Smashing the Mask

Star Wars: Episode VIII – The Last Jedi

2017

D: Rian Johnson

**********

Pros: One Good Arc, Acting, Cinematography

Cons: Derivative, Pretentious Subversions, Underwhelming Score

       This is obviously a contentious movie, and there has been much talk over it.  It has become one of those things that divides society.  Most of us recognized it as a heavily flawed movie while others dismiss this as fanboy whining.  In a strange twist this has mostly correlated to political alignment, with the more liberal groups' defending this film as a way to cover up for shoddy writing; it’s a microcosm of the SJW movement.  What’s baffling about this trend is that the Left would not be losing ground in the culture war if their escalation of it continued to focus on conservatives.  Instead they’ve gotten greedy and decided to encroach on the very Panem et Circenses that they’ve depended upon to maintain a mutually beneficial non-aggression pact with Centrists.  Oddly enough, aside from some mild but poorly-executed and inconsistent pacifist/feminists themes, the movie wasn’t terribly political.  I mostly shrugged it off until I experienced massive gaslighting campaign by the press to shame people into think the movie was great when it clearly wasn’t.  It’s an odd case in which the blinding arrogance of influencers transcends ideology.  Perhaps it's also not a good sign that the poster campaign was so good.

       I begins with The Resistance’s rushing to evacuate their base from the previous movie before the First Order arrives for payback for destroying Starkiller Base.  There's a good sense of urgency in this scene, particularly in the moment when the X-Wings hurriedly land in their cruiser's hangar so it can escape into hyperspace.  In defiance of General Leia Organa’s (Carrie Fisher) orders, Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac) leads a wing of bombers to destroy a First Order Dreadnought.  While the bombing is successful, all said bombers are lost.  The absurd fragility of these craft (which is an insult to the famously durable planes they’re named after; they're more like G4M Bettys) has provoked much criticism, but it does make some sense.  After all, Y-wings are about 50 years old by now and have all probably broken down.  B-Wings probably have too because of their impractically complex design.  Bad designs also happen, and it’s not unreasonable that the New Republic would just dump one of theirs onto a group of ragamuffins who couldn’t afford better.  Unfortunately, JJ had to ruin this explanation by putting Y-Wings and B-Wings in The Rise of Skywalker.  The scene is actually pretty tense, as Rose's (Kelly Marie Tran) sister (Veronica Ngo) sacrifices herself on one of these ships.

       It’s a primary theme of this movie that Poe made a massive mistake due to his masculinity and needs to be taught humility by women.  However, that couldn’t be further from the truth.  Poe took the type of risk one needs to in war, and his line that the Dreadnoughts are “fleet killers” implies that the Resistance ships could not have survived the resultant plot had that thing not been taken out.  After Leia is incapacitated, Vice Admiral Holdo (Laura Dern) is put in charge and immediately embarks on a brilliant plan in which she attempts to save the Resistance fleet while acting catty towards Poe every time he voices his concerns over her vagueness.  This provokes the fighter ace to lead a mutiny which is soon quelled.  Holdo rams the Mega Star Destroyer Supremacy at light speed (begging the question of why no one else ever does this), but the validity of her sacrifice is directly contradicted by Rose’s sabotaging Finn’s (John Boyega) similar action at the end of the movie.

        The sheer strategic buffoonery required for this plot to exist is staggering.  The First Order’s Star Destroyers apparently cannot shoot at a slow fleeing cruiser, and the have to call back the fighters because they can’t cover them at that distance (what the hell do they think fighters are for?  It's like when your wing mates in Starfox 64 beg for coverage from you when you're in a tank). It’s only a matter of time before the good guys run out of fuel but they can’t escape into hyperspace because the Mega Star Destroyer can track their lightspeed signature (an ability already implied to a limited extent in ANH) and apparently splitting up to different locations wasn’t an option.  The cloaked ships could have been detected if the First Order had been sensible enough to scan for them, but they only thought to do so because of an indirect result of Poe’s actions.  I don’t want to spend too much time making cliched logistical criticisms of this movie, but it had to be done.  Then again, these contrivances mainly serve the artificial “subversive” theme that the dumb male hero needs to be put in his place.  Oddly enough, it turns somewhat misogynistic when Leia and Holdo finally confide to each other like a couple of schoolgirls that they think Poe is cute.  This suggests that Holdo's tension was some kind of insecure overcompensation or twisted flirtation ritual that poor Poe wasn't in on.

