Ridley Scott's Napoleon: I Guess I Don't Know Much About History

I am happy to say that I went into Napoleon with virtually no knowledge of the film, which is pretty hard to do these days. I finally broke down and watched a trailer to entice my wife into accompanying me to the theater. We've recently gotten married and were invited to see the film along with some fellow teachers from MovieMindsPodcast. Our plans for a local honeymoon were interrupted, so we weren't able to see any new movies in the theater. With prices increasing, the school year in full swing and a lack of movies which enticed us, we just don't get out there as much. So, Napoleon is my first theatrical experience as a married man. This is perhaps fitting (maybe?) that the narrative is sort of a tragic romance of sorts. That's not to say I recommend it as a typical date night movie, by any means.

The film was not what I was expecting. Well, in a general sense it was (pun was actually not intended there but I'm keeping it anyway). The specifics of the thematic elements were more the surprise. As I suspected, the movie follows Napoleon Bonaparte through aspects of his political rise to power and several major chapters in his military campaigns. As my wife and I were discussing, it's often difficult to fit any person's life (let alone a towering historical figure's) into a few hours. Usually they focus on one major element or event, or just give brief intercuts throughout the most notable moments. 

We see Napoleon (Joaquin Phoenix) as an adult, although no real effort is made through make-up or digital effects to signify any aging throughout the story. This biopic opts for lightly breezing through major events but breaks them up with sprinkles of intrigue by various statesmen and nobles. Most notably, the filmmakers spend several scenes putting together recreations of several major battles. While I think think the most love and care was put into those aspects of Napoleon, the juxtaposition of this is what I suspect is core of the story. This being Napoleon's relationship to his wife, Josephine. 

I will confess at this point with some embarrassment that, despite considering myself something of a history buff, I don't really know a great deal about Napoleon or his wars. I guess I've never been super drawn to that period of Europe between the Renaissance and the First World War. That is one of the film's greatest positives, in that it genuinely made me more interested in learning more about the man.

Unfortunately, the desire to read more about this period is driven by a lack of real depth to many of the specific facts and a kind of unclear theme which seems to contradict itself in a number of ways. I honestly applaud the less obvious approach of focusing much of the film on Napoleon's passion and accompanying frustrations with his wife, who seems rather unfaithful in conjunction with the two having a kind of unhealthy relationship. Josephine is a character who confuses me, as she is portrayed as being both at Napoleon's mercy but also very aware of her power over him. I'm not saying love can't be messy and I'm sure the actual events brought their own unique complications. However, since the film doesn't really make the intentions or the motivations of these characters very clear, I'm not entirely sure how I'm supposed to feel about them. Simply put, despite all the scenes with them, I don't really know them. 

While I really admire this idea of Napoleon being very devoted to his wife, with all the imperfections of the relationship included, I don't think it really works well as presented. I think the idea seems to add some feminine power as a motivating force behind the French general, but it feels like no real clear statement is ever put forth. Not that it necessarily has to, as Phoenix does a great job of portraying the complex emotions Napoleon feels for his wife, especially upon hearing of her death. However, we are never really sure why. Then again, maybe he doesn't know. Love is complicated. I guess I can look past that a bit. Unfortunately, the lack of any real dialogue or scenes clarifying this make the character study on Napoleon himself even more confusing.

His love for Josephine is implied to be intertwined with his eventual downfall. This is an interesting idea, as if the man's drive is directly connected to his love for this woman. Between their marriage being made null and her death, Napoleon's victories dwindle. Once again, I really like the general idea of this theme, but I couldn't really see any direct correlation between these two ideas. As one of my fellow podcasters pointed out, "It's two films." I agree.

While I did find some of the ideas of the romance and surrounding political atmosphere moderately intriguing, where this movie shines the most is in the battle sequences. While I'm not sure if Phoenix would have been my first choice for Napoleon (based on my admittedly limited knowledge), I really liked the contrast between his soft spoken demeanor and his decisiveness in combat. He portrayed a man who was quietly confident. I appreciated that. The overall production of France circa 1800 was fantastic, with amazing sets and costume design. It's in the battles that these elements, combined with other special effects really bring you into the time and place of the battle. It feels larger than life but also rather gritty and realistic, with hints of that movie magic greatness I love. 

