Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald Review – SPOILERS

Unpopular opinion: Newt Scamander is a far more compelling hero than Harry Potter ever was.

Okay! Now that we’ve gotten that out of the way, let’s get this started.

Oh, by the way. Spoilers are freely written below, so, read at your own risk.

I heard a lot of bad press about The Crimes of Grindelwald, some of which I agreed with and understand: The ending twist is dumb and overcomplicates things for no justifiable reason). However, I think everything up to that point is refreshing, entertaining, and engaging. There was not a moment I was bored, tuned out, or disinterested. Even during the action scenes, which I usually lose interest in quickly, I was attentive and excited. Come on, how can you tell me Newt riding a cat-dragon thing into battle is not awesome?

The film is visually stunning, and not just with the fantastic beasts themselves. The various locales, action sequences, and sorcery are varied and just beautiful in general. Our journey into new corners of the Wizarding World is highly enjoyable. The addition of a circus of magical creatures (as shady as it was) is an interesting concept worth further exploration. I loved the statue portal, personally. And there are clever things like this sprinkled throughout, showcasing J. K. Rowling’s amazing world building talents. Whenever something from the Harry Potter films appears, it doesn’t come off as a cheesy Easter egg or callback, but instead is well-integrated a just being an established part of this world.

The final battle with Grindelwald is perfection. The build-up creates a quiet, unsettling tension. You sense the threat. You feel enclosed by the crowd of enemies. You know not everyone is going to make it out of this. The best thing I can liken it to is a boss fight in a video game. Grindelwald is intimidating in his careless confidence, and the heroes are humanized by the fact that they know they’re likely to fail, but have to serve their duty. There are real stakes. Mortal blows are all too near. I appreciate the bluff, making the audience think that Leta would join Grindelwald, which would have been an easy, predictable turn of events. It shows the uniqueness of Fantastic Beasts that they used the opportunity to redeem Leta. If only she’d been developed properly…

I liked that despite Newt’s dislike of his establishmentarian brother, after Leta’s death, they support each other in an emotional embrace. They had lost someone they loved, and both knew this was what mattered in the moment. Lesser films would have taken the opportunity to cause more strife between them in order to build a cheap, easy conflict that ultimately just hinders the plot. I could imagine them fighting over who Leta loved more, who Leta should have married, et cetera, et cetera… You know, cliches.

One gripe among viewers and critics was that the format was boring. There wasn’t much of a sense of urgency, no obvious character arcs, and overall it just seemed to be a bridge to the next film. I will say this, and it is highly subjective: As a jaded film lover who’s seen so many movies that I can usually predict what will happen next, down to the lines about to be delivered, I am happy to see a film successfully (key word) pull off a different format. It’s not just transitioning from action sequence to action sequence, from problem to problem. I find that format frustrating, and leans on the fact that the easiest ways to write a script is to use the format of, “The characters to this, BUT encounter an obstacle. Then, they do this. BUT, there’s another obstacle.” Instead, the characters are given a direction, a goal, and they move towards it. They achieve it, and then they are presented with a new direction. There’s a progression, not just a series of “whoops, we made a mistake and we’re fucked because someone was an incompetent idiot.” I get tired of the plot being driven by the characters being fools. I appreciate seeing a hero using their wits to move forward.

One of the complaints I heard was Queenie joining Grindelwald. It might seem like an excuse, sure, I will give you that, but my casual assumption was that she was under the Imperius Curse. If that turns out to not be the case, I will admit, it is inexplicable and dumb.

One critic even accused Queenie of being a Harley Quinn rip off. This is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard. Is this critic somehow unaware that Harley and Queenie’s accent is a real one that actual humans have? Furthermore, classic Hollywood films are full of women that fit Queenie’s mold much more closely than Harley Quinn. Has this professional critic never seen a classic movie? You lose credibility for me on that point. It’s a stupid assumption that shows a lack of knowledge of your subject matter, and a general lack of culture.

(A lot of Queenie hate, I notice.)

Of course, a great multitude of criticisms involve Nagini, and the unexpected revelation that Voldemort’s snake Horcrux was once a woman. I’ll admit, that’s a surprising left turn, but I don’t see it as necessarily bad. I hope Nagini gets further developed, because I think she could be interesting. I don’t think the portrayal of Nagini as an Asian woman is racist, especially as the actress herself wasn’t concerned with it. It’s too complex and issue to delve into here, so I’ll leave it at that. As for other problems with her character, I’ll get back to Nagini in a minute.

Unfortunately, due to the large cast of characters, some great characters don’t have much to do, or are passed over for characters with more immediate importance. Jacob, Tina, and Nagini are probably the most major victims of this. Tina just happens to be present during scenes, but doesn’t actively affect the events much. Jacob is pretty much only there to interact with Queenie. Nagini is just introduced, and then promptly set aside for (hopefully) later development. A shame.

