When three Hollywood heavyweights who are known to make things happen get together you can expect three things. Big box office revenues, excructiatingly large media hype, and a mediocre sequel. Indy had all three with a vengeance. When George Lucas is one of the three, you can also expect a little too much sci-fi where it doesn't belong. Let me disclaimer the following review by saying that the newest Indy installment will be on my DVD shelf immediately upon it's release, despite my beefs with the genre-mixology.
It was with warm fuzzies that the opening scenes of the Crystal Skull washed over me. I was pleased to be in Dr. Jones Jr's company once again. The aging Harrison only made Jones more appealing and experienced, albeit a bit more subdued. The movie built up the plot and suspense immediately, and drew the audience in. The film introduced some interesting new characters while bringing back the old favorites with a passably natural feel.
My main issue with the film was the introduction of all things alien. The film asked a lot of it's audience as it attempted to bridge the disconnect between the historical and the inter-dimensional. The cross breed of archeology mixed with alienology didn't sit well, as the archeology seemed to take a back seat in this particular case.
Spielberg's visual storytelling remains at it's peak, however, George Lucas' name is all over the CGI monkeys that dance their way across Shia LeBeouf's Tarzan act.
Despite a rather flat ending, and some less than appealing throwbacks to Jar Jar Binks, this film is worth the watch for anyone who is a fan of the Indiana Trilogy, or anyone keeping track of Mr. LeBeouf's sky-rocketing career. All in all, it lived up to my entertainment expectations, though I was secretly hoping to be blown away.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Canuck TV Roundup
Hey all,
So I said that I'd share some thoughts on the new crop of Canuck TeeVee shows that have premiered recently. It's a little later than I hoped to do it, but it's always a good idea to give shows a couple episodes to find their feet before passing judgment on them.
Anyways, in no particular order thoughts (and maybe a little writing lesson as well) on...
THE BORDER
The Good: Relentless action, some good gags, episodic in nature so you can drop in and out without too much trouble (as opposed to something like '24'). Overall probably my favorite new Canadian show, well worth watching and it's getting better as it progresses (and the numbers are getting better too!).
The Bad: Huge cast means it's hard to get to know individual characters, and that the characters we do see tend to be on the shallow end (talking about the show with friends and we're always referring to "The Tech Guy," "The Girl who speaks Arabic," "The Gambler," etc).
The Ugly: The show (or the shows Westcoast feed) seems to have some serious problems with audio. The mix is all over the place (music so loud you can't make out the dialogue), dialogue gets clipped, etc. I've taken to watching it with subtitles to avoid the hassle.
The Lesson: How to write good action. Take a look at episode three, Bodies on the Ground, written by Denis McGrath. That's some good action there. The show's also paced really well in my opinion. The action builds, then we're given some nice breathing room, then more action. Definitely some lessons to be learned there.
jPOD
The Good: Either the show's gotten funnier as it goes on, or I'm just getting used to seeing Coupland's surreal world on television. The characters and world feel unique. The writing is smart and funny, though tends to the bizarre more often than not.
The Bad: Episodes often take a shotgun approach, with a story about Ethan and the pod, a story about Ethan's parents and another random plot focusing on either the pod or Ethan's family. THe end result is we get long, drawn out subplots (the dead body plot from the pilot for example) that don't really do much for the rest of the episode. Focusing down on some of the stronger plotlines wouldn't go amiss.
The Ugly: The numbers for one. People aren't responding to jPod's world, unsure what to make of the show. Truth be told it does come across as a bit of a hybrid. Is it a drama? Is it a comedy? What's it aspiring to be? A lot of people are tuning in expecting one or the other, finding neither and then never coming back.
The Lesson: Make sure your audience knows / understands the rules of the world. The complaint I keep hearing when it comes to jPod has to do with how surreal the world is. "That would never happen" is the common refrain. jPod looks like it's the real world, therefore rules from the real world should apply. But they don't, thus subverting the audience's expectations, which is a bad, bad thing.
SOPHIE
The Good: Natalie Brown. She's awesome. It's always nice to see an unkown break out, and without Natalie Brown's charm and charisma there's no way this show would fly. When Sophie is kicking ass and taking names this show is gold.
