyone. This is the moment I recommend holding on to the most. Through the process of creating, you learn more about yourself, even if its concealed within a thematic trope. I've gone on adventure with characters and struggled with them, especially when the story seems to take a life of its own. It's almost like you're unlocking something deeper, perhaps profound. There's a bit of mystery to it. Then you put it out there and somebody could get something totally different out of it. It's a wonderous thing. 

Ultimately, this journey of writing is one of self-discovery and perhaps a method of self-regulation. It's therapeutic and entertaining. It can be meditative. You can strengthen your mind and connect with others in ways you didn't think could be possible otherwise. These are things that that, at least for now, AI cannot do. I would suggest, that if one gives way to using AI to do all or most of the creative work for you, the artists will be depriving themselves of the joy of engaging with the process of their own artistic journey. We will be losing something beneficial to us on an individual level and the world community at large. I suggest using AI as a tool if needed. The most important tool, the primary tool for creativity, is you. Art requires you.

I know the person needing to hear this most was me. In writing, it's helped me grapple with this latest stream of thoughts. Perhaps I should write more about motivation and consistency, which I do struggle with. As a writer, all the AI discussions have done is simply reiterate many of the barriers and internal doubts which have plagued artists for as long as there has been art. Is it still worthwhile? Probably. However, you have to find the joy in doing it for yourself (and possibly for others) despite how "successful" it becomes. AI is neither a loophole to fame or glory, nor is it really much of a hinderance to it. It's just another wrinkle. We just have to be careful to not let it become something more. 

Alright, I'm done. Well,okay, a final note:

Wouldn't it be interesting to suggest that this whole article was written completely by AI, maybe with prompting to reflect my style based on previous articles? This can be done, but once again, it would have defeated the whole purpose of writing it for me. From the outside perspective, how many articles aren't written by the human hand or mind?  Will there come a time when we cannot discern what was was not or was not written by a person? Will we all cease to critically think about art (or anything)? Will we cease to communicate with each other on a thoughtful level? I hope that's not the case. 

Please, keep creating. Do it yourself, even if it's hard. Do it yourself, even if it's not always fun or easy. The outcome may not always be what you want, but at least you can use it to grow and better yourself. This article has been a bit disorganized and rambling, but I want it to be from the heart. It's taken months of several breaks between and beyond checking for some grammar issues (I'll probably miss a few) I'm going to post it. It's not perfect. I'm not perfect. That's okay. At least it's mine. Your art is yours. It's what separates us from the robots. For now.

Until next time.

Joe

It Comes at Night: Punishing Horror

 

    It Comes at Night left me with an upsetting feeling left behind by its disquieting atmosphere and punishingly bleak ending. The disquiet was compounded by the execution of the film's narrative as well. This was through a combination of what I believe the intent to be as well as not meeting my own expectations.

    I've been struggling the past few years with worrying about wasting my time. As many of you probably know, there is often a concern over what you should spend your time doing. I've found myself really trying to avoid movies I don't have any interest in or that I don't think I'll enjoy. I'm trying to optimize my time. However, sometimes you do get that standard viewing experience where you are interested in a film and it ends up disappointing you. Such is the case with It Comes at Night. 

    This is not to say that the movie is bad by any means. I'm not comfortable with that statement. In some ways, it's pretty much what I expected. We find a family struggling in the wilderness during a global epidemic which has apparently affected much of the world, though this is mostly just alluded to. That's fine though, as that has been covered in many stories in various mediums. The focus here is on a small group dealing with very basic struggles for survival within such a scenario. I'm pretty sure this has also been covered before but perhaps not in such a deliberately quiet manner.

    I struggle to think of another way to describe this but it seems the plot, characters and general atmosphere is generally understated. That was my main issue with the movie, as I got the film I pretty much expected but with everything dialed down just slightly, including the atmosphere. 

   I watched this right around Halloween and was hoping for some of that arthouse/avant-garde/slightly surreal horror we've typically gotten from groups like A24. Other than hanging on some haunting imagery, such as the inserted dream sequences that are sometimes hard to distinguish from the main narrative, and shots of ambiguous concern in well framed shots, the movie is mostly straightforward in the general situation.  However, it's in the understated forming of the characters where the movie may become most frustrating or intriguing depending on the viewer.

    In a movie like this, where it's really a snapshot of a situation (which I tend to like), this is usually a way to really explore the humanity of the situation through the characters. While I do think the narrative manages to convey a great deal without us learning too much, I believe it could have beneficial with more dialogue or at least a slightly longer runtime to flesh things out. Yet the story is served well by the minimalism, suggesting the character dynamics and inner struggles through the previously stated haunting imagery, actors' body language and the use of the little dialogue there is. 

