Category: Hollywood Style

Watching the Meg: So Bad it was Good

Last night after coming home from class, I noticed my landlady and one of my housemates watching the latest shark movie the Meg. It was fairly early in the movie, so I decided to sit down and join them. I didn’t think the movie would be good, but I was entirely right in that assumption. But I have to admit, there was something about how bad it was that made it so entertaining to watch.

So, what is the Meg about? The whole plot is about a marine research group run by a private billionaire that accidentally allows a megalodon, the prehistoric ancestor of the shark, out of of the thermoclyne layer of the ocean (which is somehow locked in place by a freezing layer of water?). The megalodon, once free, begins swimming around, destroying boats and reeking havoc on the the researchers. The group works to stop the megalodon before it reaches the coast of China and kills hundreds in a lust for food.

Yeah, the plot already sounds ridiculous. It gets worse. The movie is filled with cheap and cliche dialogue, particularly between the main action dude (who is super buff and gritty, by the way), and the love interest. The dialogue made me crack up quite often, especially when they tried to use it to be emotional/dramatic. It was superficial and corny.

Expanding on that, just the interaction between all the characters feels so fake. Like, it was impossible to get into the characters or treat them like real characters fake. Their interactions were short and superficial, with no character development or deep interaction. When some of these characters reacted to their friends dying, I couldn’t feel anything because none of their interactions felt real in the first place. Even with the main guy’s ex-wife, I was rather confused about where they stood. They were still friends? But their marriage was kind of messy? I didn’t even know. They were all just barely fleshed out versions of stereotypes, or not even anything really at all.

And the romance they build between the main guy and the girl? God, was it weird. Whoever wrote the film clearly tried to make the romance super obvious. They even involved the woman’s eight year-old daughter, who basically gave the okay to having the dude bang her mom. That made my housemate cover her face with the blanket, and made my landlady laugh.

On top of all this, the film had lots of social commentary surrounding Chinese pollution and their process of de-finning sharks. Which, is good commentary, but kind of strange when paired with a movie all about killing a giant shark. I guess you could say the commentary means that the meg is just a metaphor for mother nature exacting its revenge, but that would probably be asking too much from this movie. But the commentary was obvious.

Yet at the same time, there was plenty of product placement. Nike, some watches (I don’t remember what brand), some cell phones, light up shoes, etc. The product placement was all over the place. And I’m going to bed all the brands featured pollute the environment in some way, which kind of negates the point of the commentary.

All-in-all, it was a bad movie. But I stayed and watched the whole thing, just for how entertaining it was. It was a pretty comical movie, even though I highly doubt it was supposed to be taken that way. I just couldn’t help myself. It was fun to see how bad it really was.

What is Black Friday Really?

While this event is portrayed most often as being exclusive to the US, there are actually over 20 other nations that participate in this event. Every year, a few more countries seem to jump on the bandwagon, as well, as the idea of making more money through providing massive sales is becoming increasingly more appealing to international businesses, despite declining sales in the US. But the US is the birth-land of this event, so I will be focusing on it for the sake of fully explaining what it is.

Despite what most stories have you believe, Black Friday started around 1960 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as hordes of suburban shoppers and tourists would flood the city the day after Thanksgiving to be prepared for the Army-Navy football game that happened on that Saturday of each year. Cops were overworked trying to deal with all the people, and shoplifters ran free, causing the term “black friday” to be pinned to the day.

Black Friday didn’t really take off as a national commercial event until the late 1980’s, when companies took advantage of the name and decided to try and make the event appear more positive. The only problem was, that developed an entire culture around bombarding stores in order to get that early holiday shopping done.

I’ll give you a hint about how that happened: pop culture and media advertisements. Stores began advertising their “Black Friday” deals, pushing to the public that it would be a one-day only sale of a lifetime deal. This happened on TV, radio, anything they could push it to that would gain an audience. And it did.

By the 1990’s, you start seeing depictions of it in movies and TV shows, with whole episodes or portions being dedicated to people trying to go Black Friday shopping, waiting in line or getting hindered for some reason. Even going as far as the mid-2000’s, shows, particularly comedy shows, would frame at least one episode about trying and failing to go Black Friday shopping, or going Black Friday shopping and basically participating in a Battle Royal-type scenario because of it. It became ingrained in US pop culture for a long while, only fueling the drive for Black Friday shopping.

Even now, there are still adverts for Black Friday sales. It gets mentioned on the news, on social media, on Youtube channels.  People make memes about it, we hear news about it (especially from Walmart, who is notorious for having straight brawls in their store).
It still gets talked about and remembered, meaning it will not be going away for a long while.