I will say I think the violence is honestly a bit much, as it is placed deliberately enough to draw attention but with a lack of frequency that allows it be a surprise when it happens again. One one hand, this film shows the horrors of war while on the other kind of glorifying it through the bombastic presentation of other classic war films. This is understandable, since the concept of war has often been shown to be both horrifying and oddly intriguing. It's why films like these exist and a complicated issue probably worthy of another blog or two. I'm sure some experts with much more authority on the subject than me have written about it somewhere.

Regardless, this movie leaves me uncertain about how to feel about Napoleon and I think there may be some clunky aspects of the script or production that diminished some of the fine polish of the cinematography and costumes. Napoleon dies and his last words imply a devotion to his men, his country and his wife. These are among the final texts at the end of film, along with the number of casualties caused by his wars. From what I understand, Napoleon is a controversial figure, as the text suggests. I can understand Scott not necessarily having an answer or taking a stance (although I think it helps to). Regardless, I can't help but feel like I didn't really know this version of Napoleon as well as I could have.

Scott has his place in film history for sure, having made some truly great films. Alien is one of my favorite movies, so I really appreciate his work. While I did not like Napoleon nearly as much as Gladiator or The Martian, I think it had some true moments of greatness. Ultimately, the film's overall themes and objects felt as undercooked and enigmatic to me as the title character. There are some gorgeous shots though.

C+

STAR TREK: Lower Decks (First Impression)

I suppose an alternative title to this post would be, "Oh yeah, I have a blog." 

I've been keeping busy working on some other writing and posting videos on the channel, but it seems I'm definitely due for a post here. Might as well talk about some Star Trek stuff.  

To be honest, my feelings have been pretty mixed with the CBS All Access shows from the past few years.

I'll admit I haven't fully caught up with Discovery, so I can't give a more formed opinion on that show yet. I had some issues with certain characters in the first season (mostly how Burnham was handled) and I couldn't really get past their interpretation of the Kingons. However, I did like the visuals, Michelle Yeoh, Saru, the Mudd episodes and some aspects of the Mirror Universe.

So far, it seems the second season is better (?). When I get fully caught up I may do a more fleshed out post or video. 

I only watched one episode of Picard. I know people have been upset about the contractions with canon and established character motivations. I think are problems, but I tried to watch the show on its own merits. Based on the first episode, my friend Gimli and I felt no strong desire to watch more. 

So now I guess I should talk about the two episodes of Lower Decks I viewed. 

I like Rick and Morty. I like Star Trek. I think these two have some overlap for sure. When I heard about a Trek show in this style I was actually kind of excited. From what I watched, it as mostly what I expected. 

The characters seemed reminiscent of how many Trek fans would react if they found themselves in Starfleet.  They'd be geeking out and making references and namedrops. I know I probably would. The more adult and self-referential humor was pretty charming to be honest. I found myself smiling through the episodes, but not really laughing that much.

My friend Dan reviewed the episodes and pointed out a problem he noticed. There weren't many jokes. While this didn't bother me that much in these two episodes, as I enjoyed the overall production and performances, I did kind of agree with him. While I think these episodes are fine, this show can't rely on references and Easter eggs for very long. There needs to be stronger original narrative and more jokes relating too it. 

It's still early though, and I found much of the first season of The Orville to have similar issues. Now I can't wait for season three (my favorite "Trek" show right now, to be honest). In comparison to the other Trek shows of the last few years, this was pretty enjoyable. Maybe I was just happy to see something not super dark thematically (and darkly lit), being very different than Discovery or Picard. 

I'll probably watch more of the season. I'm curious to see if other people enjoyed it. There are certainly better Trek parodies out there, but this one needs to build more on its own story. 