         Desperate to solve the problem of the lightspeed tracking, Poe sends Finn and Rose Tico on a mission to Canto Bight to find an expert codebreaker (Justin Theroux) so he can short out this ship’s trump card.  This entire subplot not only spoils the movie’s plot structure, but also derails the tone with its over-the-top cartoonish humor and preachy messages.  It’s too bad you couldn’t address complex themes of class struggle in a single line that doesn’t derail the plot while turning anyone into a caricature. 

There’s a massive “eat the rich” overtone, and a sappy moment in which Rose and Finn free a bunch of mistreated animals that will surely not be rounded up later anyway.  Those creatures do look sympathetic, but the Rancor was actually a far more tragic and subtle depiction of animal cruelty.  It doesn’t help that the modern casino setting clashes with the franchise aesthetic even more than Dexter’s Diner from Episode II.  Rose and Finn get sidetracked by a parking violation and end up recruiting DJ (Benicio del Toro) instead.  While he helps them hack the device when they infiltrate the Supremacy, they are found out and he saves himself by leaking information about the Resistance’s plans, necessitating a desperate siege on the planet Hoth Crait.  What strikes me as so hypocritical about the racebaiting from Johnson and TLJ fans is that this is a movie in which about a confused Guatemalan’s sending an Asian woman and a black man on a pointless snipe hunt of a sidequest while white people solve all the problems.

        While I’ve spent much time making derivative criticisms, I’m also one of the people who believes that Luke’s arc is a redeeming feature of the movie.  A lot of people say that it’s a character derailment for someone as hopeful and determined as Luke was to give up so easily and become so cynical, but different things can break different people.  Luke may have overcome insane odds to triumph at the end of the trilogy, but there might have been an assumption that that victory meant something.  It would make perfect sense that seeing the very evil he fought against revive itself within a generation would break him.  He would conclude that this was nothing more than a cycle when he thought there was a happy ending.  Yes, I know Mark Hamill was not a fan of this arc.  I also know enough about Mark Hamill as a person to not care what he thinks.  The closest thing he can experience to getting blackpilled is getting lionized for performative outrage in overreaction to conservative rearguard actions.  Old Man Luke also provides a good foil for Rey’s (Daisy Ridley) hopefulness.  It’s a bit like Yoda on Dagobah all over again, but it’s well-acted and it’s the most compelling part of the movie.  It's also a far better Dude homage than Fat Thor from Endgame because it realized that the Dude was funny for his sardonic wit, not because he was a stoner bum.

        Also engaging is the arc occurring between and Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) and Rey even if it is unearned in the context of the former's murdering the closest thing the latter had to a father in the last film.  Facilitated by a contrived new Force power courtesy of Supreme Leader Snoke (Andy Serkis), they visually communicate with each other across the galaxy, their romantic tension building until Rey finds out how Luke’s mistake drove Ben to the Dark Side and leaves Planet Skellig Michael to seek him out.  I like that touch with rainwater's manifesting on Kylo's face to symbolize their growing bond, but that apparently inspired a logistical copout from JJ.  It’s too bad this saga doesn’t have character who directly empathizes with Ben Solo who can just appear out of thin air.  That could provide our protagonists with some helpful insight.  Rey travels to the Supremacy and confronts Snoke in his throne room.  In a satisfying moment Kylo finally stands up to Snoke by killing him (albeit with a stupidly obvious misdirection) and fighting off his royal guard with Rey.  This would have been a great cathartic climax if not for the plot's going nowhere after that.  I’m not the first person who thought it would have been better if the movie had cut to credits or just never showed these two characters after the moment Kylo offered Rey his hand.  Johnson had multiple good options at the end of this scene: Rey and Kylo join forces and attempt to run the First Order in a better direction, Rey and Kylo join forces and join the Resistance, Rey and Kylo join forces and become a third party diumvirate.  Heck, even Rey's joining the Dark Side would be different as well as logical after Luke's rejection.  All of these would have taken the trilogy in a new and interesting direction.  Instead, they separate and continue their present courses, a massive anticlimax.       