Revisiting Disney Fanaticism

A few months back, I wrote about some of the world of Disney fanaticism. I had kind of forgotten about it for a while, but was reminded of the world when I not only saw lots of people from back home posting about going to Disneyland (all this weekend, mind you), but also stumbled upon Youtube channels dedicated to analyzing different things about Disney, namely DisneyDan.

I decided to watch some of these videos, particularly the evolution of different character portrayals in Disney parks, and felt very strange. Maybe it’s because of the level of detailed analysis that these people go into (these videos could be 30 minutes or longer). Or perhaps it’s from the fact that almost every time, these people will mention seeing all the performances that the character participates in that they could, plus going to multiple meet-and-greets for that character.

The videos surprised me, and spurred me into researching more Disney fanaticism, namely through looking at fan merchandising. It wasn’t hard to stumble upon a treasure trove. Mickey Mouse ears were everywhere, with so many different themes that it was impossible to find an end. There were also limited edition plushies, clothes, posters, art, just about anything that wasn’t a Disney park itself.

I was surprised by the creativity put into making some of the products (namely the Mickey ears-someone made Dolewhip themed ones), but not at all surprised by the quantity of items to get. I know how far fanaticism can go, although even now it’s still hard to comprehend. I’m fine with getting the occasional plush, and going to Disneyland about once a year; when I see these people go all-in I wonder where their supply of spending money comes from. Disney is expensive.

But let’s revisit the videos I watched, for a second. They’re tied to the money thing, as these Disney analysts almost always mention going out to Disney on Ice, or seeing all the different shows within the Disney park-all that adds up. The amount of personal research (plus, all the Disney history they go into to get a fully fleshed-out story line, is honestly quite impressive. I mean, it’s an interesting topic, but I’m not quite sure I’d be willing to go as much into detail as some of these people. It got me wondering what kind of people they were, centered around their intense attachment to Disney. How much merch did they have, did they have annual passes, do they work for Disney. So many questions run through my mind, ones that I don’t really know if I want to find the answer to. For me, it’s better to appreciate from afar in this kind of situation

The End of an Era with Stan Lee

This morning, comic book artist, editor, and publisher Stan Lee passed away, signalling the end of both an icon and an era in the comic book universe. Stan Lee was not just a famous figure in terms of Marvel, but was also responsible for being one of the leaders of comic book and superhero culture, marking his place in pop culture history.

Stan Lee has had a major impact on Marvel comics, creating figures such as the Fantastic Four, Spiderman, Thor, X-Men, and Hulk. Stan Lee has also been responsible for multimedia projects and acting as a brand ambassador for Marvel, despite past lawsuits against the companies for appropriate compensation for artists. In 2001, he founded the intellectual property company POW!, and later on received the Medal of Arts honor. He also published his autobiography Excelsior! The Amazing Life of Stan Lee.

Lee also helped build Marvel’s blockbuster brand, inspiring the production of Iron Man, X-Man, Thor and the Avengers. The man was also known for making a cameo in almost every Marvel film, the new Fantastic Four being an exception (to which he had jokingly remarked that that was the reason the film had flopped).

Stan Lee was an important person for pop culture, and his contributions to it will not be forgotten anytime in the near future. He helped spearhead Marvel into what it is today, and his death with certainly leave an impact on the company and the people who follow it. You will be missed.

Brand Adverts in K-Dramas

Brand advertisements in Korean dramas (known as K-Dramas) are rather interesting. Their always in the form of rather obvious product placement, contrasting from other types of shows that I’ve seen (Canadian, American, Mexican, Norwegian, etc.). It is very easy to tell when a brand is being product placed within a show, making it look almost comical.

How does product placement in K-Dramas differ from shows from other regions? All shows have brand advertising in some way, shape, or form, as a show of sponsorship and brand advertisements. Product Placement was even made fun of in the movie Wayne’s World, where they obviously showed off different products while saying that they would do no such thing. So what makes product placement in K-Dramas so special?

Well, because of how obvious it is. When a show has product placement, it’s not just an almost-subtle appearance-it’s noticeable. Let’s take two examples-cars and phones. When a phone (often Samsung, a Korean company) is advertised in a show, it’s usually in the form of all the main characters having the newest version of that phone (or, getting an upgrade to that version, if they didn’t have it before). Old phones are made fun of or remarked on as ‘ancient’, calling attention to the phone. By contrast, product placement for phones in shows from other regions are much more subtle, mostly through a particular character’s (only one) use of the phone for interaction. Not all characters have the same phone (there are some exceptions to this, but they are exceptions).

As for cars, they are like phones, in that all the main characters, if they can afford one, has the same car (just different colors). The cars roll up in a cool-shot scene, practically flexing the brand. These cars are also commented on, drawing more attention to the product, especially their luxurious and sleek look. They are obvious and out there for the audience, letting you know that it is definitely a brand advert.