The Bad: When Sophie's not kicking ass and taking names the show's downright dull. No one wants to watch a character loll around and feel sorry for themselves. Also the show needs to start expanding some of the supporting cast (it's time to move beyond the stereotypical gay best friend already!).
The Ugly: Estelle Burroughs, one of Sophie's few remaining clients. Sure she gives some great comedic moments (pretty much any of her interactions with her adopted daughter for one), but the rest of the time her character is so over the top that it becomes a grating experience to watch. Please tone her down a bit. Please.
The Lesson: More bitch, less moan. Figure out what makes a character likeable and interesting for an audience and then deliver it. Sophie's great when she's a bitch (only to those who deserve it...and snooty Maitre D's), but the show drags when she's not. In other words, don't be afraid to embrace the bitch.
I can't really speak to MVP or The Guard as of yet since I've only seen an episode of each (they're on my TiVo so I'll get to them eventually). First impressions of MVP is that it's good soapy fun, nothing particularly special or interesting other than the world it's set in though. First impression of The Guard was pretty disappointing (was it just me or did the writing and acting feel incredibly wooden?), but I'll reevaluate in a couple of episodes. Hopefully it'll find its legs in that time...
So I said that I'd share some thoughts on the new crop of Canuck TeeVee shows that have premiered recently. It's a little later than I hoped to do it, but it's always a good idea to give shows a couple episodes to find their feet before passing judgment on them.
Anyways, in no particular order thoughts (and maybe a little writing lesson as well) on...
THE BORDER
The Good: Relentless action, some good gags, episodic in nature so you can drop in and out without too much trouble (as opposed to something like '24'). Overall probably my favorite new Canadian show, well worth watching and it's getting better as it progresses (and the numbers are getting better too!).
The Bad: Huge cast means it's hard to get to know individual characters, and that the characters we do see tend to be on the shallow end (talking about the show with friends and we're always referring to "The Tech Guy," "The Girl who speaks Arabic," "The Gambler," etc).
The Ugly: The show (or the shows Westcoast feed) seems to have some serious problems with audio. The mix is all over the place (music so loud you can't make out the dialogue), dialogue gets clipped, etc. I've taken to watching it with subtitles to avoid the hassle.
The Lesson: How to write good action. Take a look at episode three, Bodies on the Ground, written by Denis McGrath. That's some good action there. The show's also paced really well in my opinion. The action builds, then we're given some nice breathing room, then more action. Definitely some lessons to be learned there.
jPOD
The Good: Either the show's gotten funnier as it goes on, or I'm just getting used to seeing Coupland's surreal world on television. The characters and world feel unique. The writing is smart and funny, though tends to the bizarre more often than not.
The Bad: Episodes often take a shotgun approach, with a story about Ethan and the pod, a story about Ethan's parents and another random plot focusing on either the pod or Ethan's family. THe end result is we get long, drawn out subplots (the dead body plot from the pilot for example) that don't really do much for the rest of the episode. Focusing down on some of the stronger plotlines wouldn't go amiss.
The Ugly: The numbers for one. People aren't responding to jPod's world, unsure what to make of the show. Truth be told it does come across as a bit of a hybrid. Is it a drama? Is it a comedy? What's it aspiring to be? A lot of people are tuning in expecting one or the other, finding neither and then never coming back.
The Lesson: Make sure your audience knows / understands the rules of the world. The complaint I keep hearing when it comes to jPod has to do with how surreal the world is. "That would never happen" is the common refrain. jPod looks like it's the real world, therefore rules from the real world should apply. But they don't, thus subverting the audience's expectations, which is a bad, bad thing.
SOPHIE
The Good: Natalie Brown. She's awesome. It's always nice to see an unkown break out, and without Natalie Brown's charm and charisma there's no way this show would fly. When Sophie is kicking ass and taking names this show is gold.
The Bad: When Sophie's not kicking ass and taking names the show's downright dull. No one wants to watch a character loll around and feel sorry for themselves. Also the show needs to start expanding some of the supporting cast (it's time to move beyond the stereotypical gay best friend already!).
The Ugly: Estelle Burroughs, one of Sophie's few remaining clients. Sure she gives some great comedic moments (pretty much any of her interactions with her adopted daughter for one), but the rest of the time her character is so over the top that it becomes a grating experience to watch. Please tone her down a bit. Please.