    As a writer, I've always admired Ernest Hemingway greatly, as I'm sure others do. Though traditional "literary fiction" isn't generally what I've been drawn to read or write, something about Hemingway's minimalist style always spoke to me. In terms of writing style this economical efficiency has always greatly impressed me, being able to express so much with so little. Or at the very least, it allows the reader to add so much of their own experiences into the story while still keeping the main structure of the characters intact.

    I believe some screenwriters and directors use similar techniques, whether through the dialogue or simple visual language. Sometimes the intent versus the audience's input can get blurry when things aren't so clear, but perhaps that's part of the fun of the artistic exchange. It Comes at Night utilizes this approach to convey big ideas of family struggles and interpersonal conflict when survival becomes the key priority. Prioritization of keeping oneself going as well as the lives of loved ones becomes paramount, even when there doesn't seem to be a shred of hope. 

    One must ask what drives these people to continue, when they are essentially cut off from civilization, if there even is any. What happens when bigger ambitions of the human race as a whole disappear and we are stripped down to more primitive, almost pre-tribal ways of being? Then, when two families meet and dare to dwell together, a civilization begins again and inevitably tears itself apart due to a fear of the other and a need to preserve one's own. Mankind seems to become so divided, even when we lean into the better part of our nature. Maybe the paranoia and self-focused need to survive was ultimately correct in this case, as opposed to learning to work in harmony with another group.

    I realize I sort of rambled with that last paragraph but I just wanted convey how many thoughts the movie did awaken in me, even though none of them were really pleasant ones. Much of movie also seems to be about the idea of fatherhood and exploring the resentment children have against their parents. We often don't appreciate our parents early in life, especially when they give us strict boundaries and rules. In the best circumstances, this is done with the child's well-being in mind, but it's hard for a younger person (in this case the adolescent son) to understand this. There is also the exploration of the idea that there is no complete guide to being a parent and parent may in retrospect may not have made the right/best choice. At the very least, even in this rather extreme setting, we hope the parent cares and is trying the best they believe they can do. 

    So, as you can see, there seems to be much we can extrapolate from the narrative, but does the film have any answers? No, not really. At least none that will satisfy the average audience member. I found the film bleak and upsetting and it continued this course until the final punch at the end. There is strong thematic foreshadowing, as the film begins with the stricken grandfather having to be put down brutally by the father (in front of the son). This action, like all the rest, is driven by the desire to protect the family, yet equally building more distrust and resentment from the son. 

    Was it all worth it? Well, not really, according to the whole vibe of the film. Yet, what choice did anyone have? While I found myself disturbed, unsettled, horrified and ultimately greatly saddened by the events of the film, I was struck by another idea. In this scenario, everyone is trying to save the one they love most and it seems is almost forced to make horrible decisions where there are no other choices. Characters are punished for trying to go beyond the animalist need for survive. Compassion and trust in outsiders is a weakness. In the end though, all the worst choices are resorted to and yet it cannot correct that mistake of kindness. The damage is done.

    So, are there such scenarios where we cannot risk ever giving more compassion to the outsider? Perhaps this speaks to some deeply embedded survival instinct we still have and the film may be suggesting could display itself with ugly necessity in such a situation. As much as I hope for a world where everyone can love, agree and get along easily, that is not the current truth. We have a strong tendency to be tribal and we keep are closest emotional circles very small. There is a combative and defensive nature we all have that perhaps serves some purpose but I hope we all can overcome.

    Unfortunately, I think It Comes at Night suggests that when the chips are down, are greatest ideas and conceptions about compassion, community and civilization will not be as important as our animalistic and cold pragmatism for pure survival for its own sake. I will admit that while I hope that is not the case, perhaps there is some truth in it, at least very much in our current time. In this film, there are no heroes and there are no winners. That is the feeling of what comes at night, when there is no light and the ambiguous darkness of what's beyond seems most frightening. That, I will admit, is pretty effective horror.

The Best Superhero Movies in Years? (Superman vs Fantastic Four)

     I've been hearing about superhero fatigue for a long time now. I'll admit that even I, someone who loves superhero comics, have certainly been feeling it. The MCU hasn't really been bringing out as many big hits since Endgame, but most people reading this probably know that. While I don't get to the theater as often as I'd like to in recent years, I did make an exception for two films. As the title suggests, these were indeed James Gunn's Superman and the newest take on The Fantastic Four. Could 2025 be the best year for superhero movies since the 2010s? Yes, I would think so. 