Hellboy 2019 Review and Star Wars Episode 9 Trailer

Hellboy is a superhero that I can't say I'm overly attached to, but I am still very fond of  the 2004 film, as I think it was a great blend of practical effects, fun fantasy action and a very charismatic performance from Ron Perlman. I went with some friends to see the film, several of them being fans of the older films. With a third  no longer happening, this reboot seemed like it would capture a similar feeling. The trailers did a good job of getting me hyped. Usually, I'm skeptical. However, I went in with fairly high expectations and found myself a bit disappointed. This is partially due to a stronger attachment than I realized to the style and performances of the previous films, but with some pretty glaring issues I was not expecting.

David Harbour of Stranger Things fame certainly fits well into the new, slightly more realistic looking make-up, and he certainly adds some energy into the performance. I believe this more bumbling interpretation is closer to the comics, but I found he often lacked the presence of Perlman. At first, I was unsure if this was a reboot or sequel, as the pace of the film immediately dumps a massive amount of exposition regarding Arthurian lore and the sealing away of an evil sorceress (Milla Jovovich). Hellboy, after being forced to kill a vampire bitten friend, is sent to England to stop giants and becomes involved in the struggle to prevent her return.

There are some pretty big issues with the movie, but most of them probably could have been fixed with one word. Pacing. It's been a long time since I felt almost entirely overwhelmed by the constant action and scene changes. The experience wasn't seamless though, as you still feel the two hour run time. In a similar way to Aquaman, we observed that this movie had too much plot going on, with so little time to actually developing it. This creates the feeling that there is much less plot than there is and you sort of become numb to the action. The introduction of other characters to support Hellboy could have been handled better, as the backstories of the antagonistic British agent and a young psychic are both clumsily handled.

The effects work and the soundtrack are also a bit uneven, as the blaring heavy metal music and the very over the top gore (which is pretty well done) left me questioning what I was supposed to take seriously or when.  There were some jokes that got me to chuckle, but they didn't give them much time to land before the next action sequence.

I can't say it was all negative though, as the most frustrating part for me was that there were obvious pieces of a much better movie. Some of the creature design was pretty inspired, the costuming in particular for Hellboy himself stood out the most. If the action had been spaced out with more time to just breathe and let the characters interact more, the experience would have been much stronger. My favorite scene was when Hellboy encounters the villainous Baba Yaga, who is perfectly disgusting in an unsettling way in common with the other  creatures he faces. He makes a deal with her in exchange for information, being in much more control but still resolving it in a slightly silly fashion. Had the whole movie been like that scene, it would have been closer to the Hellboy I wanted.


As I was planning to write this, I saw that the trailer for the next Star Wars film has been released. I actually don't care much about obviously jumping on the bandwagon of every other person who will jump to conclusions based on a single trailer. Then again, I'm doing it anyway since I have the time. Actually, more than trailer itself, it was a comment by one of my online friends that accompanied the post that made me want to write about it. She stated she isn't really that excited for Star Wars anymore but she was glad for new additions. At least among many of my friends, we're somewhat disillusioned with the franchise for several reasons.

I think it's the lack of unity of vision that makes it the most frustrating these days. The films are no longer the vision of one man collaborating with others, but seem much more tied to what the studios want to drive profits up. Perhaps that's just how it feels these days and it was always that way. I'm not sure, although the transparency between fans and creators has its downsides. One director wanted to be bold and change things. It was risky and it offended some people. Instead of rolling with that, we've heard rumors of backtracking. It is difficult with any beloved franchise and Star Wars may be the best example. People are invested in these characters and change is very hard to pull off without seeming disrespectful.

Much like that post, I don't have much enthusiasm for the films either. This is a combination of the obvious over saturation and just a change in taste over time. My love for this universe is far from dead though, as I've really been enjoying Rebels lately.

I do hope this new trailer can resolve some established plot points. Otherwise, why have them? I also don't want it to cater too much. Some creators, like recently with J.K. Rowling, tend to overcorrect when it is unnecessary. Also though, fans need to keep an open mind. There will be light sabers. There will be battles in space (Star Wars?). Lando is back. Nice. Palpatine is back? Maybe. I liked Snoke but I kind of wanted him to be his own thing. I guess that's the question I'm hoping gets answered. I like my maniacal villains and Palapatine/Snoke (same guy?) both fit that mold.