         There’s also stylistic reason that this scene lacks the impact it could have.  Most people criticize this fight for its dodgy choreography.  With its convenient tricks and timing, it is more of a dance than a fight, but that actually fits the context in the movie.  Action can be a tense (Die Hard), but it can also be a release (Equilbrium), and this fight is definitely the latter.  Kylo and Rey have overcome an obstacle and the cathartic action scene is mere lagniappe to underscore the triumph of that moment.  They fight together as a representation of their new bond.  But the problem (in addition to the narrative anticlimax immediately afterward) is that this fight doesn’t have the awesome music to go with it.  In fact, it’s like watching a music video without music.  A frustrating and not-often criticized problem in modern movies is that filmmakers have forgotten how to score epic, cathartic action.  They think that all you need for such scenes is a motif for the buildup before you downplay the music when the action starts.  No, no, no.  You keep that shit going.  Watching heroes finally overcome evil after a grind is not satisfying without the sound.  One of the reasons I found the final battle in Endgame so soporific (besides its having the color palette of a 70’s car interior and being confused about which kind of action scene it was) is that it was relatively restrained in its musical accompaniment.  Contrast this with these final action sequences in Teen Titans and Speed Racer, which took good advantage of the original theme songs.  Up til now the Star Wars movies were a good example of how to do it right (with the possible exception Phantom Menace’s arguably lacking the dramatic justification for its own epic action theme).  The tense, standoffish battle between Luke and Vader in Empire Strikes Back appropriately had next to no music, and that remained the same in Return of the Jedi until Vader pushed Luke too far and this happened.  The hatred and anger between Obi-Wan and Anakin was also nicely conveyed through music.  It’s not like the film industry doesn’t know we enjoy this, because they use epic music in trailers to trick us into seeing lame movies all the time.            

         After The Supremacy is destroyed in a arc tie-in that’s very well-executed, the good guys and bad guys rendezvous for the final showdown on Planet Red Velvet Cake.  This world has an interesting design, with a white, salty surface and a red, crystalline interior.  It’s a creative setting and the caves would be great for a lightsaber fight, but it was unfortunately wasted on retro fanservice.  The surface battle is reminiscent of the Battle of Hoth, and the filmmakers' take-home on the crystalline caverns is that they look kinda like the interior of the second Death Star.  The result is a pointless fanservice tangent so time-consuming it actually ends up being more cringe than the Baba/Evazon cameo from Rogue One.  It’s during this scene that the single dumbest moment happens.  Finn, deciding to finally redeem his disappointing character arc with heroic self-sacrifice, attempts to ram a miniaturized superlaser, buying the Resistance life-saving time.  But Rose sabotages his attempt and then explains her action with an incredibly stupid line that’s actually a pretty good summary of the Seamless Garment Doctrine.  As if the repudiation Finn’s “rash” action isn’t contradictory enough in the light of the Holdo Maneuver, Luke manages to sacrifice himself in order to delay the First Order by Force-Projecting his image in order to bait Kylo Ren into a phantom lightsaber fight.  I guess only white people are allowed to fix things.  Speaking of white people, Rey spends most of this scene gleefully shooting at TIE fighters from the Millennium Falcon because her arc’s pretty much over.

        It’s a good ending for Luke, and it’s a satisfying end to his arc.  He finally rediscovers hope and sacrifices himself to save the heroes for the last time.  It would have been interesting for there to be a literal meaning behind his telling Kylo he’ll be “seeing him around,” like he’ll be literally haunting the villain in the next movie.  Then again there were many strong implications of TFA that were aborted in this movie.  Johnson did not appreciate that Chewie (Joonas Suotamo) just lost his best friend and the last movie, and that this loss was exacerbated by the fact that Ben Solo wasn’t exactly a stranger, either.  Instead he simply had Chewie bond with cute little “porgs” in a decidedly cloying scene before allowing them to nest in the Falcon’s circuitry.  I’ve never liked this low-key denial of the aliens’ personhood that sometimes comes up in this franchise.  Not to mention the compelling theory that Kylo Ren's "pull of the light" is actually Anakin's desperately trying to reach him.  The Knights of Ren were another thing that didn't get their due development, hence their anemic presence in TROS (not that "not having enough to work with" was an excuse for how terrible that movie was).  I’m also frustrated that a critically-acclaimed director with the benefit of millions of dollars had less narrative wherewithal than deviantArt/Tumblr randos.   