I do have my share of “are you fucking kidding me” moments, however. First off, Newt saying without a hint that he was joking that if he traveled abroad, he’d be thrown straight into Azkaban. Does the Wizarding World have no scale for varying crimes? It’s absurd. Allied with Voldemort? It’s Azkaban for you. Drunk in public? Hope you like Dementors. Loitering? Enjoy spending the rest of your life in an endless void of despair. It’s ridiculous (no pun intended). If it was supposed to be a joke, they should have telegraphed that better.

I also agree with the complaint of Nagini and Leta being underdeveloped to the point of us not being particularly interested in them. While Leta does prove herself a general bad ass for her attempted assassination of Grindelwald, we don’t know much about her other than 1) Newt is in love with her, and 2) she unintentionally killed her baby brother. It doesn’t give us an opportunity to relate to her, actually makes her downright unlikable, and doesn’t give us a picture of her character as an adult.

Finally, my biggest complaint is Ezra Miller’s overacting, which crops up throughout the film, but really culminates in the final scene, where he blows out the window. Are. You. Fucking. Kidding. Me? Don’t do that face. Don’t do that ugly face. Nobody does that face. The way he pursed his lips and scrunched up his face really killed the mood for me. What should have been a shocking and emotional moment (despite it being a lame twist) instead made me grimace, and laugh at the absurdity of his exaggerated attempt at emoting. He really is the Anakin Skywalker of the Potterverse. I hope they’re smart enough to kill him off soon. I don’t see his character as becoming interesting or in any way redeemable.

As a Feminist, I feel I have to address the elephant in the room. Johnny Depp, and his spousal abuse. I honestly don’t feel comfortable with the fact that I technically supported him by paying to see this movie. I think his career should die. I think Grindelwald should have been recast, despite the fact that it would be jarring and possibly confusing to some more casual moviegoers to suddenly see a different actor in the role. I will admit, Depp did an excellent job as an actor. This role made me realize, before he started getting cast in trash like Alice in Wonderland and The Lone Ranger, he was actually a superb actor. This doesn’t excuse him being a deplorable human being, and I don’t think wife beaters should be given such high profile jobs.

Ultimately, despite everything The Crimes of Grindelwald had going against it, it succeeds in being a unique and engaging experience, equal or surpassing its predecessor, and is a worthy entry into the stories of the Wizarding World.

 

If you like what I’m doing on this blog and would like to support, consider making a donation via ko-fi.

5 Easter Eggs in ‘Chilling Adventures of Sabrina’

Warning: Contains spoilers for the first season of Chilling Adventures of Sabrina.

Chilling Adventures of Sabrina is just what it claims to be. It’s a throwback to the supernatural television shows marketed to teens that were proliferate in the late 90’s/early 2000’s, like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Charmed, which could revel in the kitschy and absurd, but also tackle dark subject matter and serious issues. It’s already stirred up controversy for multiple reasons, and not for the reasons you’d probably expect. However, those heavier themes are to be tackled here at a later time. For now, let’s set those topics aside, and get into the things every true nerd hungers for — EASTER EGGS!

1- The Names

There are many names with significance in Sabrina. Besides more obvious ones like “Spellman” and “Salem,” here are some names with more remarkable meanings:

• “Puttnam” and “Hawthorne” were the names of families involved in the Salem Witch Trials.
• Ironically, the name “Wardwell” is probably a reference to warding spells, which are used to repel evil spirits.
• “Faustus” is taken from the play Faust by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, wherein the main character sells his soul to the Devil.
• “Scratch,” as in “Old Scratch” or “Mr. Scratch,” is a nickname for the Devil.
• The mentioned-but-never-seen “Doc Phibes” gets his name from the titular character of the 1971 horror flick The Abominable Dr. Phibes.

 

2- “Criminal”

Of course you noticed the inclusion of Fiona Apple’s 90’s hit “Criminal” in Chapter 7: Feast of Feasts. However, if you’ve never seen the music video for the song, you might not get the connection. The video portrays the then-18-year-old Apple in her underwear, and lounging around with other teens on the floor, in what looks to be the aftermath of a party. The images are highly suggestive of some risque stuff going on, a lot like what’s taking place in Prudence’s room at the time.

 

3- The Weird Sisters

The term “Weird Sisters” has its origins in the Norns of Norse mythology. They were three prophetic witches who were the daughters of a seer named “Wyrd.” The term was later anglicized to “Weird” and used in Shakespeare’s MacBeth. It just goes to show, trios have always been powerful in witchcraft. The number can represent past, present, and future; the maiden, the mother, and the crone; the Rule of 3; father, mother, and child; the Furies; the Fates; and too many other examples of the power of the number three to recite here.