Oh and I am excited for the final season of Game of Thrones. We'll also probably be watching the Fruits Basket remake. There may be some videos, podcasts or blog post on these topics in coming weeks. I might even talk about that movie with Thanos. I think that's a big deal. Right?

Thanks for reading everyone. Stay magical.

vic mignogna, sexual harassment and fan backlash

Much of the focus of this blog over the past few years has been a combination of a few specific things. I've been examining current films and entertainment, specifically how they relate to my personal growth, the shift of perception of fandom over time and the role of the  people behind these fictional worlds.

I wanted to make a video a few years ago discussing a difficult topic, but I never felt compelled to go through with it. It was something along the lines of how our feelings about art are connected to the people who make the art that we love. The biggest example in my mind for many years was Mel Gibson. I have loved many of the characters he's played and the films he's directed. However, when I was in high school, he was revealed to have some negative characteristics. He said some racist things and it was suggested he may have been abusive. This did alter the perception of Gibson and his career hasn't ever fully recovered from it. However, I now know that Mel Gibson, to some varying degree, is not like the characters he portrays and does not expose all the great ideas of the films he's been involved with.

In the years since that time, we've become a culture is tries to be much more sensitive to others and aware of issues that continue to plague our society. I think that, in general, this is a good thing. How else are we going to improve if we don't stop ignoring issues of racism, sexism,  abuse, violence, harassment and rape? It's uncomfortable but I think that's why these issues still continue to be a problem. People don't like to hear about it, especially if it's someone they know. I can be difficult to deal with, but awareness must continue. It's a good thing that people are coming forward with these issues.

It seems that one area of our society that has been exposing more dormant issues has been in the entertainment industry specifically. People have been coming forward and expressing issues regarding instances of racism, homophobia and sexual harassment. I think the first one to real shock us recently was with Bill Cosby. For many, he was figure of wholesome comedy and good values. So the revelation that this man had a pretty bad dark side probably had a big effect on many people. I know so many grew up watching his shows and certainly some emotions tied in with those experiences. It's what we do. Entertainment and the arts can be a great way to help us understand our world. They can also be a much needed escape. It's understandable that have this idea tainted may have been difficult for some to accept. That is the hard reality though. Nobody is perfect. People can do some pretty terrible things.

Since then, many celebrities have come under fire for past misdeeds and even consistently recurring ones. I want to emphasize that this is a good thing. I think the one that caught my attention the most was Kevin Spacey. I've enjoyed many of his roles and this could alter my perception of some of this films. This is finally bringing me to my main point. I find the revelation of these bad deeds to be disappointing and often very sad. I feel bad for the victims and I feel disappointed in people I looked up to in some way. However, I don't know if any revelation has been relevant to the mediums I enjoy that the news regarding Vic Mignogna.

The original video idea I had years ago was on the question of how the perception of those who create art affects who we perceive and enjoy the art. If I found out that one of my favorite writers, directors, actors or musicians was a murderer or something, could I really enjoy what they create? Obviously that's an extreme example, but it's a legitimate question. I might love a film or franchise due to my emotional connection to it, but could the work be ruined for me? Should it be? Would it be morally acceptable for me to like it after learning about such things? Does that make me a bad person? I think the answer is different for every work, revelation and consumer.

Vic Mignogna is a voice actor who's pretty well know among Western anime fans. His two best know voice roles are as Broly in Dragon Ball and, more famously, his portrayal of the main protagonist of Fullmetal Alchemist, Edward Elric. For anyone who's followed this blog, or my Youtube channel or knows me personally, these two shows are kind of a big deal for me. Even before I was really a fan of the anime medium, these two shows were important. I grew up with Dragon Ball Z and have many fond memories of that show. In later years it inspired me explore the deeper reasons why such a show has endured, examining the world and its characters. FMA is pretty much my favorite anime. At least within the shonen demographic, I believe FMA has some of the best character writing and some really powerful universal themes that have legitimately impacted my philosophy on life. It was very important for me to view as a teenager. Considering these roles are the only ones I really care about for Mignogna, I can't say I'm a diehard fan of him specifically. Although, I recently discovered he was behind a project to create fan films of the original Star Trek series. These were some of the best fan films I've seen. So I was actually starting to appreciate his work more when I found out about these acquisitions. I honestly was once again sad and disappointed.