         This movie has an odd mix of fanservice and its opposite.  Perhaps one of the most obvious moments is when Kylo Ren destroys his mask after Snoke tells him it looks ridiculous.  I think “Smashing the Mask” could be a good term to describe conscientious fan disservice to pretentiously show that you’re “above” the feelings of silly “fanboys.”  TROS mended the mask to show us we could have nice things again but didn't take full advantage of it.  Another such moment was the anticlimactic background death of Admiral Ackbar, and Timothy D. Rose was actually quite upset by the moment's being reduced to a bad on-set joke.  Conversely, the movie is also a collection of plot points from Empire and Jedi which were “subverted” by taking them in the opposite direction.  Like forced contrivance, this is well established as not much more than a uncreative person’s mockery of creativity.  

       Another problem is the inconsistent tone provided by the deconstructions and the forced gag humor.  Whenever I see Finn’s being too comical (like the watersuit scene), a loud voice in my head reminds me that this character was supposedly trained from early childhood to be a professional soldier.  I would interpret this movie as a better Star Wars spoof than Spaceballs, but there is one moment in which it sinks to Spaceballs-tier humor when an beehived-haired alien with a vagina on her forehead and a mass of boobs for a body screams in an operatic voice at one moment.  Another source of forced humor is General Hux; any pretense that this is a serious character has been thrown away.  This is a shame because I really like Domnhall Gleeson as an actor.  To make things worse, TROS actually came close to justifying his buffoonery in this movie be revealing that he was a resistance mole, only to ruin it by revealing he only did this for cynical reasons before unceremoniously killing him off in the next scene.  This could have been a great twist and Hux’s impression of twisted awe at the destruction of the Hosnian system could be interpreted as suppressed horror in the same way Obi-Wan’s impression could be retconned before he lied to Luke in ANH.  Also, I’m pretty sure this is the first Star War in which someone says “ass," which is an important moment in Star Wars history.

      The movie’s design is a mixed bag.  Like most of the sequel trilogy, it’s largely derivative of OT designs.  The Supremacy takes the “bigger is better” approach.  While far more gargantuan than the Executor, it lacks its creative design and simply looks like a generic flying wing.  Snoke’s throne room is clearly modeled after the black lodge from Twin Peaks with more people beating the shit out of each other.  The Dreadnought is effectively simple, but looks less like a Star Wars ship and more like a Starfox 64 homage to a Star Wars ship, complete with a blatantly ethnic captain (Mark Lewis Jones).

There are better designs, like the bombers, the fathiers, the Libertine, and background speeders on Canto Bight.  The TIE Silencer is also a cool, innovative design, so of course JJ had to replace it with a donked-out TIE Interceptor.  The Canto Bight scene also outdoes Jex's Diner in being far to recognizably Terran in appearance to fit in this universe.  I can't help but point out that Solo did a far better job visualizing high society in a galaxy far, far away.

      There is some good direction in the movie.  Steve Yedlin’s cinematography should have gotten nominated for an Oscar despite one atmospheric shot of Leia’s gazing out onto plains of Crait that makes no sense in context.  John Williams’ score is mostly rehashes from the franchise with one good fight buildup.  Acting is mostly solid, but Rose is a joyless one-note character that doesn’t give Kelly Marie Tran enough to work with.  Other cast members include Billie Lourd, Tom Kane, Adrian Edmondson, Bill Hader, Mike Quinn, Frank Oz, Lupita Nyong’o, Jimmy Vee, Veronica Ngo, Lily Cole, Amanda Lawrence, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Gareth Edwards, Gary Barlow, Edgar Wright, Joe Cornish, Hermione Corfield, and Princes William and Harry.  Peter Mayhew was a Chewbacca consultant.