 

4- Other horror references

Besides names of characters, Sabrina contains some homages to the horror genre. Some include:

• On a couple of occasions, characters refer to the blessings of Satan as “delicious.” This most likely is pulled from a famous line in the 2015 horror film The Witch, in which (SPOILERS – highlight to read) the Devil asks the protagonist, “Wouldst thou like to live deliciously?” The scene in Chapter 10 where the Devil coaxes Sabrina to sign the Book of the Beast, he whispers in a way reminiscent of the Devil in The Witch.
• Chapter Five is titled “Dreams in a Witch House,” a slight variant on the title of the H. P. Lovecraft story Dreams in the Witch House.
• Chapter Six shows Harvey wearing the same outfit as Johnny Depp’s character during his death scene in Nightmare on Elm Street.
• The Spellman house has the same stained glass skylight as the ballet school in 1977’s witchsploitation film Suspiria.

 

5- The exorcism

The incantation for the exorcism in Chapter Six contains references to many significant figures in Witch/Wiccan culture. Apart from the mythological characters, there are several historical figures, including:

• Anne Boleyn, the wife of Henry VIII, who was accused of bewitching Henry to make him marry her. Her being a witch was also said to be the reason for her later miscarriage.
• Hildegard of Bingen was a German Benedictine abbess, but became respected by modern Pagans as a healer and mystic.
• Mary Bradbury and Tituba, both women who were accused during the Salem Witch Trials, but manage to avoid execution.
• Moll Dyer, a witch said to have lived in Maryland in the 1600s. Her spirit is still said to haunt the area where she was killed.
• Sybil Leek, one of the most prolific writers on the subject of modern Witchcraft.

 

That’s it for now, but I will certainly, in the future, dive deeper into the themes of Sabrina and possibly put a couple theories out there. So stay tuned!

 

If you like what I’m doing on this blog and would like to support, consider making a donation via ko-fi.

The Problematic Treatment of Titans’ Heroines [Spoilers]

In lieu of a standard review of Episode 2 and 3, I’d like to address a trend that has been bothering me in the new Titans thus far: The problematic portrayal of the female heroes. Many bloggers have already covered the disturbing behavior of Dick Grayson, and with Beast Boy so far barely getting any screen time (which needs to change ASAP, I’m stoked to see him more), there’s not much to say about the male heroes at this point. Hopefully, once they are more fleshed out, I will be able to discuss their portrayals, whether good or mad or neutral. For now, I’m going to focus on our heroines, Raven, Kory, and Dove.

Before delving in, I’d like to make a few distinctions. There will be spoilers for the first three episodes of Titans, so if you’re not caught up, I recommend stopping now. Secondly, my references to the comic book materials will be drawn solely from the Marv Wolfman and George Perez run on The New Teen Titans from the 1980s. As I am not as familiar with their iteration in the more recent New 52, I will not be talking about it. Furthermore, as a Progressive Feminist, this article will be written with that mindset. If you don’t care for that, you may wish to click away from this, rather than sending us hate mail. Much appreciated.

I will first address Raven’s loss of agency. In the comics, Raven is the one who brings the Titans together. Knowing the arrival of her father, the dreaded devil Trigon, is imminent, she takes action, finding heroes with specific characteristics that will be able to take down the fiend. At first, she is portrayed as a woman with unshakeable willpower who is in control of her emotions. It was only later that we discovered that she was someone who needed help. She could be vulnerable and tender, and she truly loves her friends, despite her icy demeanor.

In Titans, the writers have opted for the inverse. Raven is, straight away, a damaged individual who needs protection. She’s basically helpless on her own. Even when she does “save herself” from dangerous situations, it is actually the dark spirit inhabiting her that takes action. Yes, Raven is much younger than she is in the comics. But I feel it would have behooved the show to show her as an old soul, with wisdom remarkable for her age. No, she doesn’t need to be perfect. It would make sense that she is less disciplined and more flawed. But, I would have liked to see Raven possess more agency, and more able to defend herself.

Our next subject is Kory. Volumes have been written on the unfortunate wardrobe, and I fully agree it was a poor decision to dress her in such a way. It’s an odd choice, and led to a lot of PR problems that sadly dissuaded many from watching the show. It wasn’t worth it. Kory is vastly different from her comic book portrayal, showing almost no relation to the endearing but powerful alien girl we came to love. Don’t get me wrong, Kory is a compelling character in her own right, but if you’re going to do an adaptation of Starfire, you need to retain some of the traits that have made her such a classic character. Kory is all toughness, no heart. And that was what made us love Starfire: She beautifully juxtaposed a warrior identity with compassion. She could be filled with fury, she could luxuriate in a pool party with her friends, she could be tender with Dick, and merciless with her enemies. She was naïve, but she had convictions. This complexity is what made her beloved by fans.

Minor gripe: When Kory meets Dick, sparks should have flown. They’re one of the best couples in the DCU, and the show needs to do justice to that.

