Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons is a great step in the direction of games as art. It tells a very interesting narrative in a tight amount of time (around 5 hours, leisurely), doing a great job of combining the interactivity with the story.
Speaking of the story, it's the main draw of the game. The ending is must-play, while the rest of the game is very good. The emotional journey is the key driver in Brothers. While I do think the bulk of the story could have had more emotional elements throughout that led up to the ending, the ending still was able to provide me with a positive impact.
As such, I definitely recommend a playthrough.
Wednesday, December 31, 2014
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Big Hero 6 and the Need for Good Storyboards
Considering the quality of talent involved, Big Hero 6 was a letdown. Co-Director Chris Williams was involved in large roles on two of the more charming Disney Feature Animation movies of the early 2000s - "The Emperor's New Groove" and "Bolt" - so I was rather hopeful that BH6 would at least have heart and charm. It did have both, but only in small doses, instead suffering from a syndrome of mid-2000s video games - great graphics (or animation) over solid, emotional narrative.
Before continuing to the problems, here's a quick list of the good:
1. Beautiful animation
2. Baymax was the best character, followed by Fred
3. Great to see ethnic diversity, even if one character bordered on stereotypical (Go Go)
4. Best of all, the pro education, science and experimentation message
However, none of the above was able to overshadow the generic story with mostly one-dimensional characters who lacked proper emotional arcs/development, particularly both lead character Hiro and the villain. Hiro's emotions lacked a good flow, causing his overall journey to feel shallow (not giving specifics so as to avoid spoilers). The villain had an absolutely unnecessary mystery element to them. There was no need to incorporate a mystery like that when doing an intro film for not just a single character, but a team. It was an extra layer that added nothing.
Like when Hiro and Baymax would take in a spectacular view, when zooming out to the see the big picture of the movie, the story becomes rather strange raising several questions. What is this story about? Is it about the brothers? Is it about a young genius discovering his potential? Is this a world with superheroes? Is this story about superheroes? Is it about relationships in general? Is it a team coming together to overcome the odds? It was scattered, to say the least, with the POV needing work.
As well, in a rather surprising move for a Disney movie, the world felt INCREDIBLY dangerous. The ragtag team of superheroes are actually a group of college students with no prior fighting skills utilizing super sharp and harmful weapons while the villain was overtly violent and murderous. It was shocking how often I felt the characters were in actual danger, particularly due to the previous world issue point (is this a world with superheroes who can take a beating or not?). Because these were real humans in larger-than-life situations, it lacked the proper weight when each superhero discovered their powers. Everyone just accepted their incredibly dangerous new reality as if there were no repercussions (and were suddenly mostly pros). That's a scary message for kids that more than balances out the positive message of point #4 above.
The reasons above could easily have been discovered and resolved during storyboarding had the film given that stage its proper due. To be fair, I have no idea what the pre-production and production phases of the film were like; it could have been plagued with problems. As it appears that there will be a sequel (which I am actually OK with), I hope Disney takes the time to learn from the mistakes of the first film. I'd love to see another example of a sequel that surpasses the original, even if the bar isn't that high.
An additional criticism that should have flagged the quality of the film - the poor use of pop music and rather mediocre soundtrack. The occasional pop song in a film can be great (such as the use of numerous Prince songs in Tim Burton's first Batman), but the ones in Big Hero 6 felt... childish. Granted, they weren't nearly as bad as other kids movies.
On a pet peeve final note, the character Honey-Lemon bugged me. Throughout the film she was the only character to properly pronounce Hiro's name as "Hee-Ro" rather than the more standard american "Hero." However, as even Hiro would pronounce his name as "Hero," I would have preferred if she had done the same. It's similar to Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation.
Before continuing to the problems, here's a quick list of the good:
1. Beautiful animation
2. Baymax was the best character, followed by Fred
3. Great to see ethnic diversity, even if one character bordered on stereotypical (Go Go)
4. Best of all, the pro education, science and experimentation message
However, none of the above was able to overshadow the generic story with mostly one-dimensional characters who lacked proper emotional arcs/development, particularly both lead character Hiro and the villain. Hiro's emotions lacked a good flow, causing his overall journey to feel shallow (not giving specifics so as to avoid spoilers). The villain had an absolutely unnecessary mystery element to them. There was no need to incorporate a mystery like that when doing an intro film for not just a single character, but a team. It was an extra layer that added nothing.