    Obviously, this doesn't necessarily mean I would consider either film to be among the greatest superhero movies ever made or anything, or does it? No, probably not, but I tend to be reflective in most aspects of my life, including movies. The impact and longevity of any piece of art are most evident over time. Ah, but am I saying these films have true artistry? Well, of course, I'm being silly. (I've had a long day, so I apologize for the stream of consciousness format)

    I've given some time to consider these films, let them leave my mind, and then revisit them, because that's how I roll. I like to detach myself from the initial hype, gripes, and buzz to give my most well-rounded opinion, hence why this might seem to be a less optimum time to transcribe this, but here we are. In short, I really liked both movies. I'm tempted to say I loved them or at least aspects of them, but I will resist stating this upon giving both movies an eventual rewatch at some point. If you don't wish to read further, my recommendation is this: If you like either property, they are both probably worth a watch.

    Ah, but what did you really think, Joe? Don't dance around it. Um, well, let's start with Superman, since I saw that one first. 

    For quite some time, I have been hoping for a Superman movie that is bright, colorful, and fun. It seems like we haven't really had one since the Christopher Reeve era. Well, I got what I wanted. I had a feeling, like many people, that James Gunn would be a good choice for director. He created one of my favorite Marvel films, Guardians of the Galaxy, turning a pretty obscure group of characters into some of the medium's most popular and recognizable. It's funny, I used to say how amazing it was to me that Iron Man became an A-list, but back in 2008 I had never even heard of Star-Lord or Groot. I still think it was an amazing feat. Hats off to all on the project. 

    The same thing can be said for Suicide Squad (the Gunn version, of course), which honestly could be my go-to example of a perfect superhero movie. It retained much of the silliness of the source material (the comic aka fun stuff) while still maintaining a serious enough story with solid characters. It got the balance right.

    I don't think Superman pulled this off to the same extent, but I also believe it was trying to handle some heavier material while juggling several other major plot elements. Really, it succeeded, just not in the same way as Suicide Squad or Guardians. Oddly, it might be Gunn's penchant for ensembles or the continuous need to shoehorn in other characters to expand the franchise, but it was funny that in the Superman movie, Mr. Terrific had the coolest moments. I mean, he was terrific, so I'm not complaining. It is still Big Blue's movie for sure, but it was almost distracting. Almost. Nathan Fillion as Guy Gardner, what's not to like there?

    Superman himself was great, bringing with him some of the themes of the Snyderverse but at his most wholesome and Golden Agey self.  I found it refreshing in that this film, more than any other, really leans into the quintessential salt-of-the-earth nature of Clark Kent. It reminded me of the Jeph Loeb/Tim Sale story, Superman for All Seasons, harkening back to these classic roots of the man who grew up on a midwestern farm with a simple and honest view of things. I found the charm worked, not feeling too nostalgic, and functioned as a great anthesis to the high-tech corporate cynicism of Luthor's company. 

    That was also something new the movie brought to the table, Lex Luthor's hate and mistrust isn't enough. He has a whole company of people united in taking down Superman. You kind of respect it. They aren't really evil, just doing what they think is right in a situation they don't fully understand. On the surface, it seemed simple, but it's actually rather nuanced and realistic. It also presents Luthor as charismatic enough to lead people without fear, something I don't think I've seen before. Fundamentally, though, he is still classic Luthor. 

    It was a really good viewing experience, with the runtime not on my mind at all. I think the twist of sorts with Kal El's parents might rub some people the wrong way. I can certainly understand it if it does, but the core of the character has always been his human parents anyway, so I don't see any irreparable damage. Even so, it probably wasn't necessary, but at least it was bold and fit with the theme of the narrative. I would watch it again!

    Oh man, Stan Lee's first superhero team has not had a great movie run. I can't really say that I've ever been a big fan of these characters inside or outside of the comics, but I've always appreciated them. So I guess that's why I have been hoping (ever since they were acquired from Fox) that this team would reignite the spark of the MCU, which has been waning since the departure of Downey Jr.'s Iron Man. While I can safely say my hope hasn't been fully restored in the MCU, I found this movie, much like Superman, to be very, very refreshing.

    What do I mean by that? Honestly, it's all about style with this one. It went all retrofuturist classic sci-fi and I was here for it. I loved the whole 1960s newsreel origin aspect. The whole way the world-building and exposition were often delivered just really worked for me. That's not all, though. You know how I said it was all about style? Well, okay, maybe it's not all about style. It's also about my other favorite thing, characters.