Finally, we come to Dove. And my goodness, despite a good performance by Minka Kelly, and a comics-accurate costume, I have a lot of problems with Dove’s characterization. I’d like to first call your attention to the Women in Refrigerators trope, a term coined by veteran comics writer Gail Simone. I suggest perusing the page linked above, but the basic idea is that there are countless female comic characters who are mistreated in various abhorrent ways, often of a sexual nature, solely to provide motivation for the male characters. In Titans, Dove is not only weaker than she is in the comics (though her male compatriot Hawk is depowered as well), she is given a previously nonexistent sexual history with Dick Grayson, and is swiftly put into a coma before we can really get to know and care about her.

Why? What does this do to service the plot, other than to give emotional motivation to our brooding male heroes. It actually robs the story of an intriguing character. Okay, sure, she’s in a coma, which is TV code for “She’ll definitely positively absolutely be back soon,” but in the meantime, her absence is just a testament to the fact that writers often don’t care about their heroines, viewing them more as plot points than as active protagonists in their own right. I’m not saying writers don’t create complex, amazing female characters. I’m not saying such unfortunate treatment doesn’t befall male characters. I’m saying, by and large, these kinds of tropes are imposed upon female characters.

Within her first episode, Dove gets refrigerated. Raven’s adopted mother, Angela, is also refrigerated in her first episode. Rather than develop her into Raven’s biological mother, Arella, whose actual name is Angela, they kill her off to motivate Raven. Arella, also a fascinating and powerful character, who stands against Trigon and leads the forces of Azarath, seems to be inconsequential in the context of the show.

I would like to sum this up by saying, I don’t hate everything about the heroines in Titans. I honestly think the show is worth checking out. As I mentioned earlier, Kory is an intriguing character, and, while she’s not our Starfire, she could go to some very interesting places. Raven could grow into a stronger, solid character in her own right. And Dove is comics accurate and likable. As I said, the show has potential.

All that said, my biggest complaint is the way Raven drinks her coffee. There’s a handle there for a reason: So you don’t burn your hand holding the ceramic cup. Because coffee is hot. Drink your coffee like a normal person, Raven! Jeez. Also, Raven likes pineapple on her pizza. It’s canon. Get it together, people.

(I have no life, help me.)

If you like what I’m doing on this blog and would like to support, consider making a donation via ko-fi.

‘Titans’ Episode 1 Review [Minor Spoilers]

As someone who’s read DC comics since she was 8 years old, I have been following the development of the new Titans series since it was announced. As the train wreck progressed, it became more and more cringey and painful as a fan to see some of my favorite characters ever being mutilated beyond recognition. The horror. It got to the point where, after hearing the first reviews, I had decided I was no longer going to give it a chance.

After a couple of beers, I changed my mind.

I can say many terrible things about the first episode. My main takeaway, however, was that it was surprisingly not as agonizing to watch as it appeared from the trailers. Mind you, this is just the first episode. There is plenty of time for it to go downhill, especially with the DCEU’s track record. But for the first episode, I was prepared for the worst and was surprised that it wasn’t entirely loathsome. Like I said, there are a lot of terrible aspects to the show that I can bemoan all day (and I will do so in a minute), but, overall, Titans’ first episode isn’t as bad as the CW superhero shows like Supergirl and The Flash, but is nowhere near the lofty level of the Marvel-Netflix series that it aspires to match.

The first thing we must get out of the way is this: These are not the Titans you grew up with. And I don’t mean that in the cool, edgy way. I mean it in the “they made no effort to retain the aspects of these characters that make them who they are” way. The characters visually barely resemble their counterparts, and the same goes in terms of personality. Let’s go character by character and pick them apart.

Dick Grayson straight up mutilates and, from the looks of it, potentially murders some thugs, which will no doubt add fuel to the “Batman and family don’t kill” controversy. Yes, in the comics, Dick has a lot of resentment towards Bruce. He can be dark, obsessive, and driven, like his mentor. But Dick will never be Bruce. He retains his humanity, whereas Bruce will purposefully discard it in order to reach his objective. The difference between the characters is the prioritization of their feelings and empathy.

Raven, as far as the first episode goes, has exclusively been called “Rachel.” I don’t care, I’m calling her Raven in this article. My main complaint about Raven is that she seems to have been aged down considerably, after having started out her existence as one of the older Titans. I feel that this naive, overly-emotional take on her doesn’t suit the character. For those that don’t know, there is an actual story-related reason that Raven doesn’t express emotions and it’s very, very freaking important. I don’t hate Teagan Croft as Raven, but I feel she is too young for the role. Raven, in Titans, comes off as a Goth Tumblr blogger who writes about how nobody understands her and does Photoshop portraits of herself with her eyes oozing blackness. The portrayal is juvenile and one-dimensional.