Like when Hiro and Baymax would take in a spectacular view, when zooming out to the see the big picture of the movie, the story becomes rather strange raising several questions. What is this story about? Is it about the brothers? Is it about a young genius discovering his potential? Is this a world with superheroes? Is this story about superheroes? Is it about relationships in general? Is it a team coming together to overcome the odds? It was scattered, to say the least, with the POV needing work.
As well, in a rather surprising move for a Disney movie, the world felt INCREDIBLY dangerous. The ragtag team of superheroes are actually a group of college students with no prior fighting skills utilizing super sharp and harmful weapons while the villain was overtly violent and murderous. It was shocking how often I felt the characters were in actual danger, particularly due to the previous world issue point (is this a world with superheroes who can take a beating or not?). Because these were real humans in larger-than-life situations, it lacked the proper weight when each superhero discovered their powers. Everyone just accepted their incredibly dangerous new reality as if there were no repercussions (and were suddenly mostly pros). That's a scary message for kids that more than balances out the positive message of point #4 above.
The reasons above could easily have been discovered and resolved during storyboarding had the film given that stage its proper due. To be fair, I have no idea what the pre-production and production phases of the film were like; it could have been plagued with problems. As it appears that there will be a sequel (which I am actually OK with), I hope Disney takes the time to learn from the mistakes of the first film. I'd love to see another example of a sequel that surpasses the original, even if the bar isn't that high.
An additional criticism that should have flagged the quality of the film - the poor use of pop music and rather mediocre soundtrack. The occasional pop song in a film can be great (such as the use of numerous Prince songs in Tim Burton's first Batman), but the ones in Big Hero 6 felt... childish. Granted, they weren't nearly as bad as other kids movies.
On a pet peeve final note, the character Honey-Lemon bugged me. Throughout the film she was the only character to properly pronounce Hiro's name as "Hee-Ro" rather than the more standard american "Hero." However, as even Hiro would pronounce his name as "Hero," I would have preferred if she had done the same. It's similar to Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation.
Birdman - A Groundbreaking Narrative of Required Viewing
To put it simply, it's a work of art that requires processing.
Upon leaving the theater, I thought it was more good than bad, but always interesting. After digesting it for some time, that still holds true. I'm not sure if I'd put it in my Top 5, Top 10 or even Top 50, but it's a very special movie. It's special because it manages to successfully walk the line between two worlds - it simultaneously celebrates and takes down both theater and cinema.
Director and writer (and team) Alejandro González Iñárritu made a completely unique piece of film that takes storytelling to a whole new level. There really is nothing quite like it and probably won't be for some time. Its legacy for the general public will more than likely end up as a cult independent movie primarily for film lovers, but its achievements will hopefully transcend its status.
Strangely, the only thing I may be able to compare it to is Scott Pilgrim as to how much the directors just own their story, narrative and experience; self-contained stories with their own language. It's incredibly meta and beautifully so.
The layered acting is also fantastic and one of the most noteworthy achievements of the film, due in part to its long takes. While Emma Stone and Edward Norton are the standouts (Norton's debut scene being one of the best of the experience), Michael Keaton obviously is the one to carry the movie. He's equal parts over-the-top and honest/vulnerable. I'd love to see him do a third Batman movie after this.
Not only do I highly recommend Birdman, I'll go so far as to say it's required viewing for fans of cinema, theater and/or narrative in general. Even if you don't fall in love with it, this is an important movie.
Upon leaving the theater, I thought it was more good than bad, but always interesting. After digesting it for some time, that still holds true. I'm not sure if I'd put it in my Top 5, Top 10 or even Top 50, but it's a very special movie. It's special because it manages to successfully walk the line between two worlds - it simultaneously celebrates and takes down both theater and cinema.
Director and writer (and team) Alejandro González Iñárritu made a completely unique piece of film that takes storytelling to a whole new level. There really is nothing quite like it and probably won't be for some time. Its legacy for the general public will more than likely end up as a cult independent movie primarily for film lovers, but its achievements will hopefully transcend its status.