         The Last Jedi caused far more division than it should have.  It’s definitely okay to like this movie as long as you acknowledge the flaws.  You’re allowed to have guilty pleasures.  This conflict was probably because there were a few waves of reaction to this movie.  The first was a reaction of extreme dislike, with a small vocal minority of sexist and racist complaints.  Unfortunately the small minority of right-wing extremists defined the debate, as the stans disingenuously used them as a generalization to silence even the most valid criticisms of this movie.  I found myself in the second wave of hatedom: initially apathetic, then angry at people’s efforts to gaslight over the film’s obvious shortcomings.  Still, I can’t exactly stay mad at TLJ after having been broken by The Rise of Skywalker.  That movie was so bad it reduced me to a raving madman who can’t help but appreciate the aesthetic strengths of Star Wars: Episode VIII.
    Still, despite the comparisons to fanboys as the "dark side," they were the ones with the true love of the franchise, the ones who care about it.  The Dark Side is hypocritical, pretentious posturing.  Johnson has his skills but, like Shane Black, his off-beat deconstructive style works best with original works (or at least obscure adaptations).  When he makes an entry in a pre-sold franchise, it runs the risk of seeming like a contemptuous parody. 

   

Movie of the Decade

The VVitch

2015

D: Robert Eggers

**********

Pros: Atmosphere, Themes, Acting, Plot

Cons: One Unsuccessful Jump Scare

     When there are so many deconstructions of classic horror tales, it’s refreshing to see one that plays it straight.  We seem to have lost something in fiction when we’re not allowed to depict transcendent evil.  This movie preserves the mystery of malice as a force that corrupts humanity in insidious ways.  This mystique is lost when everything is explained and subverted.  In contrast, this story is effectively straightforward while being deep and earnest.  It was through RedLetterMedia’s recommendation that I found out about tit, and that goes to show that critics can often turn you on to obscure things when you trust them based on the genres they are strong on.  It’s too bad I missed my chance to see this in theatres.

Then again, Eggers did steal my Double V stylization.

      The story focuses on a banished Puritan family as it is menaced by a witch (Bathsheba Garnett) who lives in the woods nearby. The father, William (Ralph Ineson), attempts to live up to his appearance as a strong patriarch but is an incompetent hunter and farmer.  His wife Katherine (Kate Dickie) seems to resent him.  Both cast members are from Game of Thrones, but it took me a couple tries to finally get over the fact that Ineson was Peter Finch from The Office.  The protagonist is their teenage daughter Thomasin (Anya Taylor-Joy), and their other children include Caleb (Harvey Scrimshaw), twins Mercy and Jonas (Ellie Grainger and Lucas Dawson), and infant Samuel (Axtun and Athan Dube).  This solid cast also includes Julian Richings.

       The inciting action of the plot is when Samuel disappears under Thomasin’s watch.  He is instantly taken by the witch, who kills the child for a potion.  This serves the dual purpose of that and indirectly corrupting Thomasin through the resultant suspicion from her family.  This comes in the form of tension from the parents and gleeful mockery from the twins.  Thomasin’s alienation is exasperated by the pettiness that sometimes erupts between William and Katherine.  A pervasive theme here is the joylessness and hypocrisy of Puritanism. This is not lost on Caleb, who momentarily questions the doctrine of Predestination, particularly it applies to poor Samuel.  He is eventually seduced and killed by the witch in a younger form (Sarah Stephens). The situation comes to head in which a final intrusion on the homestead leaves the parents dead and the twins missing. Disillusioned by her family’s turning on her, Thomasin sells her soul to Satan (Wahab Chaudhry), who has taken the form of the family goat Black Philip (Charlie).  She then joins a coven of witches and feels liberated by her newfound life of hedonism.

       The movie is very well directed.  The atmosphere is enhanced by Jarin Blaschke’s cinematography, and the story takes advantage of the archetypal mystery of the woods.  Mark Korven’s ominous score is also effectively period-specific.  The movie uses animal themes to great demonic effect, but it is helpful that hares (not rabbits, mind you) already look creepy.  It also underscores in a (good way) that having a talking goat does not automatically qualify as humor.  The movie uses great restraint when displaying the witches and the Devil. The only stylistic flaw is an unintentionally funny jump scare (a trope this movie is mostly above) in which the witch suddenly appears in the form of a crazy, cackling old she-coot.

       Unsurprisingly, many feminists found the movie “liberating,” almost as if to prove its point and relevance.  You’d think they’d be clued off that the witches are clearly the villains considering they literally murdered a baby.  Then again, this isn’t the only A24 thriller that had a very similar theme which they missed the point of.  There's a moronic consistency in that these same people also project this onto anyone who recognizes the the tragic villainy of the Joker.  However, I think Midsommar is a far more exploitative movie, which unfortunately might explains why Aster's movies seem to get better releases than Eggers.' The VVitch isn’t the Movie of the Decade just because it’s the best from the time period, it’s also oddly relevant to how society is becoming more actively malicious to the point of being demonic.  I firmly believe that Evil is a force that guides humanity, and without a guiding light people don’t simply default to neutrality.