    The key aspect of what has made this group endure (well, besides Dr. Doom and few other characters I'll mention later) is the family dynamic. Despite being superheroes, the element that sets this family apart is, naturally, the family dynamic itself. This movie really leaned into it, making it the main focus. Now, is it odd that in a superhero movie there isn't a ton of superheroing going on? Is this an issue? Hmm. Maybe, but since it was done pretty darn well, and it actually breaks the tired formula that's been established over the last two decades, so I didn't really mind at all. 

    That's not to say there is no adventure or super science. There certainly is, but that stuff is mostly there to elevate the meaty character elements. This cast had great chemistry and really brought it all to life. 

    What about Galactus? 

    It's pretty tough to top how well they handled Thanos (another character I didn't much care about before the MCU), but the filmmakers did a commendable job. While he might not seem quite as all-encompassing and epic a threat as he may have otherwise, by sticking to the classic era the movie is rooted in, he fits pretty darn well. Personally, I wanted more Silver Surfer, but she also sufficed.

    So there you have it. Superman is better than he's been in years on the big screen and Fantastic Four is...well, good. That's pretty amazing from my perspective. While neither movie is perfect, and I'm sure some people gripe about one thing or another, I think you'd have to be looking pretty hard to twist either movie as "bad". Personally, I'm tired of all the negativity. Both these movies had heart-warming elements and added something new to the table. That seems like as good goal for a film as any other.

    On that note, as we were walking out of Superman, my wife and I heard a young person exclaim, "That's the best movie I've seen in my life." I'm pretty sure this young person was a teen, probably no older than fifteen or so. While I can't say I had that experience, it was truly wonderful that is film had such a positive impact. I'm fine with it being someone's favorite movie. I think that's pretty cool. 

I Watched All the Shrek Movies or The Surprising Beauty of Puss in Boots

 

What makes a movie endure? That's a really good question to start an article and yet I'm not sure I have an answer. It was question that came up as Amanda and I decided to go through all the Shrek movies. There was no particular reason for this, just a whim. While I sometimes have a desire to rewatch an old film I'm very familiar with or one I have missed that I've finally felt like getting around to, the Shrek films don't really fall into either category. 

That's not to say that I have any animosity towards the franchise, in fact I really liked the first two films growing up. I've been told recently that I throw the term "favorites" around too much, especially when it comes to movies. I guess there must be hundreds of films that I might have called that at one time or another, but that doesn't always mean they rank highly in some essential list for any great length of time.

My point is that while I may have probably considered the first Shrek films among my favorites for some brief time in preteen/early teen years (as I know my sister and I rewatched them frequently for a bit), they never made it onto any list currently or retroactively. So, no, I guess they were never REALLY among my favorites per say, but I enjoyed them and I wouldn't dispute the classic nature of the tale combined with the weird time capsule and memeability (is that a term?) the franchise has sparked with many people.

However, since I've never been a huge Shrek fan, I never watched anything past the second film. It was just one of the instances where interest waned between the second and third and I never had a desire to watch the remaining sequels. It's possibly I grew out of it, although I think it was a just simple matter of kind of forgetting about it and then (right around my high school years) I started to consider myself a "serious" film connoisseur and critic. Maybe my inclination towards believing more sequels generally equated to a downward trend in quality. Or may I just felt to mature for it. In any case, I don't think there was a conscious reason, Shrek just wasn't something I connected with enough to keep up with.

Amanda enjoys occasionally watching kids films. I feel like she suggests than more regularly than I do. So this prompted us to borrow the Shrek films from the local library. After watching all the films, something kind of unexpected happened that I honestly would have never guessed. My opinion on these films radically shifted, partially due to the simple input of new information. 

As is often the case when we get behind on what's current, my new perspective may or may not provide new revelations to Shrek fans far more diehard than I.  In fact, I find this franchise just one of many examples that I find interesting in regards to such an adoring fanbase. It's not necessarily that I can't see some appeal, I just never would have thought this franchise would result in yearly festivals. 

Having seen all the films at this point, I can still appreciate the fandom being what it is, even though it's not one of those things that resonates at the same frequency. Then again, I guess you could say that about any fandom you aren't are part of (perhaps with a few exceptions, like if you really don't GET something at all). I think I'm starting to stall, so here are my thoughts briefly on each film:

Shrek (2001)- This is of course the classic I grew up with. I can still appreciate how it's a clever jab at fairy tales and Disney's corporate nature in particular. All the while it does have a good message for kids with some spicy yet subtle adult humor in there. It's hard to deny how truly unique a film it is, which is a big part of what helps it endure, even if I don't love it as much as I did as a young viewer.