The Lesson: More bitch, less moan. Figure out what makes a character likeable and interesting for an audience and then deliver it. Sophie's great when she's a bitch (only to those who deserve it...and snooty Maitre D's), but the show drags when she's not. In other words, don't be afraid to embrace the bitch.
I can't really speak to MVP or The Guard as of yet since I've only seen an episode of each (they're on my TiVo so I'll get to them eventually). First impressions of MVP is that it's good soapy fun, nothing particularly special or interesting other than the world it's set in though. First impression of The Guard was pretty disappointing (was it just me or did the writing and acting feel incredibly wooden?), but I'll reevaluate in a couple of episodes. Hopefully it'll find its legs in that time...
Friday, January 25, 2008
Comics Contest
I am entering a contest to create a new Superheroine for the 21st Centruy. My entry possesses the most enthralling neuroses of two or three women that I know, which I have smashed together in my brain in an attempt to create a magnificent Frankenwoman to entertain the comic book masses. I told my comic store co-worker my idea and he looked me right in the eye, and he said:
"You're not going to win."
A couple days later, I accidentally called him "fat" in a round-about kind of way. I think, karma-wise, we're even.
Hello groupblog, I'm James.
"You're not going to win."
A couple days later, I accidentally called him "fat" in a round-about kind of way. I think, karma-wise, we're even.
Hello groupblog, I'm James.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
There Will Be Blood....Eventually.
Met up spontaneously with some friends last night and saw Paul Thomas Anderson's "There Will Be Blood". Following is my initial review. I should disclaimer this by saying that after about a week of pondering, my views occasionally shift. So if you see a big fat *EDIT* on this post, may it surprise you not. SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW!
THERE WILL BE BLOOD
Rach's Review: 6.5/10
Paul Thomas Anderson (Boogie Nights, Magnolia, Punch Drunk Love) tackles the challenge of the gritty oil business in this period piece spanning from 1898-1927. Daniel Day Lewis lights up the screen with his enigmatic portrayal of Daniel Plainview, a charming sociopath realizing his talent for the oil industry. Lewis was perfectly cast for the role of Plainview and portrays his battle between his ego and his id with complete consistency. Lewis carries the film through many a slow moment, enticing the viewer to stay a little bit longer if only to see what he says next. Though Anderson succeeds in creating tension through well built characters and a uniquely suspenseful score he has chosen a tough subject matter to sell. Anderson pushes his choice of genre to it's boundaries without breaking any firm barriers and he does it all with his trademark slow-moving style. Watching this film was like watching a documentary that just happened to be on the History Channel, each time I reached for the remote, a turn in the story stayed my hand. I think this film will succeed on Anderson's reputation alone, and Lewis' performance makes it worth the watch. I would recommend this film, but with it a medium popcorn and a large dose of patience. A hard story to sell, but I think Anderson will cover his costs.
THERE WILL BE BLOOD
Rach's Review: 6.5/10
Paul Thomas Anderson (Boogie Nights, Magnolia, Punch Drunk Love) tackles the challenge of the gritty oil business in this period piece spanning from 1898-1927. Daniel Day Lewis lights up the screen with his enigmatic portrayal of Daniel Plainview, a charming sociopath realizing his talent for the oil industry. Lewis was perfectly cast for the role of Plainview and portrays his battle between his ego and his id with complete consistency. Lewis carries the film through many a slow moment, enticing the viewer to stay a little bit longer if only to see what he says next. Though Anderson succeeds in creating tension through well built characters and a uniquely suspenseful score he has chosen a tough subject matter to sell. Anderson pushes his choice of genre to it's boundaries without breaking any firm barriers and he does it all with his trademark slow-moving style. Watching this film was like watching a documentary that just happened to be on the History Channel, each time I reached for the remote, a turn in the story stayed my hand. I think this film will succeed on Anderson's reputation alone, and Lewis' performance makes it worth the watch. I would recommend this film, but with it a medium popcorn and a large dose of patience. A hard story to sell, but I think Anderson will cover his costs.
Monday, January 7, 2008
Don't change that dial...
...the CBC's where it's at.
