I have a lot of work to do on my novel in progress and I changed up my work hours at the day-job so today there will be no lengthy essay.
Howevere I have now finally watched Justice League on HBO and can say this.
One – the film is a mess without a clear theme and comprised of all plot, no story, and amazingly bad CGI for such a massive budget.
Two- I loved Ezra’s Miller’s Flash and felt a lot of Joss Whedon in those scenes.
I end 2018 with yet another movie review. Now that the work at the day-job has slowed back to a more normal pacing I am finally able to catch up on a lot of the movies from the Christmas season including this gem Spider-Man: Into the Spider Verse.
Though a Marvel logo appears along with other production logos before the opening scene of the film this movie is not part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The film rights to Spiderman and a number of the associated characters are still held by Sony Studios and, after their last two Spiderman movies were poorly received by critics and disappointing at the box office, they entered into a joint custody arrangement with Marvel Studios allowing the wall crawler to enter into the MCU they retained the right for other Spiderman properties of which this is one.
Animated in a bold kinetic style that draws inspiration from the Ben-Day dots of classic comic-books of the 50s and 60s, Spider-Man: Into the Spider Verse follows the life of Miles Morales as he becomes 
entangled not only with Peter Parker, that universe’s Spider-Man, as Parker attempts to defeat the machinations of The Kingpin whose obsessions threaten the fabric of reality but also with a squad of spider-persons drawn from alternate realities where the fateful spider bit imbued various people with strange and wondrous abilities. Together they learn about each other and face an array of classic Spiderman though many have been given an unexpected twist befitting the narrative’s multi-verse nature. I particularly like the twist given to Doc Ock. Early in the film there are a number of hat-tips to earlier Sony version of the franchise including a laugh out loud reference to something according the Peter Parker we ‘do not talk about.’ At its core the story is about Miles coming into his own on a larger thematic level it is about the heroism in all us and anyone could be under that mask.
I have heard some people are uneasy with the animation style, the film does utilize a number of flashing and contrasting colors, they animators in a deep homage to the color printing processes of by gone decades even print some tone ‘off-registration’ which I am sure confused at least a few people at both the 2D and 3D screenings but over all the effect works quite well.
Spider-Man: Into the Spider Verse is a film with story, plot, hart, and soul that provides an exciting and thoughtful excursion on variations on what it means to be a hero. It is one not to be missed.
Christmas morning my sweetie-wife and I ventured to local AMC multiplex and caught the first showing of Aquaman the next release in the DC cinematic universe. Over all I, like many but not all, have been disappointed by the feature Warner Brothers have released in their effectors to catch up with Marvel’s Cinematic Universe. Essentially most of the prior films have two principal failing, firstly they do not take the time to tell a good story first and set up the deep mythology second and secondly they often deeply violate the nature of the characters, particularly in the case of Superman. The decision to rush into Justice League without establishing films in advance such as Marvel did with Avengers hampered the audiences anticipation, if you are asking ‘who is that?’ then you are very interested in seeing that character as part of a team up film, and it saddled Justice League with character introductions that ate up valuable screen time.
So with all that said how did Aquaman do?
It was okay.
Not as terrible as Man of Steel or the even worse Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice but not as tight and fun as WB’s breakout hit of the DCEU Wonder Woman. Aquamanserves as the origin story of the title character, Arthur Curry, who father was a human and mother was from an ancient race the Atlantians and their Queen. Now after the events of Justice League Arthur finds himself drawn into the political machinations of Atlantis as his half-brother, King Orm, seeks to unites the fractured undersea nations in order to launch a war with the human race. Assisted by Princess Mera and a royal adviser Vulko, Arthur embarks on quest for an ancient device that will allow him to claim the throne, mastery of the seas, and prevent that coming war. During his quest Curry is forced to grapple with the consequence of his decisions and his own emotional scars.
Over all the core concepts of the story hold together and had real promise but in execution they felt a bit flat and invoked a bit of a plot coupon adventure. (That’s a story where the characters have to get items A, B, & C, and once that is done they can turn them in for a resolution.) The film has all the hallmarks of being the combination of various scripts with the elements not always melding together well. Where Wonder Woman told a story if Diana’s lose of innocence and that is the thematic core of the film, Aquaman has thematic core and as such feels bloated and overstuffed. The direct is fine, the action fast paced and interesting, the actors all do anywhere from competent to good jobs and things progress in a logical fashion so the film is not bad or even flawed but for me it lacks emotional weight. It has a strong plot, characters need to achieve this to avoid a disastrous outcome and in that respect it can be compared to most movies of the Bond franchise but it is light on story. Arthur make no difficult choices, he as a person is not tested by the situation nor does he discover a truth about himself or life that prompts character growth, aside from titles and powers, he departs the story the same person that entered it.