However, it's important to remember that I love the ideals exposed in things like Star Trek, Dragon Ball and Fullmetal Alchemist.

Blog/Channel Plans For 2019 (Happy New Year!)

Hello everyone and happy new year! After having the flu as well as some computer trouble, the YouTube channel hasn't been super active lately. I'm hoping to get back into the swing of things, refocusing on some new and old video ideas. I didn't really get many projects off the ground last year. This was mostly due to time constraints and trying to find that balance between producing content I wanted to make but that my subscribers would also like. This inner conflict kind of prevented me from producing much content I could be proud of. I think I'm just going to have to go back to basics. I'll do what I feel like and if people like to watch, they will.

Character analysis videos will be making a comeback, though I'll be allowing my subscribers to vote on which ones they'd like to see first. Podcasts and film/show retrospectives will still be around, though I think the character videos will become a priority again. I want to make sure I do them justice though, so they could be time consuming. I also want to keep playing around with new ideas. I'm enjoying the drink reviews with my friend James (Gimli). They're easy to do but also give me some practice with editing more. I'm planning on upgrading my equipment for better audio and video quality. I'm probably overdue for that. Who knows, I may do some ASMR videos. The Dramatic Readings may make a comeback too. We will see. I have many things I want to do, but I can overwhelm myself pretty easily. I think after this year, I might have to take a long hiatus from YouTubing. It really depends on how things go this year. I'll probably still keep blogging here and focus more time on music and film projects in coming years.

As far as 2019 goes, I realized there are many movies I'm excited to see that will probably get a review of some form here or on the channel. The picture is from Glass, which is the sequel to Split and Unbreakable. Unbreakable is actually one of my favorite films and probably the best Shyamalan has made (I know most people might say Sixth Sense, I just think it's a little overrated...plus the superhero may work better for me). To see that I got a secret sequel in Split was a great twist, although I thought it was just a Easter egg rather than definitive set up for a sequel. Like many of films that become franchises, some may argue this takes away from Split as its own film. I think it still works since the reveal is really at the tale end after the main plot has concluded. Split was fun and genuinely creepy at points, with James McAvoy giving a fantastic performance. It was a bit goofy at points, but much better than I was expecting. The third film seems to be hinting that Mr. Glass is really going to be the focus, making me wonder how much time is going to be divided between David Dunn, Glass and The Beast. Since I think this trilogy wasn't smoothly constructed, it might be tough to balance resolving elements from Unbreakable and Split and be a compelling movie on its own. Even so, being as I was so hyped in the theater, I will be going to see this one, and I'm honestly not sure if I'll disappointed. Unbreakable didn't really need a sequel, but I've always kind of wanted one. It would be cool to see how this characters evolve. Much like the other films. it will be probably be a dark ending with just a dash of hope.

There are many fun movies coming out this year. I may discuss some here. The ones I'm most interested in/excited for include: Dragon Ball Super: Broly, Alita: Battle Angel, Captain Marvel, Hellboy, Avengers, Detective Pikachu, John Wick 3, Godzilla, Dark Phoenix, and  Spider-man: Far From Home. I guess these studios really want my money? I didn't even some of other movies coming out I may see but I'm not interested in at all. This could be a very interesting year for movies indeed.

As far as anime goes, I'll probably check out the second season of One Punch Man. I may also check out the new Fruits Basket, since I finally watched the original.

My interests in comics have been different lately, as I've mostly been reading Masters of the Universe and Ninja Turtles stuff. I'm not sure if that will inspire much content, but they've been good.

Podcasts will probably be the best place for me to discuss general entertainment news, so I'll work on getting those more consistent. There may be co-hosts and guests but I think I'll be doing more solo stuff.