Now, there isn’t anything particularly wrong with having obvious product placement in K-Dramas. If that’s what gets people interesting in the product, then that’s what works. It’s just kind of funny to see the way in which products are placed in K-Dramas, and how it’s so different from other kinds of shows.

Note: This type of advertisement only really applies to the ones that take place in modern South Korea (which is a majority of them).

Good Shows Don’t Always Need Multiple Seasons

Everyone would love to see their new favorite shows have multiple seasons. It’s a natural desire: when people become attached to a show and its characters, they want to see more of it, and want the story to continue. Even though I’ve fallen for this trap myself, I can’t help but look at some shows and think “it really would be fine by itself.”

What do I mean? Well, let’s look at Stranger Things. The show, which was a knock-out when the first season came out, had a popular second season, with a third on the way. I have to say that the second season was pretty good. But I, and at the time a lot of other people, thought that Stranger Things would have been perfectly fine as just one season. Why? Well, I thought it wrapped up its arc pretty well. Yeah, there were hints that the show wasn’t over yet, and yeah that there were still things to resolve, but overall I thought it wrapped up pretty well. Honestly, if you had just cut out the Will Byers bit, then you could have ended the show right then and there.

And it’s not just Stranger Things. I’ve seen other shows where I found that the first season wrapped up everything pretty well, and didn’t need anything beyond it. Of course, however, when something is popular enough, the company who made it is going to want to milk the show for all it’s worth. They’ll make season after season, until people lose interest and the show loses money. Which sucks, especially when it was a show you actually liked at the beginning (yes, I liked Supernatural when it was in its prime).

But it’s not only that. Sometimes, when another season is added, it can seem awkward and out of place, especially when it’s working off the old plot. Or directors and writers change, causing characters to change as well, sometimes for the worse. People notice when the character starts acting different, even if it’s a subtle difference. This all sets the second season at a disadvantage, as it not only would have to make the story line from the first season flow, but also maintain what was so great about the first season. It would have to lie up to its predecessor, and when its predecessor was perfect by itself, it’s nearly impossible to.

Now, I’m not saying that just because a show has a good first season that nothing should ever follow. There are plenty of shows that make their following season/seasons just as good as the first, for the most part. As the show starts hitting seasons 9 and 10, then things become tedious. I’m just trying to say that not every show needs a sequel, especially when the first season did such a good job at finishing itself.

Some Horror Favorites

I’m not going to lie when I say that for the most part, my favorite horror movies are almost all classics. I definitely prefer the classic thriller to the modern ghost story, mostly because most of the horror movies I’ve seen are just repetitions of the same plot. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule, hardcore exceptions, but I can’t help but turn towards the older films. I thought as a good way to wrap up my horror movie month that I would display four of my favorite horror films.

The Shining

For some reason, everyone thinks that this movie is overtly scary. While I would agree it has its moments, I would rather argue that its a layered and complex psychological thriller. This is especially helped by the fact that I watched it three times in three weeks at night when I was twelve. No nightmares came out of it, and I wasn’t deterred from roaming through my house. I enjoy the film’s cinematography, and how the story is structured. It spends most of the time slowly-building the father’s psychological deterioration, before culminating in the quick attempts at murder. The hotel is quickly developed as a source of evil and darkness, something the son, and eventually the father, pick up on. It’s artfully done.

Coraline

While this is a kid’s movie, I think it certainly belongs on my list of favorites. Coraline centers around a girl who feels like she doesn’t quite belong in her family, who seems to ignore her in favor of work. She discovers a fantasy land that caters to her every desire, but quickly realizes that it’s everything but. It’s creatively designed, providing drastic color differences to contrast the real world from the fake one, making the fake world all the more desirable. The film’s plot, as well, is well-executed; not feeling rushed or too cheesy, but working well in tandem with the plot. Coraline is smart, sassy, and atypical in terms of kid’s characters for it’s time. And on top of that, the villain is actually quite freaky looking. She’s bony, disfigured, spidery, and cruel, and as a kid I was actually quite freaked out by her.

Silence of the Lambs

Now, this is one that I was okay with the first time I saw it, mostly because I didn’t really pay much attention. I was fresh off of reading the book (yes, there is a book), and spent most of my time just comparing the two, rather than just enjoying the film in itself. I saw it again a few days ago, and I have to say I enjoy it much more. It’s not really scary, more just gruesome and anxiety-inducing, tugging on the senses to make the audience feel uncomfortable or worried at just the right points. While I’ll admit it does rely a little too much on the close-up shots, which are used mostly during conversations, it is otherwise an extremely good movie. Each character has their own distinctive personality and characteristics, and all are seemingly well-fleshed out (although I would have preferred they fleshed out the villain just a bit more). The film has earned its spot on my list.