      One important message of this movie is that the side of good must be welcoming.  It's important to fight evil, but we must also understands what drives normal people to it.  The Purtianism of Thomasin’s family was a bastardization of Christianity that alienated her.  When someone cannot find comfort in what’s right, they will turn toward the alternative, even knowing full well what it represents.  The human need for companionship is too strong, and while we rightfully extol integrity, it’s imperative those of us who fight the good fight must support each other.  Evil knows to take advantage of this; good too often forgets to.  It didn’t help that the Puritan definition of salvation made Thomasin’s choice seem sensible; if benevolent life is miserable and the hereafter is unjust, then one might as well damn oneself.  The benevolent must be prudent if we are to keep people on our side.

And now, for no good reason, here's my favorite Creature Feature song.

        

The New Age of Animation

Hazbin Hotel

2019-

**********

Pros: Animation, Art Style, Comic Timing, Voice Acting

Cons: Writing Gets a Bit Crude, Scattershot

      

        I’m not going to lie, I think this show is refreshing, but this probably has a lot to do with my hatred for CalArts Style.  For a decade or so, animation companies have privileged this mediocrity, and I’m happy to say that independent creators are taking a stand (not to say there aren’t plenty of good-looking toons coming from studios here and there).  I liked Vivienne Medrano’s “Die Young” despite some technical nitpicks explained by its humble origins.  With a team of animators working together, Viv has now produced something that looks better than almost anything a studio is coming out with on TV.  It's also a sign of a new age of creators over studios, as their other video got more views than a Disney Star Wars clip released the same day.*

       The cartoon has garnered some undeserved controversy, mostly coming from the Cancel Culture Community.  Part of it involves absurd accusations that some the creators’ older and arguably tasteless artwork were offensive in unspeakable ways, even though it was blatantly clear that the pictures were not endorsing certain behaviors depicted and were not genuinely pornographic.  One crew member is the subject of accusations that could be explained as OCD symptoms, but the weird dream cult stuff, which may or may not have been exaggerated, was not fully denied by him.  This is the closest thing I’ve seen to a credible accusation, but I generally don’t support killing careers without a conviction.  There was also a rumor that disgraced voice actor Chris Niosi was involved with the product.  A quick IMDb search would prove otherwise.  

But we do need to cancel Blade Runner for promoting zoo/pedo stuff.  This character is four years old and look what she's doing to that snake!  

        The animation is very good.  It’s expressive and stylized akin to classic rubber hose style with a goth twist.  The atmosphere his enhanced by rich digital coloring.  I would like the shot framing to be better, but the characters still stand out effectively from the often somewhat busy background imagery.  Character designs fit the cast well, but I have one nitpick in the case of Alastor: his antlers are small to the point of being hardly noticeable.  Slightly annoying since antlers do tend to look sinister, and this is a sinister character.  On the other hand, I love how Sir Pentious does not have a permahood (a hood that remains permanently flared for no apparent reason), which I’ve seen on many cobra characters.  That this animation was produced independently doesn’t stop it from being impressive by professional TV standards, and has garnered praise from many professionals.

        Unfortunately, some people have decided to pretend otherwise, in the same way some people claim that Last Jedi is a good movie. This aesthetic gaslighting has become popular in the political arena, oddly enough, either as a pathology or an attempted exercise in power outside ideology.  What’s more, there seems to be a bunch of people who clearly like this general aesthetic. I suspect a lot of these are SoCal furries who never made it past the gate of the animation industry, gave up, and are now jealous of some people who actually accomplished something outside the system.

