Westworld season 1 review

Westworld... high production values, took a few episodes to get to its story, yet ultimately... it falls flat on its face. It presents such lofty ambitions yet falls short. To break the series down to its components, here are other examples of things done better and save time:

Once Upon a Time in the West - A great western with an excellent villain, lame love interest, interesting "mystery" character, social commentary and a nice twist

Jurassic Park - When creations rise up against their masters (also by Crichton!)

Run, Lola, Run - On loops and learning

Groundhog Day - Also on loops and learning

Blade Runner - I think the second half/ending is a weak action sequence, but does a nice job of calling AI life into question

Ex Machina - AI learning

Her - AI learning

Robocop - Using memories to reclaim humanity (and be a badass revenge/Jesus movie)

ON CHARACTERS

The series has some very nice thoughts on life, emotions and consciousness (I LOVED that it called out human habits being an additional system/layer; that we don't necessarily have as much free choice as we think). However, the narrative was messy, using a gimmicked framing device with numerous flawed characters. Some issues...

Dolores - She's been doing this loop for years, hard to really get invested when she's programmed to be like this

Robert Ford - Good guy, bad guy, good guy, bad guy. His booking is messy, to say the least. Why is he doing most of the things he does? Outside of the narrative structuring, it doesn't really work

William - One brief period with Dolores and he becomes a monster? Ok.... Unbelievable romance (a recurring problem in Hollywood)

Lead writer guy - WTF is the point of you? You should have been fired long ago

Maeve - Could have been great, then twist! And more mystery box crap. Falls victim to her own programming. Pulling an Ex Machina would have been better

Felix - How were you even hired to begin with? Oh right, probably a game by Robert...

Teddy - Don't care about you. Your narrative was very messy.

Bernard - Actually, pretty well done,

Despite the character issues, the acting is generally very solid, with particular shout outs to Anthony Hopkins, Thandie Newton, Jeffrey Wright, Jimmi Simpson and Ed Harris.

ON THE WORLD
However, there are some other issues that are squint-worthy, particularly with the world building:

1. The safety protocols don't make sense - guns don't work on guests, then they do, then they only do when convenient; yet the hosts can punch and beat up the guests, though (but not enough to leave a mark?). Also, if the Man in Black was desperately seeking a deeper level of the game, as the majority shareholder, couldn't he have easily requested a version of the game with no safety protocols??

2. How the company is run - which is to say POORLY. There is so much incompetence. Unless, it's all part of Robert's game, which makes his arc and narrative so convoluted...

And another issue with the story - convenience! Particularly in the last episode (how convenient the two villain helpers of Maeve don't get ANY injuries and are up against some Stormtrooper-level security guards). There was also some in the second-to-last episode, but I don't remember. The sex scene with Maeve and Hector was blatantly pretentious/stupid.

Some remaining questions:

1. What happened to the security guy taken out by the native tribe?

2. Why was Elise killed? Or is she even dead?

3. Why exactly was Teresa killed (vs something else)?

4. How much of an asshole is Robert that he set himself up to die and kill so many people with him? His goal was to build murder bots?

5. Why would I care about a second season of this when they botched so many ideas in the first season? Seriously, they spent so much time on this world, which Robert was the god of, and we get a tease for other worlds at the end that had no devoted time. Again, how is the business run??

OVERALL
Westworld has the same problem as Looper to me - using a gimmick narrative device (blurred timelines vs time travel) half-assedly to tell an emotional story that falls flat when broken down. if you can't actually tell a coherent story with your devices, you're doing it wrong, in my book.

Also, why couldn't anyone explicitly tell the MIB the purpose of the maze? They kept dodging saying it's "not for you" - why not say it's a journey of personal discovery, or the maze is in the mind to try and achieve consciousness? Dumb storytelling/bad dialogue choices... Not to mention who allowed the maze references to be placed everywhere, including the inside of a scalp?

All this said, I did find the series enjoyable and compelling (binge watching parts of it), just really, really flawed. It does a number of things well and a number of things poorly. Is it interesting with fascinating ideas? Yes. Is it a bunch of narrative smoke and mirrors? Yes.

Odd Thomas quick review

Odd Thomas was a disappointing movie. Both the acting (by the two leads) and writing were flat, though general direction and cinematography were alright. I'm not sure if the original source material is better, but I have little to no interest in checking it out based on this movie. The comedy was underwhelming, action not good, though the minimal horror elements were alright.

It's a weaker version of Constantine, which is already unfortunately weak.

It's currently available on Netflix, but not sadly recommended. I really wanted to like this, as I enjoy the late Anton Yelchin, but it sadly didn't coalesce.