Starfire, who so far has been referred to by the alias “Kory Anders,” is just … not Starfire. Anna Diop looks beautiful, despite the terrible things the wardrobe department did to her, and she does fairly well in her role in the episode. But the character is not Starfire. Instead of the strong but naive and free-spirited girl we know from the comic books, Kory Anders is a femme fatale with amnesia, embroiled in a plot more easily likened to a spy thriller than to a sci-fi superhero story.

Beast Boy appears for maybe a minute out of the entire first episode, so I can’t do much analysis on him, which is a shame, because out of the entire cast, I’d say I’m happiest with their choice for Beast Boy, and I think he will be the closest to his comic book counterpart, which will be a welcome change of pace.

The writers for the show don’t seem to understand what makes these characters great. Raven’s Soul Self makes an appearance in the show, but its nature is completely inverse from its nature in the comics. In the show, it is a representation of Raven’s inner demon, whereas in the comics, it’s the opposite: The Soul Self is the pure part of Raven, whereas her body is evil. Dick Grayson is portrayed as a gloomy, disillusioned brute, which is a shame, because he’s the only one who got a good costume. Starfire just isn’t Starfire.

So now that we’ve established the characters we are dealing with, we can delve into the plot and script, and the pros and cons therein.

The central conflict so far is: Everyone is looking for Raven, while Dick is trying to protect her. This is almost like an inversion of the 1980’s Titans’ origin story, wherein Starfire arrives on Earth, pursued by the Gordanians, and Raven brings the team together to help her. The shifting of the power dynamic, changing Raven from the authoritative position, to the victim in need of protection, to me, diminishes her. And for clarification, in the 1980’s comics origin, Starfire is not diminished by needing help, as she is still an active participant in the fight against her attackers. Raven in the 2018 TV show, is mostly running away and looking for help.

I’d say, other than character portrayals, the worst part of Titans is the dialogue. Conversations are generic, uninteresting, and unrealistic. They do not keep you engaged and tend towards the predictable. There is nothing truly clever or shocking, though it tries very hard to be both. Some of it makes no sense whatsoever, sounding very little like anything that a real person would say. (“I don’t care about your emotional problems!”) I’ve heard people praise Titans for its use of humor. In the first episode, I can say, what I did see of humor was very little and very cringeworthy. I’ll let you know if that changes, but for the meantime I’m going to put a big red “NOPE” stamp on Titans‘ use of humor.

The main villain of the first episode appears in what is probably the worst scene of the entire hour. His dialogue is pure, uncut exposition, literally explaining what the viewers are supposed to feel about him and his allies. At the same time that we’re told too much, we’re also not told or shown anything that will actually make us feel invested in him or his cause, one way or another.

The soundtrack is painfully disappointing, despite being composed by Clint Mansell, whose scores so beautifully enhanced such films as Requiem for a Dream and The Fountain. His work on Titans comes off as derivative and dull.

So, overall, what do I have to say about Titans’ debut episode? It’s bad. It’s not good. But it’s not the absolute steaming pile of garbage I expected. It’s not as bad as the DCEU’s big screen disappointments like Suicide Squad or Justice League. It’s slightly better than DC’s CW series The Flash and Supergirl, mostly thanks to its ability thus far to stay away from hackneyed romance plots and soap opera drama, both of which plague the CW series. With time, the willingness to cut out the weak parts, and temper the better aspects, Titans could potentially be good. It’s nothing to write home about. The costumes are still awful, the script is laughable, and the concepts are poorly executed.

What would it take for me to say Titans is good? The characters need to be better developed. Convince me these aren’t just some emo-tinged fan fiction versions of the complex characters created by Marv Wolfman and George Perez. Show me that there’s true respect for the source material. Give me a killer version of Trigon, Brother Blood, or Deathstroke. Really make me believe you know what you’re doing, show runners. Prove me wrong, that this show will slowly devolve into a dumpster fire like the rest of the DCEU.

Also, please stop with the wigs.

 

If you like my work and would like to support, consider making a donation via ko-fi.

Netflix’s ‘Maniac’ Review (No Spoilers)

With such hit series as Stranger Things, Black Mirror, and Ozark to live up to, Netflix is under a lot of pressure to release the next great dark horse success. With Cary Fukunaga of True Detective and Patrick Somerville of The Leftovers as the director and creator respectively, you could expect great things from their latest effort, the limited series Maniac. The only problem is, you could expect a lot of bad things, too.

I could not have been more blown away by the first three episodes of Maniac. Stylistically and thematically, it heavily draws on the works of Philip K. Dick, the mind behind Total Recall and Minority Report. Like Dick’s stories, Maniac plays on themes of paranoia, isolation, and insanity. Our story follows two characters, Annie and Owen, who are both struggling with mental illness and family conflict. Their paths lead them both to a trial for a new pharmaceutical that promises to eventually do away with therapy, by resolving peoples’ psychological issues through induced dream-like experiences. During the course of the trial, we learn about the skeletons in Annie and Owen’s closets, and attempt to resolve these issues by going over them.