Shrek 2 (2004)- For about twenty years, this was where my knowledge of the franchise basically ended. I remembered for the longest time thinking this was the superior movie, with a good continuation of the themes of the story. I was surprised how many movie references of the time where thrown in. These stood out much more prominently and I may potentially damage the timelessness even more so than the pop songs.

Shrek 3 (2007)- Entering new territory, this was definitely the funniest of the movies for me. There were some very strong visual gags and some darker/slightly more sophisticated humor that I think the adult viewer would appreciate more. I was surprised to see how much they managed to push boundaries while still remaining fairly accessible to younger audiences. This movie was very much a direct sequel to the previous movie, following up Prince Charming's story as a villain in a natural way while actually providing some layers that make his perspective the sympathetic of franchise villains.

Shrek 4 (2010)- This one is kind of a mixed bag for me, as I loved the scale and scope of the concept (alternate reality a la It's A Wonderful Life). However, I must admit that this sort of scenario has been done before and does retread extensions of the same message we've been hearing since the first movie. Personally, I still think it stands out as unique, with perhaps the movie evil villain and the darkest tone. Yet, my biggest issue isn't really any of the formula, just that I feel we could have gone deeper into Shrek's internal plight or at least created a grander scale of events that the movie seems to suggest it wants to build on. Ultimately,  the movie kind of peters out rather than going out with a strong conclusive note. It's flawed, and certainly not as balanced, but I still liked it overall.

Now we come to what this article is really about. The secret of this series is not in the Shrek films themselves (at least for me). No, the biggest delight is in the spinoff, the Puss and Boots movies.

I'll admit to always liking the character in Shrek 2. I like cats. I like Antonio Banderas. I like swashbuckling adventures and fantasy in general. Someone must have really noticed the potential and ran with it. 

While the feline's first outing is pretty good, acting as sort of an origin story to the character, it's in the sequel that he really shines. Honestly, what surprised the most about these two movies is just how fundamentally different they are from the main movies.

Perhaps one reason I wasn't drawn from them was due to expecting more of the same satire but without the titular ogre. I had heard in passing the first movie was good, but with no ringing endorsements that I should rush out and watch it. No, it slipped under my radar as many good movies do. It's a shame because (and I'm not sure if this is a hot take or not) I think I enjoy these movies more than the Shrek films. 

This might be just do to the initial surprise they were actually pretty good movies, but that the tone was just not what I was expecting. Unlike the satire of Shrek, while there is some humor, these are much more straightforward, serious and fun adventure/fantasy stories. They took advantage of the melded fairy tale setting with an expanded world with set pieces. I particularly loved the ascent to the clouds to find the golden eggs. 

While the first movie is good, with the exception of an aspect of the ending that doesn't make much sense (even within the logic of the film), the second film truly blew me away.

I'm sure most people reading this probably know already, but in case you haven't seen it, just go for it. If you like fantasy or just good quality movies, I highly recommend it. While it benefits from the previous movie, you don't really need to see it or the main series to appreciate the story. The animation was wonderful, the humor was great and the themes were very poignant and complex. It may in fact be one of my favorite movies now. Time will tell.

So basically, the Shrek franchise didn't go as downhill as I feel I was led to believe over the years. Nice.

No Romulans But Still Pretty Good! (Alien: Romulus Review)

Alien: Romulus is pretty scary, but not as scary as adenocarcinoma.

Well, horror films provide a different type of scare. They often echo the fears in our own lives while providing that detachment once we are no longer immersed, if we are successfully immersed of course. We can dip into these fears and explore them in a new way, perhaps coming away with a little more perspective and maybe some relief. These seems to be true of many stories, horror or otherwise.

It is fitting to draw comparisons to the Alien franchise with something akin to cancer. The xenomorph, in its various transformations which accompany its otherworldly life cycle, invites all kinds of comparisons which have been analyzed since the inception of the first film back in the 1970s. Probably the most commonly cited is showcased by the H.R. Giger production design. The creatures and their methods of attack are invasive, particularly with a sexual connation.  There is a type of violation the alien creature commits which reflects fears many people have of similar violations of a physical nature. After all, the face hugger forces its eggs down the throat of the victim violently with its proboscis, regardless of how the victim feels.

This concept is indeed frightening and I know some people have found the films uncomfortable for this reason and have refused to watch them. Some people don't like horror movies and others understandably like them even less if they take them to traumatic places. If nothing else, this proves the Alien franchise is willing to use these monsters from space to elevate itself above B movie camp (which I love and also has its place of course) to try and explore these primordial concepts.