Strangely, the only thing I may be able to compare it to is Scott Pilgrim as to how much the directors just own their story, narrative and experience; self-contained stories with their own language. It's incredibly meta and beautifully so.
The layered acting is also fantastic and one of the most noteworthy achievements of the film, due in part to its long takes. While Emma Stone and Edward Norton are the standouts (Norton's debut scene being one of the best of the experience), Michael Keaton obviously is the one to carry the movie. He's equal parts over-the-top and honest/vulnerable. I'd love to see him do a third Batman movie after this.
Not only do I highly recommend Birdman, I'll go so far as to say it's required viewing for fans of cinema, theater and/or narrative in general. Even if you don't fall in love with it, this is an important movie.
Saturday, July 26, 2014
My Resources for Life Lessons
Hello blog!
It's been a long time.
Just wanted to make a quick post about a few of my favorite sources for life lessons. I'll update this when relevant.
1. Improvisation - It teaches everything you need about being on a team (and having fun)
2. The book "Good to Great" - Excellent lessons on business and how not to panic when things aren't going well
3. http://www.marcandangel.com/2014/07/06/12-quiet-rituals-of-enormously-successful-humans/?utm_content=buffer02a96&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer - These really are great life lessons for success
4. http://www.businessinsider.com/ways-rich-people-think-differently-2014-5 - An eye-opener to different thought processes. It's not the black & white of rich vs poor, it's really about the mindset of successful people and how they view the world.
5. Standup - Nothing like putting yourself completely out there for all the world to see. It's nice to hold a mirror to yourself for full introspection. When you challenge yourself is when you grow.
6. The Golden Rule - because it's just nicer
It's been a long time.
Just wanted to make a quick post about a few of my favorite sources for life lessons. I'll update this when relevant.
1. Improvisation - It teaches everything you need about being on a team (and having fun)
2. The book "Good to Great" - Excellent lessons on business and how not to panic when things aren't going well
3. http://www.marcandangel.com/2014/07/06/12-quiet-rituals-of-enormously-successful-humans/?utm_content=buffer02a96&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer - These really are great life lessons for success
4. http://www.businessinsider.com/ways-rich-people-think-differently-2014-5 - An eye-opener to different thought processes. It's not the black & white of rich vs poor, it's really about the mindset of successful people and how they view the world.
5. Standup - Nothing like putting yourself completely out there for all the world to see. It's nice to hold a mirror to yourself for full introspection. When you challenge yourself is when you grow.
6. The Golden Rule - because it's just nicer
Saturday, April 2, 2011
March 2011 stuff
Merlin 1998 miniseries
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Avatar: The Last Airbender
Used Cars
For Your Consideration
Archer Season 1
Last Action Hero
Marathon Man
Made
Cannibal the Musical
Killer Klowns from Outer Space
Reaper complete series
The King's Speech
started Dexter
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Avatar: The Last Airbender
Used Cars
For Your Consideration
Archer Season 1
Last Action Hero
Marathon Man
Made
Cannibal the Musical
Killer Klowns from Outer Space
Reaper complete series
The King's Speech
started Dexter
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
February2011 stuff
Poltergeist
Insomnia
Crank 2
God of War 2
The Town
Thunderbolt and Lightfoot
Miami Blues
Misfits (first two seasons and special)
DuckTales: Scrooge's Quest
Dodgeball
What About Bob?
Gamer
The Burbs
Death to Smoochy
Arthur
Legion of the Superheroes: Great Darkness Saga
Red (again)
Nothing But Trouble
Cool World
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
2010
Myths and Legends of Shaolin Kenpo
Legion
Superman/Shazam: The Return of Black Adam
Driving Ms. Daisy
Full Metal Jacket
Book of Eli
Zardoz
Started the Merlin '98 miniseries, and Avatar: The Last Airbender
Insomnia
Crank 2
God of War 2
The Town
Thunderbolt and Lightfoot
Miami Blues
Misfits (first two seasons and special)
DuckTales: Scrooge's Quest
Dodgeball
What About Bob?