Pan’s Labyrinth

Last but not least, this film is one that I only saw this year. I’ve known about it, but never got around to watching it until I was invited to go to one of the midnight viewings that happen during the fall in my town. I have to say I don’t regret going.

Pan’s Labyrinth is not so much a horror, film. It leans much more towards tragedy. It takes place in the aftermath of the Spanish Civil War, focusing on the changeling Ofelia trying to find her way back to the land under the hill. The film utilizes the contrast of hot and cool colors, having the realm of the Fae be much warmer in tones than the human world. It also makes an interesting parallel between the dangers of the human world versus the dangers of the land of the Fae, with the dangers of the latter being more conquerable than the former. It blends fantasy with reality to make an incredible comparison between what the innocent child can see versus what the disenchanted adult can see. Each character dynamic is fluid and distinct, leading to a lovely film.

The Impact of Slasher Films

When horror films are analyzed for their greatness, the genre of slasher films is never included in the mix. We always turn to the more complex artistic thrillers such as Dracula, Rosemary’s Baby, the Shining, and An American Werewolf in London in order to present the hallmarks of horror. Some of the very few remarked-on slasher films include Halloween and Psycho, renowned for their complex relationships with their mother, calling homage to Freud’s Oedipus Complex.

But interestingly enough, despite the fact that slasher films are almost never remarked on in film academia (other than to be criticized for their garish nature), they are a major source for parody and imitation. While that may appear counter-intuitive for the genre being taken seriously, the fact that it is so imitated and parodied does say something about where slasher films lie in the horror genre.

Let me explain my argument by first studying the core or slasher films. Slasher films are exactly what the name “slasher” entails- violent murders, heartless serial killers, predatory chases, and other such forms. There is hardly room for the deep psychological thriller aspect, more focused on providing the gore and grotesque. The slasher film’s goals are both to make the audience laugh at the almost cartoonish nature of stable character archetypes and feel uncomfortable by the homage to basic and “savage” animal behavior- not just in the killer, but also among the good guys as well.

What do I mean by that? Well, from what I’ve seen, characters return almost to their basic human instinct-ignoring morals, ignoring civilization, all of that. It becomes merely an act for survival, the play on fight or flight, with airs of sexuality and other such basic functions.

As I’ve also mentioned before, as well, is that the characters in the slasher films have pretty stable archetypes, even as the plots change. They rarely ever change, making it easy to imitate not just for other slasher films, but for parody films as well. It also becomes easier to carry out in sequels and remakes, as expectations for complex characters among the audience is rather low. That’s why you can have a whole series such as Saw or Nightmare on Elm Street.

But where does the impact factor come in, other than imitation? Well, I’ve recently read a piece on slasher films that remarks that students of folklore or mythology will be able to tell you how slasher films are the epitome of oral history. Their archetypes, their diverse and interchangeable story lines, and the accumulation of sequels and imitations all reflect the story patterns of oral history and stories. No telling is exactly the same, and sequels are invited because there is not set story to finish. Because of this, pop culture can take slasher films and go to the moon and back, creatively adding their own takes for the sake of both horror and comedy. This in turn leaves a greater impact on the audience. We start to associate horror with aspects of the slasher, because we see it imitated and extended so much through pop culture, not just in films, but in TV, social media, and other such forms of media. Of course we won’t forget the other types of sub-genre within horror, but we identify and associate more with the slasher.

It’s not just because of their capacity for imitation that we remember the slasher genre so well, however. We also remember it because the genre does get quite creative, without having to be so deep and layered. Chucky and Nightmare on Elm Street are both remembered as horror classics for not just their slasher nature but also their creativeness. Chucky only had two sequels, and yet we remember the first one the most because of it’s take on killer dolls-something that hadn’t really been considered in horror film before. Almost the same goes for Nightmare on Elm Street-despite its numerous sequels, it takes the audience to a place that hadn’t been considered for horror films before- your own dreams.

Slasher films can get just as creative as its other horror counterparts, and leave just as much of an impact. The only thing is, because of their seemingly blunt and gruesome nature, they are sidelined by academics, who either consider the genre beneath them, or just see the genre as part of a “murder fetish”. Slasher is not given the light of day it deserves.

The Haunting of Hill House-Paranormal or Just Metaphor?

Beware: Spoilers

Recently, Netflix released a 10-episode series known as The Haunting of Hill House, inspired by the original novel by Shirley Jackson. The show doesn’t center around much of the original plot, however. Rather, it centers around the Crain family (making them the center focus rather than a distant detail), and their troubles in an after the house.

The Crains initially buy the derelict manor in order to flip and sell it, so they could afford to build their own dream home. As time goes on, however, strange things begin to occur around the house, culminating in a “final night” that causes them to leave in a hurry. This night, and life in the house in general, slowly comes together in bits and pieces seen through “character focus” episodes. There is the long-standing mystery of what exactly happened the “final night”, which is solved at the end, but the viewer can’t help but notice that a complex and frayed family dynamic is at the forefront.