For me, the Alien films never came off as overtly sexual, at least not at the forefront of my mind. No, it usually gets under my skin (if you will) due to fears that are more akin to classic body horror. The face hugger always bothered me due to its forceful entry into the body but then leaving behind the egg within. This growth could be a stand in for many biological dangers that can strike. It acts as a tumor or some sort of parasite but could also become suddenly violent like a heart attack, albeit with much more blood. The chest bursting itself is terrifying of course. This film in particular made use of crackling bones crunching as the creature made its way out. Never underestimate great sound design. 

Then there is the other, more basic and perhaps primal horror that these films tap into. That is fear of the unknown. That is perhaps the greatest fear but, more specifically, the xenomorph seems to be a brilliant representation of the predatory animal. The creature, particularly due to the design of the monster and the accompanying atmosphere of these films, seems (for lack of a better word) evil. It's this greyish and ebony not quite humanoid/not quite reptilian/insect creature with multiple jaws of fangs, a speared tail and acid blood. It's a nightmare. Worst for me though is the lack of eyes. This brings much more emphasis to the scowling and drooling fanged mouths, which seem just so filled with hate.

This is, of course, a human perception, but the design choice is also somewhat deliberate I'm sure. As far was we can tell though, this thing is just an animal being driven by that instinct for survival we also have. This in itself brings us questions about the natural world, for we as humans often place ourselves above the typical animal. Our intelligence, our consciousness, or sense of morality and compassion separate us from the other creatures of the world. It makes us better than them in some way, right? We're special. We should get some special treatment. Well, maybe. Maybe not. Either way, regardless of what makes us different, when thrown among the wolves, the wolves will care little for your human qualities. Perhaps we're not so separate after all.

What makes the xenomorph more intimidating than say, a lion, is that we know a lion. We, to some degree at least, understand the lion. The lion, in this example, has some spectrum of emotion we can project on to it. This potential understanding makes the animal less frightening, at least from a distance. The lion is a mammal though, similar to me, more similar to my cats, which I can equate as cute and loveable. The lion can even be cute and loveable, from a distance. I think some people tend to have less connection to the animal the further they are removed from it. Reptiles or insects for instance. Unless you find those things interesting, you probably won't have as much natural affection for a reptile or insect. Personally, I think reptiles are really cool and I even would dare say I find some of them cute. Maybe not as cute as other critters, but probably cuter than an insect. Even insects we can make cute, through marketing or animation. We can project the best aspects of our humanity onto these creatures. The xenomorph is truly alien, so this lack of understanding feeds into that most basic aspect of fear, fear of the unknown.

The mystery of the xenomorph was a driving force for the franchise for years. Less information always makes things scarier, in movies and in life. We can bring our own ideas about the origins of the monster and incite fan discussion and debate, all while bonding over our individual and common fears. I guess that's one reason horror movie fans are so passionate. Maybe the whole thing is therapeutic. Movies have been a great outlet for me in general, for escapism as well as reflection and socializing. So maybe the whole Prometheus thing may not have been the best thing for the xenomorphs. I do like of like the movie but it has some big flaws. Aren't I supposed to be talking about another movie? Oh yeah!

I had some medical news come up that kind of threw me off for about a month, so I didn't feel focused enough to write a review on Alien: Romulus after seeing it in theaters. It's kind of good thing though, as I had some time to ruminate and really solidify how I felt about it. In short, I liked it! I liked it quite a bit actually. 

I'm sure most die-hard fans have probably seen it at this point, but as I write this it is coming out available for streaming. With that said, about a month after seeing it I really want to watch the movie again. I would declare its the best movie in the franchise since Aliens. At first, that probably wouldn't sound like a ringing endorsement, but I feel confident saying that. 

I certainly have some mixed feelings and a few doubts upon my initial viewing, but there is one major factor which causes me to (mostly) push those things aside. This movie made me feel something. Most movies do of course, but I had a significant emotional response based on the events occurring on screen. I'll go even further. This movie made me shed tears. Yes. Tears. I don't often cry in movies and when I do, they are in dramas. I don't think I've ever cried in a horror movie before. 

My theory on why is simply that I was invested in the characters. Much like characters in past Alien films, these were blue collar everymen/women/people you could sympathize with. They were believable and relatable without having to know much about them. I connected with their family dynamics and an instilled sense of survival against a large money hungry company that seems to own everything. This concept seems to get more relevant and dystopic every year. Oh my. Anyway, our characters are part of a mining colony, essentially indentured servants to the corporation and a ship with cryogenic technology is their chance to escape. Whatever could be on this ship? You already know.