Gamer
The Burbs
Death to Smoochy
Arthur
Legion of the Superheroes: Great Darkness Saga
Red (again)
Nothing But Trouble
Cool World
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
2010
Myths and Legends of Shaolin Kenpo
Legion
Superman/Shazam: The Return of Black Adam
Driving Ms. Daisy
Full Metal Jacket
Book of Eli
Zardoz
Started the Merlin '98 miniseries, and Avatar: The Last Airbender
Saturday, May 15, 2010
On the difficulty of Demon's Souls and the ease of games
I can't exactly give a proper review of Demon's Souls, as I've only played maybe 2 hours of it, but if the game remains along the same path, then I can at least state an opinion/observation...
Many people seem to love the game for the apparent return of it's "old school" nature: extreme difficulty. In an era where people are complaining about the increasing ease of games, and the emergence of the casual genre, it makes sense that something with a nostalgic feel has a moderate re-emergence.
However, while some may call this innovative, I am more tempted to consider it broken, and something that should probably only be a one-off (unless there's a direct sequel - to put it another way, From Software should be the only ones to developer a game like this).
The reason it's broken is simple: it's backwards.
We're in an era where games are moving forward in terms of ease and speed (checkpoints, regenerating health) because the people playing them and making them, who more than likely also grew up with them, don't have the time to spend dozens of hours on one game, trying to accomplish one task. When we were young we had lots of time, so a game like this was the norm. Not to mention there was nothing like the modern games we had, so we were all used to "extreme" difficulty.
It makes sense that as we age, and go from the player to the creator, we want to make games that we would play. Unfortunately, modern youth, who still do (and youth more than likely always will) have lots and lots of time for games that are more old school in nature. Then again, there are also adults who have felt "burned" by the increasing ease and predominance of casual games.
But are easier, more time-friendly games a bad thing? Definitely not.
As the language of games matures, it begins to take on it's own unique features. While games from the past decade were mostly trying to mimic movies in their grandiose, cinematic scale, games of today appear to be going more in the direction of books and TV - chapters.
While games have been having save and checkpoints for quite some time, it's only more recently that game makers are understanding the benefits of pacing and creating chapters.
A perfect example of this is the Uncharted series. Each game has around 25 chapters, with each chapter being anywhere from 15 to 45 minutes. It can be difficult to find time to play a game, and so when we sit down, we may not really know how long we really have to play. Using chapters is a great way to generate a sense of accomplishment and progress in a small time, even though we may not know how long a chapter will be.
The addition of chapters adds a certain flow that only benefits the narrative and structure of a well-crafted game, to the point where playing through a well-written game such as the Uncharted series is akin to reading a good book that you can't put down. You always want to read or play just one more chapter, and with the progress and direction in which games are going, players can go through a chapter and know that it won't take forever, or if they die, all that time spent will be for naught.
This is the lesson that Demon's Souls sadly ignores - the value of time. I am very intrigued by the world, story and mythos of Demon's Souls, but I have sadly neither the time, interest, or, really, patience to put up with it's design.
Perhaps the sequel will make up for this, but I doubt it.
Many people seem to love the game for the apparent return of it's "old school" nature: extreme difficulty. In an era where people are complaining about the increasing ease of games, and the emergence of the casual genre, it makes sense that something with a nostalgic feel has a moderate re-emergence.
However, while some may call this innovative, I am more tempted to consider it broken, and something that should probably only be a one-off (unless there's a direct sequel - to put it another way, From Software should be the only ones to developer a game like this).
The reason it's broken is simple: it's backwards.
We're in an era where games are moving forward in terms of ease and speed (checkpoints, regenerating health) because the people playing them and making them, who more than likely also grew up with them, don't have the time to spend dozens of hours on one game, trying to accomplish one task. When we were young we had lots of time, so a game like this was the norm. Not to mention there was nothing like the modern games we had, so we were all used to "extreme" difficulty.
It makes sense that as we age, and go from the player to the creator, we want to make games that we would play. Unfortunately, modern youth, who still do (and youth more than likely always will) have lots and lots of time for games that are more old school in nature. Then again, there are also adults who have felt "burned" by the increasing ease and predominance of casual games.
But are easier, more time-friendly games a bad thing? Definitely not.