Black Mirror season 3 review

Black Mirror season 3 is its best season yet, primarily for the ideas. It does a good job of telling cohesive stories and being philosophical; it's better than Westworld season 1, in that regard. Arguably, the season gets better with each episode.

Specific episode thoughts below, in the order in which I enjoyed them...

1. Nation of Hate - I enjoyed the detective story, liked both leads and enjoyed the commentary on social media and government surveillance, as well as consequences of speech and actions. The general conceit of the bees was kinda dumb, though, and it was probably a bit on the long side.

2. Men Against Fire - Perception is reality and everyone is being lied to! Enjoyed the commentary on the military and how soldiers aren't treated well (they're commodities). The eugenics element and commentary on humans was also good. Was it lacking a bit something? Yes, but I liked the topics and ideas.

3. San Junipero - Really enjoyed the commentary on the afterlife and digitization of personalities. Didn't really buy into the love story (both are in love after one or two encounters? ok... I could understand with Yorkie, but not Kelly). The acting from both was rather good, though Yorkie was a bit annoying initially, along with some stilted dialogue earlier on. It was fun to watch how it played with the tropes from different eras. Would have been nice if there was something more to the guy who was interested in Yorkie (maybe he was a shell digital representation or dead). Was a loose thread, but not really the focus.

4. Shut Up and Dance - This was fine. That the focus was on trolling was interesting, but it lots steam for me rather quickly - it seemed rather apparent they were screwed no matter what. Also, reminded me of the movie Nerve, despite not seeing it. Little twist at the end was interesting. The kid's acting was also interesting, in that it wasn't a typical kid.

5. Playtest - Also OK. Some of the ideas were interesting (evolution of gaming, tapping into the brain, calling parents while we can), but the general gist of a horror story made it too apparent that reality was going to be messed with. The specific ways in which it occurred were certainly interesting, and the final reveal of the length of time was interesting, but... wasn't as good as it could have been.

6. Nosedive - Fun idea about heightening social rankings, but the general "tragedy" of the story was so on-the-nose and trite. BDH's big speech was cringe-worthy to watch, but entertaining. It does make me want to disconnect from social media more. Basically, felt rather by-the-numbers.

When Star Wars and Seagulls collide

Prepare to have this stuck in your head. Just remember, in space - no one can hear you squawk.

The backpack part and refrain may be the best parts.

I've loved their music remixes since "Morning Dew," if not the original "Black Friday" remix.

Available on Amazon here

Finally watched the pilot to Westworld. Thoughts with minor spoilers...

I largely enjoyed it as the first chapter in an ongoing story, so the slower pacing was tolerable. It did get particularly slow in the middle, but what can you do.

Easily the worst part of the episode was the music - the title sequence felt like a Game of Thrones rip-off (not surprising), the general score was whatever, and then the crowning achievement of crap: the cover of "Paint It Black." It was a bad cover and didn't fit the scene (felt forced). It's like they were going for Battlestar Galactica's "All Along the Watchtower" cover and failed miserably.

Also, there were some stupid (world-building) moments, which presumably will be built on but I'll call out now:
1. The engineer (is that her job?) lady kissing the whore IN THE WIDE OPEN. Unless your job is to QA the bots like that, you're going to be having a talk wtih your supervisor. Skipping the kiss and teasing her intrigue would have been a better way to go.
2. The dialogue writer is shitty with dialogue. This is a multi-million if not billion-dollar experience and they get a hack writer as the lead?
3. Similarly, why introduce a coup/climb the corporate ladder/nefarious ulterior motives for Westworld in the first episode? That scene could have been cut to shave time and placed in a later episode. Let Jeffrey Wright and Anthony Hopkins fuck up a bit more.
4. Back to the business of Westworld - this is a huge, highly resourced entertainment/electronics company and they do no real QA before releasing updates to their consumers? What in the fuck?!

What self-respecting company wouldn't have a beta environment with beta testers to test out the potentially dangerous and life-threatening robots. Maybe if they want to save expenses, but if there are fatal flaws and the company gets shut down, they have no business. I thought Jonathan Nolan had gaming experience...

A couple quick things I liked:
1. The "programmed" state of some of the narratives, with branching options. It was interesting to watch how the robots behaved when new elements would be introduced (e.g. robots being distracted or humans interfering). This helped to show how game-like the world is.
2. The fly narrative. A simple tactic, nicely executed.
3. Ed Harris as the Man in Black. Dig it.

I am definitely curious about the show and look forward to watching the next few episodes. This has me intrigued in a way that Preacher did not.