Again. And again. And again. And again.

For at least five episodes, as the trial goes into the “B pill” testing phase, they go over the same information, and the plot goes nowhere. While the first three episodes do a good job of setting a tone, constructing a world, and getting us invested in our characters, all the episodes in the middle completely undo that. Rather than making good use of the world they’ve already done an excellent job in establishing, Maniac goes off in haphazard and pointless directions for no apparent reason other than to do something ‘wacky,’ because, apparently, going on inexplicable and self-indulgent tangents is a proper substitute for actual substance these days.

While there is some tongue-in-cheek humor established early on, by the middle, the series has gone off the deep end into over-the-top goofiness. It’s a true shame, because Jonah Hill and Emma Stone are better in this series than I have ever seen them before, and really proved that they have grown as performers since they appeared together in 2007’s Superbad and can deliver grown-up, mature, and compelling performances. While they still give good performances in the episodes after, it loses much of its impact in the flood of irredeemably lame gimmicks. By the ending, the series has regained some of its form, but, overall, it’s just a completely different show by then, and I hardly care what happens to the characters.

 

Besides the terrible excuse for humor, the episodes in the B-pill phase have another inexcusable flaw: They essentially present us with a mystery to which we already know the answer, rendering the investigation next to pointless. And, in case we somehow didn’t get the “metaphors,” we’re given a lengthy exposition scene, explaining to us in unnecessary detail exactly what it represented. For clarification, but without spoilers, here’s what we sit through: First, we witness the back story of our characters. Then, we sit through a “dream sequence” full of metaphors for the back story that we just witnessed. Finally, the character explains their back story again, and how the metaphors tied in with it. This recycling of information over the course of multiple episodes is mind-numbingly boring, and absolutely killed my interest in the characters, their struggles, their development, their resolutions, etc. As much as I had empathized with them previously, I now just wanted to get to the end of the series so I could be done with it.

It’s a tragedy to see something as amazing as Maniac‘s first three episodes lead into something as trite, dull, and uninspired as its remaining episodes. What could have been a masterpiece ended up just a lot of failed potential. I wish I could whole-heartedly recommend this series to you. As it is, I’m left warning you ahead of time, you’ll never get to see the ending to the amazing story you’re presented with. Instead, you get to watch a so-stupid-it’s-offensive sketch show with some sci-fi wraparound.

If you like my work and would like to support, consider making a donation via ko-fi.

Review: ‘American Vandal Season 2’ (No Spoilers)

Disclaimer: No spoilers, but story elements will be discussed. If you don’t want anything that might influence you before watching, you may want to turn back now.

I’d like to open by being completely honest with you. I did not want to watch American Vandal at all. I was raised a film snob and I will die a film snob and that was something well-established in my circle. I still resent that I wasted space in my brain to hold information from Season 1. That said, I have acknowledged that Season 1 is not terrible. It’s great for an audience that just doesn’t include me. There are some genuinely funny moments, impressive acting from unknowns that add much-needed realism, and excellent production values. It’s even a good premise: Take the most ridiculous crime you can think of, and make a dead-serious investigative documentary on it. That’s great. I only watched it because my boyfriend and my sister wanted to and I live with them ergo I watched it too. I acknowledge it wasn’t terrible. I just felt there were better things I would rather have spent my time watching.

(Side note: I tried to hide it from my boyfriend when Season 2 came out so I wouldn’t have to watch it.)

Season 2 is honestly a marked improvement. Again, it’s not one of the best shows you can spend your time on this year, but it’s an enjoyable diversion. The jokes are better integrated with the script, adding to the intended realism of the series. The characters are more relatable, and while still petty and irritating, as humans tend to be, you never really end up hating anyone, ultimately. It’s interesting to note that last season’s accused was a stereotypical low IQ stoner dude-bro, who isn’t what he seems, and this season’s accused is a stereotypical pretentious white privilege intellectual, who isn’t what he seems. In both cases, the dissection of their characters is the real heart of the story.

Let’s get the criticisms out of the way first: My two main complaints this season both involve the twists. And don’t worry, it’s no spoilers, I’m not giving any specifics. However, if you got used to the formula from the first season, Season 2 is very much the same. It follows the same pattern, the same conflicts, the same implications, the same cycle, which makes it easy to figure out where many of the story arcs are going to go. My issue with the final twist, is actually that it’s not obvious enough. I feel that there should have been more foreshadowing, more suggestions of the final solution than we got — which is none, really. It more or less comes out of nowhere. While technically you could have guessed the culprit from early on, there are certain elements you could not have guessed that would make your early deduction flawed. These elements are suddenly introduced, without any precedent. It doesn’t ruin your enjoyment of the show, and it’s not a major criticism. Just an observation.