As the language of games matures, it begins to take on it's own unique features. While games from the past decade were mostly trying to mimic movies in their grandiose, cinematic scale, games of today appear to be going more in the direction of books and TV - chapters.
While games have been having save and checkpoints for quite some time, it's only more recently that game makers are understanding the benefits of pacing and creating chapters.
A perfect example of this is the Uncharted series. Each game has around 25 chapters, with each chapter being anywhere from 15 to 45 minutes. It can be difficult to find time to play a game, and so when we sit down, we may not really know how long we really have to play. Using chapters is a great way to generate a sense of accomplishment and progress in a small time, even though we may not know how long a chapter will be.
The addition of chapters adds a certain flow that only benefits the narrative and structure of a well-crafted game, to the point where playing through a well-written game such as the Uncharted series is akin to reading a good book that you can't put down. You always want to read or play just one more chapter, and with the progress and direction in which games are going, players can go through a chapter and know that it won't take forever, or if they die, all that time spent will be for naught.
This is the lesson that Demon's Souls sadly ignores - the value of time. I am very intrigued by the world, story and mythos of Demon's Souls, but I have sadly neither the time, interest, or, really, patience to put up with it's design.
Perhaps the sequel will make up for this, but I doubt it.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Star Wars: Force Unleashed: Ultimate Sith edition review
Ok, so I actually wrote this review on a gaming website in the comments section a couple of months ago, but have been meaning to review it here, anyway.... So, without further ado, poorly pieced together and slightly reworked is a review of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed - Ultimate Sith Edition...........
Quite frankly, it sucks. It's the epitome of bad Western video games:
Poor hit detection (right next to an enemy, facing directly and the lightning doesn't hit)
Bad balance (having to replay a section 10 times on normal difficulty? they added waves of bad guys to padden the length of the game, because it's otherwise very short)
Reusing of assets/levels
Lousy voice acting (particularly the Emperor, more of a caricature than gloom, seriousness, and gravitas of Episode VI)
Rather bland/odd looking character models (particularly the female pilot)
Also, it's called the Force Unleashed, so just skip all of the awkward pseudo RPG elements and let me be a damn Jedi/Sith with power. Don't give me a small Force meter for recharging, give me UNLIMITED POWER (zap).
And the health system... this game has made me of the mind that, instead of having "difficulties" in games, bad guys should always be of a certain level, but players should be able to choose how their own character has health and energy (e.g., instead of the normal 100% health, you could have 900% health). I am so tired of dying in games, it's an archaic design from the days of arcades and needs to stop.
As for the story... it's got some good and bad. I don't think the characterizations are very good (particularly Vader). The actual plot seems rather cheesy.
Force Grip is another issue I had. As "fun" as locking several people together, it was unnecessary (apologies to those who worked on the physics of the game - I commend the work, just didn't use it much).
For Force Push (which was worthless for the Purge Troopers... more on them later), I would have much preferred simply pressing a button and automatically having the nearest object fly at the nearest enemy (or directed enemy). Or the nearest enemy go flying. Would have preferred something like that significantly more.
Also, that reminds me, the game had very little clear direction in what to do (poor level design). Just so flawed. Bah, must stop before I go off the deep end.
Terrible jumping and platforming. Let's also throw in the mediocre camera, made worse due to the bad platforming and level design.
And the unskippable cutscenes. Ugh
All around bad logic - you can manipulate an entire Star Destroyer but not a single Purge Trooper? As one of hte other commenters pointed out, "they supposedly had magnetic boots which allowed them not to be picked up. Which for one, why not give everyone magnetic boots? And also, if the character is strong in the force enough to do all the force grip "puzzle" portions, why can he not pull the Troopers apart an the shins?"
On the whole, I have no idea how it got a Meta score in the low 70s. While the game is playable, I would rate it somewhere in the mid 40s, low 50s, and recommend this as a rental only (I prefer the CAG method of giving a recommended buying price, but I can't recommend anyone buying this. Maybe, maaaaybe, $5 for the Ultimate Sith Edition).
