Tag: films

‘Sonic’ Director Agrees to Change Design of Sonic

Earlier this week, the first trailer for the new live-action Sonic was released, leading to a wave of criticism from the internet. The model of Sonic that appeared in the trailer was thought to be much worse than what had been seen in teaser posters, with the classic hedgehog looking like a weird fuzzy nightmare with human teeth.

The new trailer led to floods of memes, particularly surrounding the actor Jim Carrey, who is set to play the antagonist Eggman, saying that he will “carry the whole movie”. It also led to many artists editing the Sonic design to appear much more like his classic model from the games, leading to questions of how one artist can make a better design for a character in seemingly a few hours, when a company spent years making a monstrous design.

Well, the level of criticism seemed to reach the director, who understood what he needed to do loud and clear. Yesterday via Twitter Jeff Fowler announced that they would be changing the Sonic model to make him appear more like his classic features, which he imagines would appease fans and critics.

The announcement comes just six months before the supposed release date of the film, which excites some, but worries others, particularly artists. The media industry is rife with exploitation for artists, especially as these artists cannot unionize and advocate for themselves. The idea that they would have to change the main character’s model in just six months, with no announced push-back date, leaves the very great and dangerous possibility that these artists will be forced to work overtime for little pay in order to fix the design.

It’s not as though the artists can protest for better work conditions, either. With the media industry being so competitive, these artists can face harsh punishment for pushing back, or even get fired, and be replaced by someone willing to work the hard hours. It leaves the artists in a classic position of either doing what they’re forced to, or find themselves without a job.

The announcement to change the Sonic model comes only a week after developers and artists expose the exploitative work conditions in trying to quickly crunch out new content for the popular game Fortnite.

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 Saturation Complex of Geek Culture

I had mentioned in a post earlier that there is a prevailing idea that misconstrues how geek culture came to be. I can’t really say where this came about, although I strongly suspect that films and TV shows of the 1970s and 1980s paired with gendered conceptions surrounding geek culture are to blame. Whatever the cause, it has fueled this conception, leading to a sort of alienation complex as the geek community shifts and changes.

As a result, there is this saturated version of history, which relies on the idea that women and minorities have not been a part of geek culture until very recently (as in, within the last decade). As a result, there has developed a constant push against women and minorities joining in on geek culture, with particular “tests” placed against women in order to test if they’re “qualified” to partake in the geek community. These blockades grow increasingly pointless as geek culture continues to gain popularity, and yet for some reason persists. Perhaps I can explain why.

You see, it all starts at the source of geek culture: Science Fiction (Sci-Fi). In the saturated version of geek history, the first Sci-Fi author was Jules Vernes, best known for his book Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea. As a result, this causes men who believe this start to think that women and other minorities have no real right to enter and write about Sci-Fi.

However, if you make one quick Google search, you’ll find that this version is incorrect. While Jules Verne was one of the earlier Sci-Fi writers, the real first Sci-Fi author was Mary Shelley, who published Frankenstein in 1818, a whopping fifty years before Jules Verne. This makes the Sci-Fi genre not a “boys only” club, but a club founded by women.

Shelley wasn’t the last female Sci-Fi author, either. Well-known ones include Octavia E. Butler, Margaret Atwood, Ursula K. Le Guin, and Suzanne Collins. Sci-Fi has never been a “boys only” club, although it is often pushed to appear that way.

Comics, by contrast, didn’t really diversify until recently. In its early days, the comic industry was very much “boys only”, mostly outright refusing to hire women and other minorities. This isn’t unusual, however; the entertainment industry as a whole was that way.  That isn’t to say that women and minorities weren’t in those realms, but it was very difficult to break in, particularly from the 1920’s-1970’s. This realm makes it a whole lot easier to promote the saturated history. Since women and other minorities were barred, it was easy to say that they didn’t belong and exist in the space. Despite the fact that the majority of comic readers in the present era greatly outweighs the “traditional” readership (white men), there is still this stigma that pushes women and minorities away.

The same goes for the video game industry. Women and minorities were mostly barred in the early days (as they were discouraged and stigmatized from getting STEM degrees in college), meaning that they couldn’t break in until more recently. This has created a frictional environment that extends beyond game development and into game playing, leading to online harassment and common claims of not being a “real gamer” to anyone that doesn’t fit the geek stereotype. To be honest, the “fake gamer” argument is ridiculous: if you play games, you’re a gamer. You don’t have to be best of the best, but if you play video games as a hobby, then you qualify.