This movie is certainly a ‘your mileage may vary’ piece, as we reached the climatic ending of the movie there were cheers in the audience but not a lot of them. I do not regret going out to see the film but nor can I heartily recommend it to anyone.
10 years. We have been building towards this climax, this resolution, for a decade. Infinity Stones, teased in a handful of the previous 18 movies now movies take the principal McGuffin position and the villain hinted at in Marvel’s The Avengers, Thanos, mounts the stage in all his regal glory. Nearly every principal hero of the cinematic universe mans the field, a field that stretches from the boroughs of New York to the furthest end of the galaxy, in a bid to thwart Thanos’ mad objective. A couple of major heroes miss this fight and their absence is dealt with in a flash of dialogue that is all too easy to miss, but in general the mightiest team ever has been assembled, and they will be tested.
Infinity Warstarts shortly after where Thor: Ragnarokconcluded. The film blasts into the action and the terrible stakes at risk. There is very little fat or heavy exposition in the script; people who are not familiar with the MCU will undoubtedly be ‘at sea’ trying to 
understand the various threads that weave this tapestry. However, those who have been following the experiment since Iron Manin 2008 will be rewarded with a rich, intense, and highly emotional rollercoaster. Where other films in the MCU may have seemed a little light in the coasts to the heroes, Infinity Wardoes not flinch from the central concept that war always brings a hard, heavy, and terrible cost. There are moments of humor, many which are born of the alchemy created by clashing characters from the desperate domains of this vast canvas. There are appearances from nearly aspect of the MCU, except the television franchises, included one that very nearly elicited a cheer from me. (A quick check of IMDB indicates the original actor did not return but that was no evident in the performance.) There was also a major actor introduced a new character in the MCU and this character’s stature plays out as perhaps the subtle joke performed in an MCU movie. There is of course and obligatory Stan Lee cameo, but the directors correctly dispensed with this obligation quickly so that the beloved tradition would not break the movie’s spell at more important and a dramatic moment. (Yes, I am looking at you X-Men: Apocalypse.)
Originally this film was title Avengers: Infinity War Part 1, with next year’s release Part 2.The structure of the pair of films appears to be same with only the titles changed. So what is started here in the massive blockbuster will be concluded in 2019. Like so many franchises of late be prepared for an ending that while completes the plot of this particular franchise entry leaves much more unresolved than resolved. I will say that the ending is a bold risky choice and I have tremendous respect for Marvel Studios in rolling those dice. (Though the early box office is showing that Infinity Warhas already broken box office records.)
In effect Infinity Waracts as the culmination for a decade long narrative experiment and the real risk the studio ran was that it may have come off as anti-climatic. With this much build up it would be very easy of fail, fall short, and leave the audience with a sensation of ‘really, it was all just that?’ That is not what happened. Playing their best villain fully to his cosmic best, Infinity Warfulfills the promise when we started this journey. It is grand, it is fantastic, it is emotional, and the MCU has changed. The status will never be quo again.
Prompted by a discussion on the NPR Podcast Pop Culture Happy Hour, I have been thinking about the motivations of heroes and villains and the troubles that arise when these are not well considered.
One of the podcast’s panelists, and I am not sure if it was Glen Weldon or Stephen Thompson, commented along the lines that if a villain’s motivation became too relatable then the filmmakers, though I am sure the tracks with other narrative arts, run the risk of making the villain into the protagonist. I think a strong argument can be made that is precisely what happened to some degree with Walter White in Breaking Bad. He never transitioned to an antagonist but remained a protagonist who was evil. This idea of keeping the villain’s motivation at arms length was used as a reason for why so often the villain’s goal is one of massive destruction.
The problem with a massive destruction goal for your villain is that it reduces your hero to a negative goal and one that is inherently impersonal. If the monstrous big bad wants to end the world so it can start a new then anyone with the ability will oppose that villain if for no other reason than self-preservation. The hero’s goal is simply to prevent something from happening and that goal has no direct connection to the hero’s character. Another effect is that it is only the villain that really wants something. This has the effect of stripping your protagonist of individuality and reducing your story to plot and spectacle. If this is part of a franchise it will always start the dreaded ‘raising stakes’ inflation spiral; save a person, save a group of people, save a city, save a nation, save the world, save the galaxy, save the universe, following that chain leads into absurdity.
The path of avoid this trap is to give your hero and the villain positive goals that are mutually exclusive. Now, particularly in the super-hero genre, too often writers will take an easy shortcut to a positive goal, save the girlfriend. A weakness in the Sam Rami Spidermanmovies is that all of the third acts revolve around rescuing Mary Jane Watson. This is a lazy shortcut; usually the villain grabs the girlfriend as a method of putting pressure on the hero and it rarely raising the stakes in a meaningful method. (Yes, I am looking at you Iron Man 3.)
When crafting a plot and story make sure that your protagonists has something that they want to achieve and make that goal incompatible with the antagonist’s and not simply preventing something and you’ll have a stronger story.