Now, throughout the series, there is plenty of the paranormal. There are obvious ghosts, hidden ghosts, even the crazy imagination ghosts. The show lets you know that yes, this is a horror story, making some freaky designs and figures. The ghosts do follow the adult Crain children around, affecting some more than others (Nell and Luke experience the paranormal the most, Steven and Shirley the least). The house has a certain quality about itself as well, seemingly alive and possessive, taking over the minds of Olivia Crain and Nell Crain, and protecting itself against attack. There are multiple levels to the paranormal in this show, providing an especially ghoulish aspect.

In Nell’s episode, however (named the “Bent-Neck Lady”, after the main ghost that haunts her), all this comes into question. Unlike the other siblings, her episode is rife with mental stability issues, as she deals with sleep paralysis, trauma, and anxiety. The youngest Crain’s stable life is ripped out from under her with the death of her husband and a switch to a new therapist. From then her mental health declines rapidly, leading her to enable her twin’s drug addiction and have an argument with her visiting sister. The episode culminates with her returning to the Hill House and committing suicide via dreamlike state , leading to another interesting twist. In the moments before she hung herself, she realized that she had a noose around her neck and she was standing on the edge of a staircase, and got confused and scared. In the moments after, the viewer realizes that she was the “Bent-Neck” Lady, having haunted herself the whole time.

The episode, which works as the halfway point of the series, explains how Nell ended up dying in the house. But it also hints at how the mother, Liv, died in the house as well. Both Luke and the father Hugh blame the house for “killing” Nell and Liv, despite the fact that both were suicides. This could be explained: Nell went into a dreamlike trance, seemingly led by the house into putting the noose around her own neck. As for Liv, she starts seeing ghosts that convince her to kill her family to protect them. From what, is unknown. It’s easy to argue that the house does contain some supernatural capabilities, actively influencing Liv and Nell to their final moments.

However, notice who the house seems to affect. Liv came into the house with an unknown mental illness, marked by migraines that she would get periodically. Her condition was only exaggerated by the fact that Hugh didn’t get the proper help for her, unable to because of stigma against mental illness that plagued the time period. The old house started to get to her, leading her to have sporadic and “possessed” behavior, leading up to her death.

As for Nell, she was also mentally vulnerable, having suffered from trauma and anxiety since she was as young as 6. She was also more prone to being “influenced” by the house, and only was really affected by the house when she was in her most vulnerable state. Luke also, sits in a vulnerable state, and was more prone to being affected by the house due to his struggles with drug addiction.

Also, it can’t help but be noticed that most of the paranormal occurrences occur when the family is divided, following the hill house. Which begs the question-is it really paranormal? Or is it all just a metaphor?

Well, we don’t really know. You could go either way, but you can also say it’s a mix of both. There are shared paranormal experiences among the family, adding a more solid paranormal experience. At the same time, there are individual experiences that are especially tied to mental illness and especially trauma, which solidifies the hypothesis that it’s all a metaphor. All-in-all, it’s never fully explained. Although the cast does like to relate to the metaphor theory, especially as the family is so dysfunctional and traumatized that it would make a great amount of sense.

The Haunting of Hill House is actually a very good show. While it does have its corny shots and moments, it is one that provides multiple layers to its horror, making it perfect to watch in time for Halloween.

How Science Fiction Works Better in TV

I began watching Westworld recently to celebrate turning in my essay, and quickly got invested in it. The world, character arcs, and dynamism of the hosts intrigues me, especially as more of how the whole thing works slowly gets more developed and explained. Seeing how the show introduced its dynamics got me thinking about other sci-fi TV shows, and how they compare to movies of the same genre. The more I thought about it, the more I thought that sci-fi as a genre does much better in the realm of TV than film.

Why is that? Well, sci-fi often involves complex world/story-building when done right, and needs to be set out in a way that doesn’t seem rushed or boring. In film, there is only a two-two and a half hour span to introduce and develop the story and the world. Often times, that means there are aspects that are underdeveloped, rushed, or simply never explained. Which, when portrayed in a particular, more natural way, can work out.

Think of Mad Max: Fury Road. There wasn’t much actual explanation of the post-apocalyptic world, but there was visual representation, paired with just the right amount of explanation where the audience could understand how things worked. Of course, there were aspects left out; but the most important aspects are understood.

Now, the case of Mad Max is a case of sci-fi in films done well. More often than not, however, it takes a film multiple movies in order to explain itself and the world, sometimes dragging out stories that aren’t interesting enough or good past film 1 or 2. Or, in the case where there is only one film, the world is not explained enough, or simply isn’t interesting. Other times the story line is so bad and rushed that the world suffers as a result, too. In any sense, something is missing.