The reason there is such a push back against diversity entering geek culture mostly stems from a victim complex among the “traditional” geeks. Despite the fact that geek culture has been gaining continuous popularity over the last two-three decades (exploding after the premiers of Walking Dead and Game of Thrones), the news for some reason has not hit the geek community. Or, rather, it has not processed.

The “traditional” geeks seem to be in denial about just how popular geek culture is, moaning and groaning how they are such victims and such a minority, while at the same time fighting against anyone that doesn’t fit their own characteristics and pushing them away. They like to act like they’re still the kids that get severely bullied, although just about any kid with a computer nowadays has access to video games and anime. It’s a bizarre complex that sticks out like a sore thumb.

The Controversial Author of a Beloved Series

The Harry Potter books and movies have been loved and cherished for around two decades. It was a series that was recognizable to millions of people, to the point so that some of the advertising for Deathly Hallows Part Two didn’t even name the title of the movie. It has also led to the opening of Harry Potter World in both Universal Studios locations (Orlando, Los Angeles), with hundreds of thousands flocking to partake in some of the magic. The Harry Potter series was classified as the hallmark of an entire generation.

While the fandom for Harry Potter seems to be thriving, I can’t help but wonder how much this is done out of pure nostalgia, especially as more negative light turns to the series’ author, J.K. Rowling. As time goes on, I notice that former die-hard fanatics are noticing more issues with the series, particularly with the actual lack of originality that the magic world in the series has. But contrasting from these fans-turned critics are the ones that are still die-hard, constantly taking every house quiz, referencing the series when they can, and even getting permanent tattoos of famous symbols. It’s an interesting mix that I increasingly notice is coming at odds with one another.

In order to analyze why I notice some people being pushed away, we’d have to first look at the history of negative light placed on the author. You see, this all started after the release of Halfblood Prince (the book, of course), in which J.K. Rowling announced that Dumbledore, the father figure to Harry Potter, was actually gay. This came at a celebration of diversity initially, although there were some that questioned the fact that Dumbledore never revealed anything about his sexuality (no reference, no actions, nothing) in either the books or the films. Over time, this move turned purely to criticism, calling the author out for making a cheap shot of queerbaiting, especially with the lack of interaction between Dumbledore and his supposed “lover” in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them 2.

J.K. Rowling only put more bad attention on herself by claiming diversity in the books after the fact, despite never referencing those characters in her series. This gained more negative attention and criticism, although a meme has arisen around her after-the-fact claims, with people claiming ridiculous things to mock her attempts.

Now, you may think “well, she wrote the books in the 1990’s and early 2000’s, she’s from England, so it would make sense that she’d only write about white people”. There’s a few issues with that logic. She had written the books with only white people, which, if you just left it at that, is fine. There’s nothing wrong with admitting that most of the characters are white, and all of them are straight. Most mainstream series and books from that period were like that (especially European books, although they do have a level of diversity that they seem to ignore). If she had just acknowledged that fact, there wouldn’t have been any controversy. But to try and say that you had diversity, while not putting in the effort to display that diversity, or re-editing the books to show real difference, is just weak. It reads as cowardice and band wagoning, which would turn people away.

Another issue, which came up earlier this year, is that J.K. Rowling has been following and liking the posts of TERFs. What is a TERF? A TERF, or Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist, is someone that focuses on promoting the equality of “biological” females, claiming that trans-males are traitors and trans-females are women-haters. They claim to be feminist, but are really not, and they are rejected by most of the feminist community, leading them to call discrimination and brainwashing. Their tweets are very difficult not to tell, and J.K. Rowling liked and retweeted several from a known TERF, which were targeted against trans-females. This caused some outrage, but not nearly as much as it should have. In fact, it has almost been completely forgotten, quickly hidden with news of a new interactive Harry Potter game. But it left its mark on me.

Where do I sit on this issue? Well, I was never able to finish the original series, despite the fact that my sister had read all seven books 4 times. I saw the movies, but was never all that invested. But the controversy has made me quite put off from investing my time and money in any of J.K. Rowling’s works or films.