I've been more interested in playing older video games, so they might manifest into some Let's Plays, but I might just play those for fun if I have the time.

Lastly, I hope to get out of town and go to a few conventions. I didn't really do that last year.

Well those are some plans for the channel and some things looking forward to this year. I appreciate everyone for continuing to read/listen and watch. Let's make this year a good one!

Harry Potter, Rocky and Video Game Movies (Some Thanksgiving Thoughts)

Hello everyone and Happy Thanksgiving. It's been a long day but I have a little downtime to write. To be honest, I had hoped to get some podcasts or videos of the above named topics, but the month is coming to a close so I might not be able to get to all of them on the channel. So, just in case, I'll at least touch on them in this little blog. As usual, life has been busy.

I know that Fantastic Beasts had another movie that came out recently. I'm honestly not being a downer, though I feel like I'm often ranting online lately about franchise fatigue, but I didn't have any interest in seeing it. I've heard lukewarm reviews, but I wasn't going to see it in theaters in anyway. This was an slight conundrum for me to ponder about myself, as I was once a very big Harry Potter fan.

Here's where I get sentimental and self-reflective with some history. I haven't discussed the Potter franchise too much but  I have very fond memories of it. I read the first book in second grade I believe. My interest in the books peaked around the fourth entry. Then there were longer delays and my hype slowly cooled as I got closer to my senior year. Despite this, Harry Potter was a character who was about the same age as myself. In a sense, I kind of grew up along with him and his friends. Maybe that's why I found the characters so relatable, as I was invested enough with the story to maintain interest between about age eight and seventeen. No other book series has had quite the same hold on me since.

Even when the movies were released, I always professed the books were better. I did watch all the films though, with my interest declining slightly with each one. Despite my love for the series, by the time the final movie was released I felt there was enough Potter for awhile. Perhaps that means I'm not as diehard as some fans, but I always felt that Fantastic Beasts was a bit of a stretch to expand on the franchise. I found the first movie enjoyable enough, but I wasn't overly excited for a whole series of films. Though I enjoy the Wizarding  World, Harry and his friends were the ones I was most invested in.

It is possible that my interest changing is simply a byproduct of time's effect on me, but I would probably be more interested in something a little closer to the Potter narrative. I believe the films do add on to backstory of some characters and ideas. Are they going to be compelling enough? I suppose we'll see, but there is potential in that universe for sure. I need to go back and read those books.

I wanted to talk briefly about the Rocky series. Creed is due for a sequel this season after all. While I am not a major Rocky fanatic, I have seen all the movies. One summer I was very bored and had time marathon the first five Rocky films. Balboa I believe I saw in theaters. Ah yes, the memories of free time. Where has it gone? Anyway, with the exception of Rocky V, I honestly like all the Rocky movies. While I wouldn't describe any of them as fantastic, it's a generally fun series with many solid made films. What I might say next is probably a little controversial, but I truly do feel this way. You see, I think Creed is the best Rocky film I've seen.

Now I know most people will say the first Rocky is technically the best movie from a dramatic standpoint. I can understand this. Many others will say Rocky IV is the best due to the over the top nature of the presentation. I can understand this as well. I guess for me, Creed just seems like a wonderful sequel/spin-off of the franchise, but also a truly great film without that legacy. If it were unrelated to the series, I'd think it was about as good. It's a tight drama like the first, with that nostalgic touch to add an extra emotional significance based on that familiarity. For a hardcore fan, it would probably work even better. Plus, I just think it's better acted and shot than the first film.  I typically enjoy boxing films, and the fight itself was very compelling to me in Creed. It deals with themes that resonate with the first film. I guess I like my Rocky flicks more serious than campy. Then again, my favorite before Creed was Rocky III. Why? Hmmm. I don't have a particularly compelling argument. I just like Rocky's fall from grace to due pride as an interesting and believable result of celebrity. He's taken place with opposing force of Apollo Creed that he was the underdog against. Plus I think Clubber Lang is a fun, ridiculous and actually kind of threatening villain. Why is he so mad? Tell that guy to relax!