In the case of TV, however, there is a lot more to work with. Worlds can be properly flushed out and can work as an element of intrigue for the audience as it slowly unravels (in good shows, of course). Shows usually have a minimum of eight episodes to work out their world and dynamics, providing much more time and space to develop everything. The added fact that it usually comes out one episode a week even adds more to the suspense, maintaining greater interest than if it came out once every 2+ years. Sci-fi is a large and infinitely creative genre, and needs plenty of space to exist as a valid genre.

Sci-fi has had a long history in both film and movies, but is notably more prolific in TV, and much more recognizable. In the last decade particularly, sci-fi has been on the rise, after a period of falling behind fantasy. Sci-fi in TV shows also has the luxury of existing for longer, as average great shows can have as many as 9 or 10 seasons without appearing old or run-out, a heavy contrast from film. Shows can take on many more story arcs, as well, adding greater levels of complexity that otherwise couldn’t or wouldn’t exist.

Sci-fi can exist in both film and television, and has phenomenal pieces in both sets of media (Star Wars, Star Trek, Stranger Things), paired alongside bad pieces. However, I tend to notice that TV overall has better sci-fi series than film, particularly in recent years, most likely as a result as the care and space provided through TV. TV has provided sci-fi a grander space, and has lent it greater popularity than film, causing the genre to have an overall better quality.

Aladdin, the One Live Action Remake I’m Excited For

A few days ago, Disney released the teaser trailer for the live-action remake of 2019’s Aladdin. Although the teaser trailer mostly displayed the grandeur of their CGI backgrounds, it hinted at some of the story with the overlay of a revamped “Friend Like Me”. In all honesty, it made me kind of excited.

I had always liked the original Aladdin. It was kind of like a blend of Vegas meets generic Middle East, but it worked surprisingly well. It was entertaining, aesthetically pleasing, and the songs were very good. Although it did have its flaws, I had to say overall it was an interesting film.

Usually, liking the original animated film in those ways is an automatic recipe for not liking a remake-especially when the Disney live-action remakes tend not to put that much effort into “retelling” the original. They do add some elements, but overall, the films haven’t been all that interesting or creative (especially not Beauty and the Beast, which I analyzed earlier).

But for some reason, I got genuinely excited about the live-action remake. And when I looked into who was the cast and who worked on the music, I got even more excited. I like to imagine that it’s because they are keeping the movie a musical, which means there’s going to be a whole new look to how they portray some of their most happening songs. What makes it even better is that they are still using Alan Menkel, the original composer, for these songs, even using him to compose a new song for Jasmine.

They kept the cast predominantly Middle Eastern, as well. The one fully white character is supposed to be a suitor for Jasmine, and was added to create a new dynamic of nation-politics. But other than that, everyone fits the bill for the location of Agrabba, which is a plus. Other movies have tried casting white actors for Middle Eastern roles, but increasingly they have been unsuccessful as they face public backlash. Disney played smart in casting, this time around.

I really can’t explain fully, however, why I want to see this new remake. I can’t explain why this one sparks my curiosity when none of the others have, and why I’m actually excited to see it. I can’t argue that it’s good old nostalgia, because if that were the case, I would have been excited to see the other remakes. But I wasn’t. Maybe it’s because this is the most fantastical one. There’s so much that happened in the original in terms of design and setup, that perhaps I’m curious about seeing how it can appear in a more solid form. I don’t know.

Returning to the World I Knew Before

I don’t know if I’ve indicated before, but I have a long history of being a huge nerd.

Or rather, a geek (yes, there is a difference). I wasn’t the techy “build your own computer and digs math” type, which would have classified me as a nerd (by stereotypical standards). No, I have always preferred pop culture and literature, preferring to spend my time playing games and dabbling in a bit of anime. But the biggest highlight of being a geek was going to conventions.

The two biggest conventions I went to were Wondercon, which functions as a mini-Comic Con, situated in Anaheim, and Anime Expo, the largest Anime convention in North America. I went to these conventions every year from when I was thirteen until I went to college, when scheduling began interfering. It got to a point where I kind of got sick of them.

But in college, things changed. For some reason, I had it in my head that I should “grow out” of my geekiness, or at least keep it more private. Perhaps it was because I looked around and saw all the other geeks around me at school made me uncomfortable. They were just too stereo-typically geeky. That’s not to say that some of my high school friends weren’t, but these guys just fit the bill too well.

The disassociation might also have been partially influenced by the fact that I never fit the bit for someone who was geeky. Yeah, I wear glasses and at one point cut my hair short and dressed less-than-pleasantly, but I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about my face, my figure. I looked more like the kind of person geeks and nerds would wish would be into the same stuff as them. And this isn’t out of an inflation of my own ego. I’ve had enough creepy experiences to know exactly what position I was in. I look more like I belong in a Starbucks.