What really aided my investment wasn't really the writing. Although there are some nice subtle touches, the characters aren't the most complex or dynamic, although their relationships do compel the audience to consider ideas about family and loyalty, despite inherent differences. No, it's all about the performances. The initial trailers with the young cast made me more than skeptical. It just looked like they'd turned Alien into another disposable slasher. I was very wrong. The youth of the cast provides something new. They seem like a ragtag group of misfit orphans who are really out of their depth. For the most part, even with one character who was meant to be unlikable, I really wanted this group to make it. 

Two scenes stick out in particular. One involves a young girl who we find out is pregnant. There are some obvious parallels to the the concepts toyed with regarding childbirth and motherhood in this franchise, so it's not surprising this was included. Also, this girl had few other attributes other than being a young mother to be who simply wants to get out of her situation, therefore providing a better life for her child. Much like other things in this movie, it's pretty safe and potentially boring but...it worked for me. Perhaps it's partially due to my own thoughts regarding mortality in recent months along with the possibility of having children of my own. It was also a very compelling performance. I worried about this young woman. I cared about her and her unborn child. I was doing that sort of cinematic prayer you sometimes may find yourself doing. Please let her make it. Please let her be okay. They wouldn't go that far. Of course they would, that's why she's here. No, they won't do that. Come on. No!

There is also a scene involving characters separated by a door and the moral decision of opening it versus closing it, with a xenomorph hunting one person on the other side.  It's a basic, classic dilemma. Once again, it's simple but therefore a universal conflict with lives on the line. Much like a pregnant woman in danger, it seems passé and tired but it was done very well. There was tension. My anxiety was up. I'm pretty sure I shed tears here too. I understand if they have to make the decision but maybe they'll let her in. Maybe. I hope they do. I won't reveal the resolution for either of these characters in case you haven't seen it but the point is that this movie had me invested. It upset me. I left the theater feeling unsettled and it took me hours to feel more like myself...and that was kind of a good thing? 

​Before I wrap this up (this went on much longer than I anticipated) I wanted to try to be fair and point out a few potential flaws that do stick out to me. I hesitate calling them flaws but I could totally see some people hating these elements. It's tricky though and something many movies based on these franchises often have trouble with. This is an Alien movie. So it does...Alien stuff. On one hand you always want to try to bring something new to the table instead of rinsing and repeating the stuff we've seen. However, if the movie strays from the established beats too much, why see it? How much can a thing be different from itself before it no longer becomes that thing? Indeed. Ha. No, but seriously, I've wondered this regarding many IPS. The truth is, I think Alien: Romulus does both. 

Face huggers. Chest bursters. Androids. Weyland-Yutani. Cryo sleep. Strong female characters. Hybrids? You've seen it all before. If these things weren't there it wouldn't be an Alien movie. Some of these things I admit felt almost a little obligatory, like fan Easter eggs or...what's the South Park term? Member berries. Look at this? Remember this? Hit those nostalgic neurons and like our movie! Except, it never really felt disingenuous to me. I'm pretty cynical about this stuff and I just felt that these things were done very effectively, with reverence to the source material. Yeah, they repeat some things, but they do add new elements. Some of it is just more or bigger or with a new coat of paint, but they do add something new. This batch of characters offered a new perspective and the whole mining colony setting did expand the world bit more. That's about it but otherwise it was a more intimate tale covering much of the same ground. I liked it!

There is one thing I think people may have hated that could be the exception. It would be the appearance of one character that could be seen as a fun throwback or a cheap nostalgia hit. It was probably a bit of both but I kind of like the reintroduction of this character. Maybe it's because I think of him as such a classic villain and a very fascinating one. If people hate it, that's fine but it mostly worked for me. I'm not sure if the movie needed it but hey, whatever.

So, there you have it. There were no Romulans but it was still pretty good. Take care everyone.

​- Joe

Our First Wedding Anniversary

Due to recent circumstances over the last few weeks, we had to modify our anniversary celebration a bit. As most of you know, Amanda Manduck and I are generally homebodies, so the biggest change was transportation and (most unfortunately) food-related.

Our original plan was to retrieve samples from each of the Hummelstown pizzerias and sample them, much like we did to determine the menu for our wedding. Since I'm currently recovering from surgery, I haven't really been able to go along on long car rides and my ability to intake food has been rather limited at the moment. I thought it was a rather cute idea and I look forward to making it happen next year. This time, my lovely wife was my personal delivery driver! This marriage thing has some nice perks.