The pilot gets a solid RECOMMENDATION as a very good episode, just shy of greatness (though it may be arguably great).

Quick assessments of the Princes in Disney Princess movies

For fun and per request from a friend, and as a "sequel" to this column, here are some quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies with regards to their messaging based on the Princes (apologies to my Disney fan friends):

Note: I haven't seen some of these movies in awhile, so these may be off...

Snow White - You only need two skills in life: singing and kissing. You don't need a name, though, but you do get to embrace your necrophilia. Also, be handsome.

Cinderella - Get her some shoes and you'll win her heart. Also, money and charm don't hurt. And be handsome.

Sleeping Beauty - Sometimes your parents can pick out a hottie for you, especially when you come from money. Also, use that money to learn how to use a sword, because you're going to have to fight to protect her. And be handsome.

The Little Mermaid - When the world is at your fingertips, you can wait for the right girl to come to you. Through song (avoid the silent ones). Also, use your money to learn boating. And be handsome.

Beauty and the Beast - It doesn't matter what you look like on the outside, as long as you have plenty of money and servants to help you find a pretty girl who sees the inner you. An inner you who is handsome (with money and servants... and a library).

Aladdin - Lie and manipulate your way to success, until it backfires and you realize being true to yourself is the way. Of course, getting REALLY lucky and having the support of Robin Williams certainly helps. Also, being cute is the poor man's handsome.

Pocahontas - When in doubt, Mel Gibson your way out

Mulan - Be a Man. You must be swift as a coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon, with all the strength of a raging fire, yet mysterious as the dark side of the moon. Also, have no respect for women (unless they act like men (and kinda look like one)). And be handsome. And manly.

Princess and the Frog - Don't entirely remember... When you have money (or don't and pretend to), it's OK to be a manipulative, obnoxious and entitled brat and use women for your pleasure/survival. Also, be handsome.

Tangled - Eh... this is taking too long, so... work your way up the ladder of life, keep some secrets, be handsome.

Brave - N/A

Frozen - Be an evil conniving bastard who can sing, dance and has money, or be a total clown dimwit. Either way, have looks.

Moana - Be The Rock

Feedback is welcome in the comments.

Quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies based on the lead

For fun, here are quick assessments of the Disney Princess movies with regards to their messaging based on the lead protagonist (apologies to my Disney fan friends)..

Note: I haven't seen some of these in awhile, so they may be off (friend corrections are noted below the list)

Snow White - Dated and no

Cinderella - Being oppressed sucks, but wishing for a man to save you vs taking your own actions? No (*friend correction below)

Sleeping Beauty - HELL NO (yay being molested while sleeping)

The Little Mermaid - Fuck you, Ariel, you entitled child. Keep changing yourself for your man more, you stupid piece of shit

Beauty and the Beast - Stockholm syndrome. No (*friend correction below)

Aladdin - Lie and manipulate your way to success, until it backfires and you realize being true to yourself is the way. Of course, getting REALLY lucky and having the support of Robin Williams certainly helps

Pocahontas - Eh... there's a degree of empowerment, but it's for the purpose of romance... Also historical inaccuracies

Mulan - Being empowered, yes and breaking flawed norms/traditioms. This is good

Princess and the Frog - Indifferent/don't remember (*friend correction below)

Tangled - Largely OK? Characters seem independent, yet also goofy/dorky

Brave - Not too shabby. Wanting independence, with a focus on family bonds

Frozen - Eh... the sisterly message is great, but both characters are pretty bad

Moana - TBD

I'm very curious about Moana, particularly since there's apparently no romance element.

Friend updates
When I first posted this list, a few friends had pointed out some corrections for the following (these are verbatim and definitely welcome feedback; the above were admittedly flawed quick thoughts for fun):

*Friend 1: Princess & The Frog - work hard to make your dreams come true - you can't wish on stars - but don't let the joys of life pass you by. Best Disney Movie.

*Friend 2: That is a misunderstanding of Cinderella on a core level. She was not waiting for anyone, let alone for a man, to save her. She was trapped in an abusive household, and she wanted a night off of being a slave to her family to be happy - and equal - for once. She did take her own actions whenever she could, and then used the support system she had when she couldn't. Excellent.

*Friend 2: Ariel wanted to be human long before she met Eric, and Part Of Your World is about how she, existentially, feels complete among humans and not merpeople. Eric gave her a focus point, but she would have made that deal sooner or later. And the thing is... she didn't change for Eric at all, really. She changed her body for her, but her personality remained exactly the same. Eric fell in love with her genuinely. (Sidenote: the entire story makes more sense once you realize it is a metaphor about class relations (HCA original) or a queer coming out story (Disney). Can elaborate on that one.)