This was a factor that had always plagued my adolescent years. Especially during the height of gamer gate, where you could get called a fake gamer or fake nerd for just about breathing the “wrong way”. They never judged the people that looked like (stereotypical) geeks and nerds. They judged the people that didn’t.

It didn’t help that my Mom and sister would make fun of me for being a geek. My sister has become more involved in the culture herself in recent years, which has lightened her take on it, but my Mom would always roll her eyes. She still thinks I’m into things that I’m not (i.e: she thinks everything I watch is anime for some reason). She didn’t stop me from being a part of geek culture, but she didn’t much like the fact that I was so into it, either.

So for most of my college years, I kind of kept things under wrap. I stopped investing myself in geek culture for the most part, although I couldn’t help having my closest friends know what I was into. Everything was going fine.

But then, I started to miss the geek world. I started to miss being involved in the newest game, and missed going to conventions. I missed being a geek. I wasn’t going to suddenly stop dressing decent, but I didn’t want to let go of something I actually enjoyed. It was a big part of my life, and it was something cool to do. I got to see artists I follow in person, discover new artists, and find new things that I didn’t know before in geek culture.

So I’ve decided to come back. My Dad says he can get us into Comic Con, and I am planning on going to Anime Expo, so I guess that’s a good start to breaking back in. While I don’t have much time to be “full geek” (I have school and work), I do plan on enjoying the things I once did.

You Can’t Rely on Old Media for Depictions of the West

Recently, Rockstar has announced that Red Dead Redemption 2, the sequel to its instant classic of Red Dead Redemption, will add black cowboys, portraying a more realistic perspective of how the Wild West would have been.

However, like all things with time period games, there are those who dissent to having these characters added. Fortunately, it’s not nearly on the same scale as some other games, but it still exists. One argument of the dissent that stuck out to me was the idea of how historically “inaccurate” it was to have black cowboys. These arguments are based off of old Hollywood and TV portrayals of the West, somehow justifying their arguments. If P.O.Cs were not portrayed then, then therefore they simply weren’t actually present, right?

Wrong. Let me give a little insight on the actual realm of the West. The West, with its notoriety for being a “lawless wasteland”, was much more racially open than the rest of the United States. A former part of land owned and controlled by Spain (and later Mexico), the wide and mostly unpopulated expanse had plenty or room for the proliferation of Vaqueros, or the precursor to cowboys.

The Vaquero lifestyle was mostly used by Mexicans and some Natives, who gained influence from the Spanish ranchers on the Missions. However, when the land was won over by the US in the Mexican-American War, the Vaquero stopped being a purely Hispanic profession. Caucasian and later black cowboys began making an appearance on the scene, taking up the Vaquero (later renamed cowboy) lifestyle to live a “free rancher” life.

Black cowboys initially started as slaves tending to their masters’ cattle ranches while they were away at war in Texas, although there were some that escaped West before incorporation into the US to escape their former masters. In this, black Vaqueros gained the skills that would make them invaluable to the cattle industry, allowing them to prosper following the end of the Civil War. As many as 1 in 4 cowboys were Black, travelling throughout the West to help ranchers herd their cattle.

Now, this didn’t make the West some racial paradise, as discrimination against Latinos, Blacks, Native Americans, and later Asians (who came in to help build train tracks that would help connect the Continental US) was still a common phenomenon. But it allowed more freedom than other parts of the US.

Now, with all that in mind, how does this relate to old media? Well, if you’ve watched any spaghetti Western film or TV, you’ll easily notice that the diverse history of the West simply does not exist. If there’s a Native, they’re violent savages killing the poor white woman for fun. The Asians are portrayed as dirty, cheap, and lying. There’s not even a mention of Blacks or Hispanics.

No, the Western shows and films represent and idealized White version of the West, one which claims the cowboy as purely American made, despite its Hispanic origins. It’s about the finding the Classic love in the Wild and Gritty West, centered around White actors in a purely whitewashed realm.

Even as late into the 1990’s, media surrounding the West was heavily geared towards portraying it as white dominant, with only a few outliers that portrayed otherwise. It was only in recent years with Django Unchained, Hateful Eight and Magnificent Seven that the whites-only narrative has fallen back, showing another, previously unacknowledged side of diversity in the Wild West.

Old Media has a particular representation for portraying false narratives, and is unreliable for arguments trying to prove historical accuracy. Media changes stories and narratives all the time for entertainment, especially in older films and TV shows.

Most Horror Movies Suck

Most horror movies suck. This isn’t a result of a new phenomenon, where an over-reliance on jump scares and cheap tricks has lowered the quality of horror movies. No, this is something that has existed since the dawn of the horror genre in film.