The Border premieres tonight at 9pm.
In fact you could pretty much just watch the CBC all week.
Tuesday
jPod @ 9pm
Wednesday
Little Mosque on the Prairies @ 8pm
Sophie @ 8:30pm
Friday
MVP @ 9pm
Sunday
Heartland @ 7pm
Rinse and repeat.
Little Mosque and Heartland are darn good. I'll review the others as I catch them (yay for TiVo!).
And let's be honest...what else are you gonna watch? American Gladiators?
The Border premieres tonight at 9pm.
In fact you could pretty much just watch the CBC all week.
Tuesday
jPod @ 9pm
Wednesday
Little Mosque on the Prairies @ 8pm
Sophie @ 8:30pm
Friday
MVP @ 9pm
Sunday
Heartland @ 7pm
Rinse and repeat.
Little Mosque and Heartland are darn good. I'll review the others as I catch them (yay for TiVo!).
And let's be honest...what else are you gonna watch? American Gladiators?
Do your f*cking research!
There's a school of thought that says you should only write what you know. Then there are those who insist on the literal translation of this. If you haven't lived it you can't write it.
Bullshit.
If you have to live it then we can all say adios to fantasy, science fiction, alternative history, mythology, religion, and the list goes on. That's where research comes in. Writing is researching. Research lets you flesh out your world, your characters, your everything. It's integral to the writing process.
What a lot of writers seem to forget is that research doesn't stop when you send your script out into the bad, bad world.
You see, production companies tend to specialize. Each of them have their own little playgrounds to frolic in, and they tend not to stray too far from those familiar stomping grounds. Some companies do horror flicks, some do romantic comedies. You can usually tell what kind of projects a company likes to do with a quick search of imdb.
"The last ten movies they produced were zombie movies? They must like zombie movies then!"
For the love of all that's holy don't go submitting a script that's the complete opposite of what a prodco's looking for! The only thing that's going to do is piss off the development people who have to wade through your shit (not necessarily your shit, but the vast majority of submissions are shit. That's the nature of the beast and it's why so many low level development monkeys have such loving natures).
Alright. Back on track. Let me give you an example.
The company I currently work for primarily produces socially driven projects with a women's perspective. It's all environmental issues and social justice. That's what we do.
This means that if you waste my time with a fucking TIME TRAVELLING ZOMBIE MOVIE...I will not be pleased.
And look, there's that loving nature I mentioned.
Moral of the story. Do your fucking research before submitting a script. You don't want us development monkeys angry with you, cause when we're angry we throw poo.
Bullshit.
If you have to live it then we can all say adios to fantasy, science fiction, alternative history, mythology, religion, and the list goes on. That's where research comes in. Writing is researching. Research lets you flesh out your world, your characters, your everything. It's integral to the writing process.
What a lot of writers seem to forget is that research doesn't stop when you send your script out into the bad, bad world.
You see, production companies tend to specialize. Each of them have their own little playgrounds to frolic in, and they tend not to stray too far from those familiar stomping grounds. Some companies do horror flicks, some do romantic comedies. You can usually tell what kind of projects a company likes to do with a quick search of imdb.
"The last ten movies they produced were zombie movies? They must like zombie movies then!"
For the love of all that's holy don't go submitting a script that's the complete opposite of what a prodco's looking for! The only thing that's going to do is piss off the development people who have to wade through your shit (not necessarily your shit, but the vast majority of submissions are shit. That's the nature of the beast and it's why so many low level development monkeys have such loving natures).
Alright. Back on track. Let me give you an example.
The company I currently work for primarily produces socially driven projects with a women's perspective. It's all environmental issues and social justice. That's what we do.
This means that if you waste my time with a fucking TIME TRAVELLING ZOMBIE MOVIE...I will not be pleased.
And look, there's that loving nature I mentioned.
Moral of the story. Do your fucking research before submitting a script. You don't want us development monkeys angry with you, cause when we're angry we throw poo.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
In the beginning there was...something?
Happy New Year! Hope you're all ready for another round...
Figured I'd start off 2008 by talking about the writing process. More specifically I'm going to talk about ideas, the initial concept behind a TV series (and you can take what I'm about to say and apply it to other mediums, cause it's all story).