*Friend 2: Beauty and the Beast is definitionally not Stockholm Syndrome, as Belle never considers the Beast an authority figure and does not align herself with him over the course of the movie until he changes his behavior. In fact, because Belle is actually in charge in their relationship and the Beast aligns himself with *her*, you could make an argument for Lima Syndrome, if you wanted. But that still rests upon the Beast holding her captive, and it's established very quickly that "holding her captive" is a flimsy formality in their relationship. Belle does whatever she wants from day one.

*Friend 3: Beauty and the Beast is in no way Stockholm Syndrome. Belle is actually one of the strongest feministic characters Disney ever created. She is intelligent in a world that only respects brutality, she is kind and loving, she fights WOLVES head on, and every action she does for the first two acts of the movie are to protect her family and her town. The third act was to literally break out of a prison cart and prevent a mob from murdering an innocent man.

TL;DR: Belle's a badass and a nerd, and easily one of the greatest female characters created.

Also, debunking your Stockholm Syndrome: http://thefederalist.com/2016/08/10/7-reasons-beauty-and-the-beast-is-not-a-tale-of-stockholm-syndrome/

*Bonus: Here is the version with regards to messaging based on the Princes.

Jaws (1975) movie review

For a film from 1975, Jaws still largely holds up very well. It has a pretty classic structure that can be found in films made after, such as Predator (which I'd argue perfected the idea in this movie) and Jurassic Park (which was Spielberg's SIGNIFICANTLY improved attempt).

A threat falls upon an area, with a key person trying to rectify the threat, while facing some opposition from the local community, which allows for some solid social commentary on greed, with a cartoonish-yet-human mayor (the suits!). It then comes down to a few people taking on the thread heads-on. It's a very reasonable structure that mostly does what it needs to do.

The only real flaws stem from the films tonal shifts. Though starting out as a potential horror movie, the film then turns into a bit of a buddy/adventure movie. While the comedy and human bonding during this portion is excellent, the shark-chasing parts with the more upbeat musical score took me out of the movie. By the time it got to the ending, a good degree of the drama and tension was removed. Combined with the rather abrupt editing (particularly the death of Quint and actual conclusion by Brody), it felt rushed.

Then again, when viewed as a product from the 70s, leniency can be given.

Jaws was absolutely a precursor for both Spielberg and Williams, which is probably the most special reason to watch it, at this point. With Williams score, he has hints of so many of his big movies to come: Superman, Raiders, Star Wars, Last Crusade and more.

Best parts of the movie:
1. Human dialogue throughout (it's really good)
2. Quint
3. Richard Dreyfus
4. John Williams' score
5. Roy Scheider (his understated performance may be slightly higher)

Worst parts:
1. The occasional awkward editing
2. Some tonally out-of-place Williams music

It's a classic for a reason and RECOMMENDED at the very least from a film history perspective. It's not perfect, though, so expect some elements to be a bit dated, such as a relatively even or slow pace.

Clue remake casting

Slightly old news that Clue is being remade (which I'm fine with), so here's my current casting thoughts, which were actually made with friends in the summer of 2015:

Mustard - Nick Offerman
Peacock - Kristen Wiig
Scarlett - Tina Fey?
White - Julia Louis Dreyfus
Delivery lady - Kristin Chenoweth
Yvette - Kate Upton
Green - Robert Downey Jr or Aziz Ansari
Wadsworth - Tom Hardy, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio or Colin Firth
Mr. Body - ?? (Christoph Waltz?)
Plum - Jonah Hill? Maybe Chris Pine

Thoughts? And yes, while the above cast is fairly white, non-white actors are 100% welcome (these were just quick-thoughts from more than one year ago). Stephen Root and Kate McKinnon would also be great additions.

The World is Made of People

Controversial (not really?) rant of the day:

Can we please stop saying how either "politics" or "the system" is broken? That oversimplifies the actual issue:

People don't know how to communicate or work together

If everything is a social construct, which it largely is, the root of that is PEOPLE. People have created basically everything on this planet. It requires people working together to do so.

If something isn't working, it's more than likely because the people aren't working together, for potentially a variety of reasons.

Politics isn't working? Perhaps because certain people are stalling the process. Perhaps because certain people don't know how to listen or keep an open mind. Perhaps because people don't know how to communicate or do what's best for the future/collective rather than just the present/individual.

This works similarly to any large organization. Whether it's a corporation, a city, a school - any sort of collective where people are unwilling or unable to work together will stall progress.

People are the greatest resource on this planet. If we can learn to work together, then we can achieve almost anything.