The thing I liked best about this season is the characters. I thought they were well nuanced, and behaved more like real people, than the more stereotypical behavior seen in the characters in Season 1. This series is all about subverting peoples’ expectations and straightaway the script makes it clear that these characters aren’t what you expect; it’s just that you’ve been viewing them from a certain lens. This idea is expanded on across the course of the season, evolving and finally becoming clear in the finale, where it unites the various ideas and philosophies presented to us and makes an ultimate statement on human nature and how we interact with our own life.

As with the first season, Season 2 does a good job of building a theme. In Season 1 the overall theme was “People aren’t what they seem so don’t judge too quickly,” and it was prevalent throughout the season. The theme is virtually the same this season, but its tone is very different. It infers that social standing is just an illusion, and that behind a beautiful facade is a real, broken person in need of connection. Because of this theme, social media is a much more important aspect of the mystery this season, bringing out some commentary on the nature of our dualistic, internet-oriented lives.

In general, I liked Season 2 much better than the first season. I liked the actors, the jokes, and the characters better. This is not to say that it is inherently superior to Season 1, as both have their charms and their pros and cons. It’s just to say that Season 1 can be hard to digest if you’re not very much into it, and Season 2 holds perhaps a more widespread appeal. And while the series has been interesting and unique so far, I think it can only last so long on this premise, and is already starting to become predictable insofar as patterns go.

To be fair, though, whereas Season 1 is like a cudgel, necessary to break audience expectations and set its own standards and precedent, Season 2 is more like a scalpel, expertly dissecting the subjects it chooses for the audience to consider and, perhaps, learn from. If Season 1 didn’t win you over, I suggest you give Season 2 a chance, and its presentation and execution is only improving.

 

If you enjoy my work and would like to support, consider making a donation on ko-fi.

‘How to Talk to Girls at Parties’ Review (No Spoilers)

On a very off chance, two or three years ago, I happened to come across a photo online that was taken of Nicole Kidman on the set of a new film. The name of the film? How to Talk to Girls at Parties. I was taken aback. Wait, what? Like that little story by Neil Gaiman that nobody’s really heard of? Curious, I looked into it, and proceeded to keep tabs on it. After a couple years passed, I figured, something must have happened, they never finished it, or they finished it but couldn’t get it distributed, or something. I was disappointed.

But earlier this year, a trailer for the film popped up, reigniting my excitement. Not only was this a take on a story from my favorite Gaiman collection (Fragile Things), but they’d merged it with the 1977 punk scene, a subject close to my heart. The trailer didn’t completely sell me on it, I was very skeptical. How do you stretch out an 18-page story and make a feature length film out of it? Did they just make up a bunch of nonsense to fill in the run time?

How to Talk to Girls at Parties is a charming movie that, while it massively embellishes on a very short story, stays true to the spirit of Gaiman’s works: Fairy tales for grown-ups, that can still capture wonder and imagination no matter what your age or walk of life. It’s not a perfect film, but it’s a lot of fun, and fits in very well with Gaiman’s world. I would even put it above Stardust (2007), which I thought was too exaggerated, too Hollywood, and didn’t do the source material’s endearing whimsical nature justice. How to Talk to Girls is an indie film through and through, and the creative enthusiasm of the team behind it shows. This isn’t a movie made to make money, to feed to the masses in convenient servings of banality; it is something either you like or you don’t, and it is unapologetic about its personality.

The plot goes as such: Enn, a teenage punk in 1977 Croydon, goes to the wrong party, and ends up meeting some very strange girls, including Zan, an outsider. She, like Enn, is frustrated with the status quo and restrictions of her society, and wishes to break outside of it. He takes her to explore the world of punk rock, in which she promptly flourishes. However, the true nature behind Zan, her people, and her purpose, slowly comes to light, until Enn realizes he and his friends must take action or risk losing her forever.

The film could certainly be accused of being built around the Manic Pixie Dream Girl archetype, but I would argue that Zan shows too much agency, and that the story is truly about her journey to self-realization, while Enn is more there as an aid and witness to her development, and learns about himself along the way. At first blush, Enn does appear to be the protagonist, and he does have his own arc, of course, but Zan is the real hero of the story, who grows beyond her limitations into something greater. It’s a nice change of pace from so many films of this kind, that are about an awkward boy gaining confidence through his supportive girlfriend to achieve his dreams. This movie does service to all of its characters, Zan and Enn in particular, of course. They both have times to shine, arcs to fulfill, and greater things to become.