        A more valid criticism is the show’s humor.  Though it has its moments (like its blink-and-you’ll-miss-it background text), it’s mostly scattershot crudeness with a great deal of gratuitous cussing.  It’s been compared to Family Guy, but I think that’s unfair because Hazbin does not share that show’s overdependence on pop cultural references, which I actually have much less tolerance for than outright vulgarity.  It’s more like South Park for its blatantly late 90’s edge.  However, one strength of the animation is the way it enhances the humor.  Jokes are better when the characters' emotions are believable, for one thing.  I believe that delivery is often key to good comedy; there are multiple occasions where good delivery has salvaged a terrible joke (the latte spill from Zoolander) and poor delivery has ruined a very clever one (the black market bootleg toy ring run by Mall Santas in Jingle All the Way).  This moment is a good example of how Hazbin turned to lead into gold through impeccable timing, and it also confirms Alastor as having one of my favorite villainous temperaments.  I’d like more dry wit from this show and Husk has great potential for this: he could be like a cross between Shadow the Hedgehog and Michael Bluth.  The creators said they put in jokes they like, and I respect that, but it seems the high concentration of them is reflective of understandable assumptions that they might not make it past the pilot.  This might be a good thing, since it could be more restraint in the future.  Also, spin-off(?) Helluva Boss is funnier, even if it crosses some of my lines in terms of dark humor.    

        The voice acting is solid and it enhances the character development.  Charlie Magne (Jill Harris, Elsie Lovelock when singing) is the daughter of Satan and Lilith.  In response to the population of Hell’s being culled due to overpopulation, she runs a Hotel in which she plans to use to rehabilitate damned souls so they can go to heaven.  She perseveres despite her own doubts and the established rule that the Damned cannot be redeemed.  Almost everyone, including her own father (appropriately), tell her this is impossible.  I like this theme of hope in the face of hopelessness. Charlie is a light in the darkness despite her own demonic** roots.  Backing her up is her fiercely loyal girlfriend Vaggie (Monica Franco) and the lovable, violent mimbo Angel Dust (Michael Kovach), who cares about them more than he lets on.  He momentarily plays role of straw centrist so he and the audience can be given an exposition dump on the villain.

        The primary antagonist(?) is Alastor (Edward Bosco, Gabriel C. Brown when singing), a powerful demon who “supports” Charlie’s quest for no other reason that he wants to watch her fail.  It’s an interesting dynamic set up of a Neutral Evil Character who alternately helps and threatens the protagonists, only this time in closer and more constant proximity.  He brings to the table likably manic cleaning demon Niffty (Michelle Marie) and curmudgeonly bartender Husk (Mick Lauer).  Another villain is Sir Pentious (Will Stamper), who frequently engages in turf wars against Angel’s friend Cherri (Krystal LaPorte) with his army of Egg Bois (Joe Gran).  Other cast members include an odious anchor Katie Killjoy (Faye Matata) and her partner Tom Trench (Joshua Tomar).

       I could have a field day about the theology of the series, but that would probably be a bit too over-serious for a series like this. Some of the gripes concern the birth of people in Hell and, most seriously, the implication that angels come over and commit infernal genocide in spite of this.  It’s more like a fantasy in which Hell serves as a fantasty stand-in for some sort of prison colony (which explains why there are innocent people born here in addition to the presence up people sent there for a reason).  It can explain the corruption, since such places are no place to raise a kid, anyway.  There’s an interesting concept that the Damned simply indulge their vices without any real love, but then again we see genuine tenderness from some characters. Another interesting element as these souls know better than to have real respect for Satan outside fear, and they give none toward Charlie.  Theologically, I don’t expect much, so it’s a mixed bag.  I might as well nitpick when Satan is being depicted as being beholden to a Finnish hard rock frontman.

         Hazbin Hotel is imperfect, but it’s imperfect in a promising way.  I know this is overly optimistic when talking about a small indie animation, but many long-running shows (South Park, TNG, Adventure Time, The Simpsons) have started out rough, but stuck through because of a novelty hook with potential.  These shows just had to smooth out their edges and focus more on their strengths and appeal, whether it be a gimmick or not.  Hazbin Hotel can coast for a bit on its visuals before it realizes the potential of its story and characters (particularly Lucifer). To paraphrase another Star Trek show, it has flaws but it has teeth. 

And here's some fanart I made.

*There are some confounding factors, though, like people watching the Star Wars clip from multiple sources, but it's still impressive.