Is it possible to make a good video game movie? I've heard many arguments that it isn't. In fact, I watched a recent video explaining that the most important part of a video game is the interactivity. This doesn't translate to a movie. That certainly makes sense, though the video also claimed that most video game plots aren't very good. Those that are have too much story to be contained in one film. While I mostly agree with this, I have a hard time believing this isn't possible. After all, just about every other medium can be brought to film. I just think we haven't found enough people who care about these properties passionately enough. Most of them are kind of lackluster in one form or another. Of course, I will admit to being mostly a casual gamer and I haven't seen a massive amount of video game based movies anyway. That being said, I'm kind of sad that the best video movie to date is probably 1995's Mortal Kombat. Well, I'm actually not that sad. I like that movie.

I know that bar is low, but it still ranks among the better ones. It's probably due to my nostalgic attachment to the movie, but I still find it to be a fun and campy ride. It also seems to  hold fairly true to the game despite the PG-13 rating. This alone is kind of impressive. Actually, the film expanded on the basic story of the game slightly, not having to deviate too much from the tournament fighter. Many of the actors achieved the likeness and personality traits of the characters they represented, with the film replicating the mood through set pieces, music and pretty good choreography. It's campy, but then again so was the game. The story isn't that deep, but neither were the early installments. It hit the right beats and mostly made the fans happy despite the lack of gore. That's pretty impressive. Obviously, not all games are Mortal Kombat, but there may be some lessons to emulate here. I'm not too worried about it, but it would be nice to see some more genuinely good video game adaptations. I have a hard time believing you can't make a decent Hitman movie. He's an assassin who kills bad guys. It's been done before. Why does the brand curse the movies? Alas, I must wait for a good Hitman movie. Or I can just play the games again.

Well, those were my pop culture related thoughts for the evening. When I've had the time, I've been re-watching the Marvel Netflix shows, slowly catching up on My Hero Academia, playing Spider-man and finally checking out the rest of Star Trek: Discovery. Marvel's Spider-man has also been a good show.

I've obviously had plans for the channel, but the year has made it hard to keep up with my own self-imposed schedule once again. The end of the year will bring some movies I want to see, so there may be some reviews with friends. I also may do some more videos or podcasts on related topics if my schedule allows. I have some reviews planned out for the next year, along with some anime and comic book stuff early on. I'll keep you all posted. Thank you for reading, watching and listening. Happy Thanksgiving!

I'M NOT SURE HOW I FEEL ABOUT HALLOWEEN 2018

I viewed the newest addition to the Halloween franchise this past weekend. It's a very frustrating thing when you see a movie and you aren't sure how you feel about it. I really felt like taking a few days to let it sink in before writing anything. Unfortunately, I'm still not entirely sure I know how I feel. Even so, it has been some time since I posted anything on this blog and it is the spooky season after all. Perhaps writing this will help me clarify my thoughts for myself and my readers. Life continues to be busy, so some things may  require more time and thought.

I wouldn't say that the Halloween franchise is my favorite series of horror or "slasher" films. However, John Carpenter is one of my favorite directors and the original Halloween is easily his most popular and influential film, though not necessarily his best. I watched the movie again to prepare me for viewing this newest one, and once again I was reminded of how good it truly is. It holds up well. It essentially popularized and defined many of the beats of "slasher" films to come.  What I think makes the film work so well is how much is does with such a basic premise. The story is simple, but the characters are likeable. The budget is limited but balanced by excellent editing, cinematography and sound design. Even though I think the franchise has mostly lost steam over the years, the first movie is a true classic for a reason. It's kind of the standard that everyone else has tried to meet since.

Now, I won't say I'm an expert on the franchise, as there are many films I've missed. I'm also not the biggest enthusiast of "slasher" movies, though I do appreciate and enjoy them. However, I do feel like I know the first film well enough to get a sense of the narrative and themes. After all, this one does away with all other sequels and alternative versions. I think that's one reason it's drawn a strong response. If you're a fan of the first movie but haven't seen any others, it doesn't matter! Just jump back in. So I guess I'm an appropriate audience for it?