As much as I love pizza, we decided to get some pasta from Fabio's. It's an Italian place in Grantville we discovered on our honeymoon this past summer. I highly recommend it. Although the amount was small, I was able to have fettucini alfredo. Amanda got the macaroni and cheese dish.

After eating the wonderful food she brought home, we spent time finishing one of the stories from a Planet of the Apes anthology. It was based on the live-action show, so we watched an episode of that and then followed it up with Amanda's favorite film, an obscure sci-fi entitled 2001: A Space Odyssey. Ever heard of that one? Even though Amanda insisted on not talking through the whole film, ironically, we talked through the whole thing.

When Amanda suggested the idea for the time capsule filled with vows, letters and other writing material, I thought it was a very fitting idea. However, I could not have anticipated how fun and heartfelt this new tradition would be. There was even a plot twist or two!

We opened the box and examined the contents within. These included badges from the Star Trek convention and our little yarn ghosts. I've gotten much better with crafts in part due to our crafternoons at the library. I hope to go to one this month if I'm up to it.

I also think we did a pretty good job with our author summaries and recommendations. It's almost like we like reading or something. Sheesh, what a pair of nerds.

We then reread our vows after looking for Frank Saveslives wonderful wedding ceremony script. He did such a wonderful job with the ceremony. We read our letters to each other and I have to say, Amanda Manduck wrote a much better letter than I did. This is proof that I really have to up my game yo.

The best part of this process was reading the requested letters from our wedding party and families with words of wisdom, encouragement, and love.

Yolanda Poth thank you so much for welcoming me into the family. Your letter continued that message and I am very proud to be a part of it.

Brianna Steimer had some great advice and sweet words that provided laughter and joyful reminiscing. I'm sorry to say that Amanda is still the spider-slayer though.

I'm very happy to say, as with the wedding-related events in general, my guys really came through for me.

Sometimes, especially with how our past few weeks have been, it's good to hear kind words from friends and family. It serves as a reminder of the smallest yet most important aspects of any relationship. With this new tradition, it was also full of wonderful surprises.

Jonathan William and Hannah Emily We loved hearing your kind words and, in a way, your letter served as a time capsule reminder of your new union as well. Thank you so much for supporting us as friends, fellow educators, and lovers of literature. We're looking forward to seeing you both again soon!

Nathaniel Rose Amanda and I really appreciated your time travel-themed letter. It was both humorous and heartfelt. Thank you for continuing to add to the laughter and humor of our movie nights. We plan to do more in the future!

Justin Miller is a truly fantastic writer and really took the theme to the next level. I guess we should have expected no less. Two letters and with a bit of a novel-like structure complete with preludes and afterwords of a sort. We were both amazed and greatly touched by how honest and open you were as you wrote. To put it bluntly, you went there. You should really put more of your work out there. These letters were fantastically written and were full of love and honesty. You had some great advice as well. As expected, you gave us something to ponder, reflect on, and perhaps discuss in the future.

James, my best man. I know that typically you are a man of few words. I also know you probably didn't like that I gave you a writing assignment. Despite this, your letter was beautiful. Amanda can attest, I got a little tearful reading one particular line. We really enjoyed your letter and look forward to the five-year one you generously and most optimistically provided us as well. You're my best friend too.

Thank you once again to everyone who helped make our wedding special and also continue to support us on our journey together. This first year was mostly good, but it's had its challenges of course. Overall though, it was just so great to have this reminder of all those who love us and who we love together in one special memento. Amanda and I really needed this, especially after my stay at the hospital. You all helped make the day truly special for us. In my case, I actually managed to forget what had happened so recently. That's how powerful the experience was.

It's been a scary few weeks but as I recover from my surgery, I've been thinking a great deal about what's important. Specifically, that I've done a pretty good job of being thankful for every little gift each day brings. Now I'm just even more aware of it.

I'm a very lucky man to have a loving, sweet woman in my life who shares my interests and laughs at my corny jokes. I hope to have many more years with you to go to Star Trek conventions, watch bad movies (and some good ones) with friends, share good meals, take long walks in the woods, and create new crafts together among many other things I hope to do. I'm incredibly fortunate to have found such a wonderful person who accepts me and encourages me as you do. I love you, Amanda.

I also love all of you, my family (cats included), my friends, my colleagues, and all those people who have enriched my life up to this point. I thank all of you who wrote letters, I thank all who helped put our wedding day together, everyone who made it out on that chilly day to share the moment, and all who have supported us since then. We appreciate you all greatly.

Take care, everyone! Happy anniversary, my love!

P.S.- Justin told me to be more open and vulnerable, so I'm taking his advice. Be forewarned, I plan to write something similar in the future.