That isn’t to say the film doesn’t have its low points. It is very obviously the victim of poor editing, as Nicole Kidman’s Bodicea character is under-developed, with scenes fleshing her out further seemingly missing, causing some of the dialogue between her and protagonist Enn make little sense. The special effects are also spotty, details of Zan’s collective are somewhat confusing, and some concepts are undercooked. There is a vaguely environmental theme that crops up from time to time, but it is inconsistent and never fully realized.

One thing I’m not sure if I should criticize or not is Vic’s arc. Vic attends the party with Enn at the beginning, and has an experience he doesn’t quite understand. Throughout the film, we see moments of discomfort from him, which, eventually, he is required to face up to. However, exactly what that is that he is facing is unclear. I could extrapolate plenty of answers, and just because something requires you to think and come to your own conclusions doesn’t make it bad, but I feel like the movie might have benefited from clarifying this particular plot point.

Overall, How to Talk to Girls at Parties is not a perfect film, but it does its source material justice and is an enjoyable ride, and in this age of multi-million dollar blockbuster trash heaps, supporting indie films is important. While the special effects are low-budget, it remains visually striking, from the set design, to the costumes, and the group performances with the punks and Zan’s people. While the very basic concept behind the story is one of the oldest tropes — forbidden love between two teenagers — it manages to give it a fresh twist and subvert your expectations.

The movie is available for free with an Amazon Prime subscription, and you can stream it on YouTube and Google Play.

 

If you like my content and would like to support, consider making a donation on ko-fi.

‘Disenchantment’ Review (No Spoilers)

“Entertainment is just a tool that pacifies the masses and leads to the decay and ultimate collapse of the civilization. Let’s clap along!” -Luci (Eric Andre)

Look, here’s the hard and honest truth no one wants to accept.

Disenchantment. Is. Not. As. Bad. As. People. Say. It. Is.

Sure, if you go in with expectations that it will be a Simpsons or Futurama clone that puts gags first and story after, then you’ll probably be disappointed. But that’s on you, and not the show. The show is fairly decent as its own thing. It is 100% plot driven, with jokes worked in there. The characters are interesting and compelling enough that you want to see what happens with their stories.

The story centers around the hard-drinking Princess Tiabeanie (“Bean” for short), an outcast Elf named Elfo, and a demon named Luci who has been sent to manipulate her. While the characters may at first seem one dimensional, they are further explored, and reveal new mysteries about themselves, as the series progresses. What appeared to be a simple fantasy tale with a Simpsons-y twist turns out to be far from what it seems. There are some dark moments, and some satisfying character development.

I’ll admit, I, myself, was extremely skeptical. I thought it was going to be utterly forgettable. The Simpsons took a sharp dip in quality after its “Golden Age,” and I found Futurama to be spotty in quality. (I think your enjoyment of Futurama is directly proportionate to how much you like Bender, and I found him annoying at best.) Maybe because I had low expectations and thought I’d tire after the first episode, I was greatly impressed and couldn’t wait to see what happened next.

Keep in mind, though, it’s not a laugh fest, and it’s honestly not meant to be. The story comes first at all times, and the jokes are just there to add some spice. The writers work on building up the mysteries, conflicts, and plot twists, which keep you wondering at all times. You feel like you’re always on the verge of discovering something in this show, and I promise you, it does reward you for paying attention and remembering plot details, as certain elements return, further developed, later on in the series.

These ten episodes do a good job of world building, making you hope for a season two, in order to further explore the possibilities lying within each new place. There are many different creatures and races introduced that are only briefly touched upon, who could hopefully be expanded upon in the future.

Mark Mothersbaugh provides the music, which gives the series a unique feel. It captures the excitement and zaniness of Disenchantment with gusto, giving the feel of a medieval festival full of drunken knights, peasants, and jesters. Mothersbaugh has always delivered quality soundtracks for his projects, and this is no exception.

The title Disenchantment really says it all, as the epic presents you with all the tropes and stereotypes of a classic fantasy and slowly strips away the conventions, twisting them into something worth your attention. It demystifies itself and manages to ground its fantastical characters enough to make them not too outrageous.

All the voice actors do well, but Eric Andre is a standout. His performance as Luci manages to be simultaneously maniacal and endearing. Overall, though, all the actors deserve a shout-out for the amount of characters they voiced, with just 18 voice actors portraying all the characters in the series. Of course former Groening collaborators at present, such as Billy West, Tress MacNeille, John DiMaggio, and Maurice LaMarche, and all do a top notch job as always.

Overall, Disenchantment is fun, and its something uniquely its own. It’s not The Simpsons, and it’s not Futurama, and you shouldn’t expect it to be. It builds its own intriguing world, and presents you with new characters to follow in their quest to self-discovery. Every character has a purpose and potential to grow, and even if you’re not sold on them at the beginning, by the end, you will care about what’s at stake for all of them. Even if you have low expectations, and even if you end up not liking it, I very much recommend giving it a chance.