First off, there are such things as bad ideas. These are the concepts that should have been Old Yeller'd long before they were committed to paper. Bad ideas are tricksome things, and it can be hard to tell a bad idea from a good one.
Bad ideas are dated. Boring. They're the shows that people will tune into and think to themselves: "Self. Haven't I seen this before?" Showbiz is always on the lookout for the newest, freshest, most original thing.
At least that's what they say...
And they may even believe it (sort of). For all of Hollywood's horrible "liberal-ness," it's awfully traditional. Everyone's risk averse, they want the sure bet. If something's worked in the past, then surely it'll work again? Right? Right?
Bueller?
This is why we have umpteen cop / doc / law shows (the holy trinity of television dramas). A bad idea is one that's just a retread of one of these old, tired concepts. A good idea is one of these old, tired concepts with a twist.
Life was a new cop show this season (criminally underrated by the by). Reason it works is that the hero is a Zen cop who's just been released from prison after being locked up for ten odd years. The Shield works because the "heroes" are all crooked cops rather than the noble protectors of the innumerable Law & Orders.
House uses a similar principle, take a hero who's normally nice (a doctor) and make him the most curmudgeonly asshole you've ever seen. Good ideas are made by taking old terrain and looking at it with a new perspective.
That's not the only important thing of course.
A good idea will have compelling characters. Characters who are recognizable (Tony Soprano the family man) but, at the same time, bring something new to the table (Tony Soprano the mob boss).
A good idea has a world that people want to spend time in. The world can be good (everyone wishes they could live like the kids on The O.C.), bad (life on the street in The Wire) or a mixture of both. Whatever it is people have to want to spend time there.
A good idea has legs. TV isn't like the movies. You need to be able to come back week after week, year after year, and still have stories to tell. This is why cop / doc / law shows are so popular. Every week you have a new case for your heroes to wrestle with.
These are the most important things any pitch can have. If your pitch is missing them, any of them, then it's going to fall flat and most likely wind up in the trash. Ideas are, after all, cheap...
Figured I'd start off 2008 by talking about the writing process. More specifically I'm going to talk about ideas, the initial concept behind a TV series (and you can take what I'm about to say and apply it to other mediums, cause it's all story).
First off, there are such things as bad ideas. These are the concepts that should have been Old Yeller'd long before they were committed to paper. Bad ideas are tricksome things, and it can be hard to tell a bad idea from a good one.
Bad ideas are dated. Boring. They're the shows that people will tune into and think to themselves: "Self. Haven't I seen this before?" Showbiz is always on the lookout for the newest, freshest, most original thing.
At least that's what they say...
And they may even believe it (sort of). For all of Hollywood's horrible "liberal-ness," it's awfully traditional. Everyone's risk averse, they want the sure bet. If something's worked in the past, then surely it'll work again? Right? Right?
Bueller?
This is why we have umpteen cop / doc / law shows (the holy trinity of television dramas). A bad idea is one that's just a retread of one of these old, tired concepts. A good idea is one of these old, tired concepts with a twist.
Life was a new cop show this season (criminally underrated by the by). Reason it works is that the hero is a Zen cop who's just been released from prison after being locked up for ten odd years. The Shield works because the "heroes" are all crooked cops rather than the noble protectors of the innumerable Law & Orders.
House uses a similar principle, take a hero who's normally nice (a doctor) and make him the most curmudgeonly asshole you've ever seen. Good ideas are made by taking old terrain and looking at it with a new perspective.
That's not the only important thing of course.
A good idea will have compelling characters. Characters who are recognizable (Tony Soprano the family man) but, at the same time, bring something new to the table (Tony Soprano the mob boss).
A good idea has a world that people want to spend time in. The world can be good (everyone wishes they could live like the kids on The O.C.), bad (life on the street in The Wire) or a mixture of both. Whatever it is people have to want to spend time there.
A good idea has legs. TV isn't like the movies. You need to be able to come back week after week, year after year, and still have stories to tell. This is why cop / doc / law shows are so popular. Every week you have a new case for your heroes to wrestle with.
These are the most important things any pitch can have. If your pitch is missing them, any of them, then it's going to fall flat and most likely wind up in the trash. Ideas are, after all, cheap...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)