Quite frankly, it sucks. It's the epitome of bad Western video games:
Poor hit detection (right next to an enemy, facing directly and the lightning doesn't hit)
Bad balance (having to replay a section 10 times on normal difficulty? they added waves of bad guys to padden the length of the game, because it's otherwise very short)
Reusing of assets/levels
Lousy voice acting (particularly the Emperor, more of a caricature than gloom, seriousness, and gravitas of Episode VI)
Rather bland/odd looking character models (particularly the female pilot)
Also, it's called the Force Unleashed, so just skip all of the awkward pseudo RPG elements and let me be a damn Jedi/Sith with power. Don't give me a small Force meter for recharging, give me UNLIMITED POWER (zap).
And the health system... this game has made me of the mind that, instead of having "difficulties" in games, bad guys should always be of a certain level, but players should be able to choose how their own character has health and energy (e.g., instead of the normal 100% health, you could have 900% health). I am so tired of dying in games, it's an archaic design from the days of arcades and needs to stop.
As for the story... it's got some good and bad. I don't think the characterizations are very good (particularly Vader). The actual plot seems rather cheesy.
Force Grip is another issue I had. As "fun" as locking several people together, it was unnecessary (apologies to those who worked on the physics of the game - I commend the work, just didn't use it much).
For Force Push (which was worthless for the Purge Troopers... more on them later), I would have much preferred simply pressing a button and automatically having the nearest object fly at the nearest enemy (or directed enemy). Or the nearest enemy go flying. Would have preferred something like that significantly more.
Also, that reminds me, the game had very little clear direction in what to do (poor level design). Just so flawed. Bah, must stop before I go off the deep end.
Terrible jumping and platforming. Let's also throw in the mediocre camera, made worse due to the bad platforming and level design.
And the unskippable cutscenes. Ugh
All around bad logic - you can manipulate an entire Star Destroyer but not a single Purge Trooper? As one of hte other commenters pointed out, "they supposedly had magnetic boots which allowed them not to be picked up. Which for one, why not give everyone magnetic boots? And also, if the character is strong in the force enough to do all the force grip "puzzle" portions, why can he not pull the Troopers apart an the shins?"
On the whole, I have no idea how it got a Meta score in the low 70s. While the game is playable, I would rate it somewhere in the mid 40s, low 50s, and recommend this as a rental only (I prefer the CAG method of giving a recommended buying price, but I can't recommend anyone buying this. Maybe, maaaaybe, $5 for the Ultimate Sith Edition).
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Gotta love 3D movies
They pretty much are and always will be a gimmick. They were a gimmick in the 50s, a gimmick in the 80s. A gimmick in the 90s. And now that pretty much every major live action franchise blockbuster movie is going to be in 3D, a gimmick in the 2010s. Avatar opened the door, and just because one film had massive success with it doesn't mean every film will.
Part of the appeal of Avatar's 3D effects was that the world was so colorful and vibrant, and that you wanted to explore, be a part of, and absorb every sense of it. A majority of the films being announced as 3D are simply piggy-backing on the success of Avatar - very few offer a world that you want to explore. However, that's not to say there won't be a few good ones.
The biggest concern is simply that 3D will become so mainstream so quickly that it will lose it's appeal. That, or everyone will own their own pair of 3D glasses, and ticket prices (and profits) will go down, that Hollywood will need to find a new gimmick (scents?).
In any case, studios shouldn't expect to have anywhere near the success that Avatar had, and (BIG GUESS) by Summer 2012, 3D won't be nearly the spectacle it was with Avatar in December of 2009.
Part of the appeal of Avatar's 3D effects was that the world was so colorful and vibrant, and that you wanted to explore, be a part of, and absorb every sense of it. A majority of the films being announced as 3D are simply piggy-backing on the success of Avatar - very few offer a world that you want to explore. However, that's not to say there won't be a few good ones.
The biggest concern is simply that 3D will become so mainstream so quickly that it will lose it's appeal. That, or everyone will own their own pair of 3D glasses, and ticket prices (and profits) will go down, that Hollywood will need to find a new gimmick (scents?).
In any case, studios shouldn't expect to have anywhere near the success that Avatar had, and (BIG GUESS) by Summer 2012, 3D won't be nearly the spectacle it was with Avatar in December of 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)