The Art of Time Loop: How a Cliche Genre can be Done Right

We’ve all heard of at least one movie were a guy either is stuck in a time loop of the same day, or decides to mess with time. It’s usually either cause he has to get a certain day perfect, or he wants to meddle with time and then realize he has to fix the mess he’s created. The cliche has appeared at least once every two years, so it’s difficult to say that it isn’t a cliche.

But unlike many other cliches, this one can actually be done right. How is that so? Well, there are unique and creative ways that the main guy can be stuck in the time loop. He usually does it to try and get the girl he’s always wanted, but the re-do doesn’t always have to be about that.

The problem is, Hollywood has never tried to do the re-do as anything beyond romance, which adds to the cliche. You can go so many different routes when it comes to the time loop, even going so far as to main the main character do the re-do to affect someone else’s life, rather than just their own.

The main issue with the re-do cliche is that they almost always involve the guy trying to get the girl he thought he wanted, before coming to the realization that she wasn’t the one. It also always a certain day perfect, either their wedding day or some other big event that is heavily tied to their romantic life. It’s never anything else. Making it about something else would actually make the cliche so clean and refreshing. It’s so easy, and yet the Hollywood industry doesn’t want to take that step. Romance is an easy, audience-drawing theme to follow-why do anything else?

The re-do trope has gotten so similar to itself that it’s not even worth watching anymore. Unless they decide to finally branch out, you can just about guess the entire plot of the movie, with some variance give-or-take. It makes it so overtly bland that it’s almost intolerable.

There have been a few horror movies, however, that have taken the time loop in unique, twisted ways. Movies such as Happy Death Day and Before I Fall have been taking the time loop genre out of its original comedy genre, and planting it firmly into horror. It’s interesting to see, and definitely adds to the suspense of a plot. We’ll have to see where it takes us.

Hollywood and the Wonders of Rome

Trevi Fountain and the Mouth of Truth are both internationally renowned landmarks in the city of Rome. The former is inspired by the Baroque period, but was built in the 1700s as a grandiose way to be the end of a rebuilt aqueduct. The latter was built as a Roman sewer cap, but later became the source of a medieval tradition. We like to have the perception that these sights were always famous, and will continue to be. However, this is not the case. These monuments became famous during the 1950s, when a series of Hollywood films centered around Rome showcased these, sending tourists flocking to Rome. Three different films promoted these sights, each playing an important role in the sudden fame of the two sights.

Trevi fountain, or La Fontana di Trevi does not have a long history, although the source of its water does. Its water comes from an aqueduct that had been shut down, known as the Virgin Aqueduct. It had been shut for a while, before a pope during the Baroque period decided to reopen it and build a fountain to mark the finishing point of the aqueduct’s path, recruiting a design by Gian Lorenzo Bernini. However, it wasn’t actually built until the 1700s, designed by Nicola Salvi and finished by Giuseppe Pannini in 1762.

While the fountain was grandiose and a sight to see, it didn’t gain much international attention until the 1954 release of 3 Coins in the Fountain (Tre Soldi Nella Fontana). The film, which centers around 3 American women travelling to Rome to find love, throw coins in the fountain to make a wish, and reunite with their Italian lovers at the end of the film in front of it. Also, in 1960’s La Dolce Vita, and Italian film taking place in Rome, has a scene where Anita Ekburg takes a bath in the Trevi Fountain. While that will get you arrested if you try that now, it was fine for the time, gaining a great amount of attention internationally. These two films put the spotlight on Trevi fountain, showing off nuances of Rome that hadn’t been seen on the international level before. Now the fountain is almost always crowded with people, those who want to take photos in front of the beautiful artwork or throw a coin in and make a wish.

The same thing happened with the Mouth of Truth, or La Bocca di Verita. Once an embellished sewer cap depicting the god Ocean, it became the source of a medieval tradition which functions as a lie-detector test. Built into the exterior wall of a church, the tradition where someone placed their hand into the mouth of the cap to answer confession-type questions, where a false answer would result in the hand coming off. It was a long-standing local custom, and stayed that way until the 1953 release of Roman Holidays (Vacanze Romane), starring Audrey Hepburn. In the film, the Mouth of Truth is displayed when Gregory Peck places his hand in the mouth and fakes losing his hand to trick Audrey Hepburn. The film sent people to an otherwise normal medieval Greek catholic church, each one wanting a photo of themselves placing their hands inside the mouth of the cap. There is now a line in order to place your hand in the mouth, gaining a lot of popularity for the church, and getting them donations to continue to function and maintain their church.