Anyway, I guess I should discuss this movie. That's probably why you're still reading this (congratulations on getting this far).

Let's start with my favorite thing. That would be the opening. We've go this pair of journalists investigating old murders and arriving at a prison holding Michael Myers. In this version, those events of the first film occurred as we viewed them, but he's been locked away since then. It's been forty years and Michael doesn't really say anything. The journalists first plan to interview Michael and then interview Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) to examine the nature of the event.

We are then brought to Michael Myers, in an open courtyard of the asylum. He's chained in his own section among dozens of other mental patients, facing way from the journalists and the audience. The male  journalist approaches Michael and begins questioning him with no real responses. Then, in a last ditch effort, he slowly reveals the famed William Shatner mask. He raises it to the sky and continuing to raise his voice as well. The other patients become more nervous and the guard dog begins to bark. The tension continues to rise as the journalist becomes more frustrated and almost enraged. Then we cut to the classic opening titles and opening score. Describing it doesn't really do it justice. It was an awesome opening. The problem is...I feel like this is kind of where the movie peaks.

It's very possible I need to watch this again. It's definitely worthy of further examination. When people asked me what I thought of it, I've just kept saying, "It was interesting." That's because that's how it was for me. I didn't love it or hate it. I'm just kind of oddly intrigued by it.

This may be another example of a movie that is trying to be two different things. I may be the minority in this point of view, as the online metrics seem to suggest the majority of people liked this movie. I don't think it does anything particularly bad, I just don't feel like it's revolutionizing anything with the genre or these particular films. Then again, is it supposed to? I guess it's not marketed as doing so, but the film is kind of trying something a little different.

On one hand, the film is definitely trying to be a direct sequel to the first movie. There are visual callbacks to the original for sure. The editing, cinematography and music are very similar. Some of the time, I felt like I was enraptured in the atmosphere of the first film (this makes sense with Carpenter's involvement in this one). So it's kind of not only a direct sequel but also trying to capture the spirit of that film...some of the time. Most of the movie seems to be something else.

The rest of the piece feels like it's trying to take the legendary character of Michael Myers and bring him into the real world. The film is asking what Myers would be like if he actually existed in the present. What if those events did happen? What if he was locked away for forty years and then escaped today? How would such an event affect those around him? I know this sounds like something any "slasher" film with a similar premise could do narratively, but this movie seems to be conveying a very realistic concept....most of the time.

Despite the ramifications of the murders on Laurie's personal life and the people of Haddonfield,  it's something we only kind of dance around. Curtis does a great job demonstrating the trauma a person would realistically suffer in such a situation. She's lived her life in fear and that fear had a negative impact on her family. However, I don't know if this is really delved into enough. Perhaps we don't need that, but I thought it was a really fascinating idea to explore further. It also kind of seems to be at the core of the story. I think this comes back to a slight lack of focus.

The film wants to be a more realistic take on Michael Myers as a serial killer, but also dances around the almost supernatural vibe he gives off through the tone and style of the feature. It really seems to want to be both an homage to the first film as well as a more believable take on the story. I guess this movie falls victim to the conventions of its own genre? At the end of the day, Michael is still going around killing teenagers (and just about everyone else) on Halloween night...in some of the most violent ways possible. I guess that's what a good "slasher" film should do and this one delivers while touching on a few more thought provoking ideas. I guess the Rob Zombie films dived into that enough? Those were a different version as well, after all.

It's always tricky talking about the identity of a piece, especially when building upon a solid foundation. How true should you stay to your roots without betraying them? How many risks are you allowed to take before becoming something else?

Alright, this blog review has helped me figure out how I feel about this new version of Halloween. I thought it was pretty good. It entertained me and I thought it was smarter and creepier than many other films in this genre I've seen. Whether  you like it or not upon the first viewing, I would definitely encourage you to watch it again. I certainly would. At the end of the day, that's a pretty great compliment for any movie, Halloween related or not.

Thanks for reading everyone. Have a Happy Halloween!