Now, you might be saying, “There’s plenty of classic horror movies”, or “there’s been good ones all the time”. Yeah, I’m not talking about the classics. I’m talking about everything else.

Let me put it into perspective: in the entire movie medium as a whole, there is a very disproportionate level of bad movies to good ones. For every great film, there are plenty of okay or even mediocre ones that came out before it. The ratio for horror films is even worse. The horror film industry is a very prolific one, meaning that combined with the critically-acclaimed classics (some recent ones including Cloverfield, Get Out, a Quiet Place, and Hereditary) come many, many more bad horror films. And that’s just on the level of mainstream media.

The problem is, although the production value for horror films has increased exponentially (in the earliest years, most horror films were pushed to the side-lines, almost to the level of B movie films. That isn’t to say that any weren’t, however: quite a few were. The difference in levels of production value drew more attention to the really good horror films, making them classics.

The good classics were remarkably known for their story line and the emotional investment of the actors, paired with excellent and perfectly timed cinematography. Suspense was deeply intertwined with these films, causing the audience to actually be invested, even long after the further development of movie effects and realism to make films pop more. The bad ones by contrast knew they weren’t very good. They made the most out of lowered budget and “lesser” actors, becoming mindless entertainment. Even the high quality bad horror films knew they were bad, at least to some level. There was a distinction in how the bad movies presented themselves, specifically separating themselves from the good ones.

Nowadays, it’s much harder to tell. With the increase in production value all around, and the overall increase in popularity for horror films, even the bad ones take themselves seriously. They try to act like the good ones, hiding otherwise boring, similar plots under the guise of an enticing trailer. The only indication might be picking up the ridiculousness or the stupidity of the plot in the trailer, and even then sometimes they’re misleading. I’ve been tricked into seeing plenty of horror films that look promising, only to see the same story line played out. The only difference would be the positioning of the jump scares.

Another issue is, when a great horror film comes out, there are often sequels that follow. And usually with each sequel that comes out, the quality of the film gets worse (exceptions include Cloverfield). As a result, the whole series, including the first film, gets devalued.

Horror films have the unfortunate trend of having a few really good horror films within a few years, and tons of bad horror films. Although This trend is starting to shift (2018 was an unusual year for having more good horror films than bad ones), there is a long history of really bad horror movies. There’s nothing wrong with that, as rom coms also had the same trend. The difference is, there is still some creativity to horror coming back, which has kept it alive through a particular decade of flops. Rom coms and horror films had a shared decade of mediocre majority films, but rom coms, holding too much to the classic formula, fell to the background. Horror films were able to barely cling on, until recent films have fully pushed it back onto its feet. We’ll see how horror movies evolve over the next few years.

The Downfall of Telltale Games

Now, I am a few days late to this whole drama, but that has let me get a glimpse of a little extra content.

Last week, Telltale games declared that it was going to be shutting down, laying off most of its staff (who were expecting an eventual closure, but not so sudden). Official reports argue that a failed round of funding (the last backer abruptly pulled out) caused the shut down. The company is only staying open in order to finish the Minecraft: Story Mode for Netflix, then is shutting down permanently. This puts a halt to the much anticipated final season of Walking Dead and trashes the production for a Stranger Things game.

While officially, financial problems led to the closure, this development was a long time coming. Telltale games exploded onto the mainstream scene with the insanely popular first season of Walking Dead, released in 2012. Every gamer who was played that game, with streams for the first chapter popping up. As the game had promised that the endings would change based on your actions, people were trying to get the best ending possible. The first season was pretty good at making it seem like it changed based off actions, as well.

However, people quickly realized in the second season that this was not the case. Major events occurred no matter what, taking away the purpose of trying to find different outcomes. Another problem as well was the fact that the only character that remained consistent was Clementine (and later the child), while all other characters seemingly disappeared. Even the spin-off game was a dead end, with none of the characters making it into the actual game. This made it so there was too many characters to get invested in, turning people off.

This also ruined interest in Game of Thrones and Batman, two games that were reportedly good, but too long and unchanging for people to really be invested in. It only goes downhill from there, as Telltale keeps releasing more and more games, none of which had anywhere near the same popularity as the first season of Walking Dead. As a result, the company was merely digging itself into its own grave.

But, it didn’t let that on to its employees. In fact, the company had just hired people weeks before they had the massive layoff, with people even moving across the country in order to come and work. As a result, a massive class-action lawsuit has been filed against the company, as with the sudden layoff with an almost immediate cut-off of benefits, they have violated California labor laws. Some argue that in suing a bankrupt company, they are wasting their time, but it’s important to solidify that these laws apply to gaming companies, who might otherwise think they’re exempt.