**Or possibly angelic, and I'm not the first to point that out.

You Know You're Wrong When You Fridge a Woman in a *War Movie*

Fury
2014
D: David Ayer
**********
Pros: Atmosphere, Score by Steven Price
Cons: Some Cheap Plot Points and a Flawed Character Arc


      David Ayer, with the help of cinematographer Roman Vasyanov, demonstrates better directorial acumen in this than he does in subsequent movies.  Wonderfully gritty depiction of the horrors moral corruption of war faced by a tank crew (Brad Pitt, Shia LaBeouf, Michael Pena, Jon Bernthal).  The film also stars Jason Isaacs.
      What brings the movie down is the primary arc of Norman "Machine" Ellison (Logan Lerman).  This kid is pretty ambivalent about killing Nazis until they accidentally kill a girl (Alicia von Rittberg) that Brad Pitt coerced him into having sex with as her mother older cousin (Anamaria Marinca) watches helplessly.  It's possibly the worst example of Fridging a Woman I've seen.

My video review of with GuanYu56 (please forgive the terrible audio quality)

Better Than Spaceballs

Galaxy Quest

1999

D: Dean Parisot

**********

Pros: Good Cast, Funny, Good Effects and Design

Cons: Not as Funny as It Starts Out, Mediocre Villain

     

      I remember when I first saw Galaxy Quest shortly after it came out on video.  I didn’t particularly care for it.  I recently figured that perhaps my sense of humor had matured since then, so I doublechecked it and I was fortunately right.  The movie is of the typical ersatz Three Amigos! formula, but it’s funnier than the last one I reviewed.  There’s even a bit of a Liar Revealed plot as the main character’s egotism causes him to play along with the hapless aliens’ delusion he is a real hero. 

     The movie introduces us to its cast of actors from a fictional version of Star Trek.  Our Kirk analogue is Jason Nesmith (Tim Allen).  Gwen DeMarco (Sigourney Weaver) played an objectified female officer whose role on the show was limited to repeating the ship’s computer.  She is moderately embarrassed by this shallow role.  Less mild in his embarrassment is Alexander Dane (Alan Rickman), a snarky Shakespearian actor whose alien character is known for a decidedly cheesy line.  A nice payoff is his earnestly reciting this line while comforting a dying alien (Patrick Breen) he has formed a connection with.  His cynicism toward his role could be a possible crossover reference to Alec Guiness, but I’m bugged by a brief scene in which he is seen in his home still wearing his head makeup despite his hatred for the role.  Other cast members include the clueless Fred Kwan (Tony Shalhoub), who played the ship’s ChEng, Tommy Weber (Daryl Mitchell) who played a gimmicky child pilot (Corbin Bleu), and Guy Fleegman (Sam Rockwell), a dead redshirt who tags along on the adventure and is later recast as a major character in the revived series (a reference to Star Trek’s frequent reuse of the same actors).  The flaws and quirks of Trek are effectively and affectionally ribbed throughout the movie.  I was afraid the movie was overpraised for making fun of fanboys in the same way that most 90’s Warner Bros. cartoons did during the preceding decade, but it’s brief and respectful.  One of them (a young Justin Long) even helps them win the day at the end.

      The witty dialogue and effective chemistry are utilized well in the first scene, in which the crew is preparing for yet another humiliating publicity stunt.  The timing is good, and the cinematography (Jerzy Zielinski) even uses a mirror to deliver a joke that appeals to my sometimes capricious taste in delivery.  A few more funny scenarios occur: a hung-over and bemused Nesmith is herded by the Thermians into what he thinks is an elaborate LARPing session but is in fact an actual attack on an enemy ship.  The cast witnesses a group of cute aliens turn on one of their wounded.  

        Unfortunately, the movie suffers from a common affliction: Plotting a Perfectly Good Comedy.  Usually, the opportunities for comedic strengths of some movies are discarded in the 2^ndor 3^rdact in the name of a formulaic, earnest plot. Fortunately, this plot is actually pretty effective, and there’s still enough decent humor that’s satirical enough to not be passed off as just comic relief.  The stakes are effectively high.  You actually care about these characters along with the too-good-for-this-universe Thermians (Enrico Colantoni, Missi Pyle, Jed Rees, and Rainn Wilson in his film debut).  I usually roll my eyes at assertions that “X parody is a better X serious work than X serious work,” but that applies to Galaxy Quest in a way that’s quite indictment of recent movies.  It’s definitely better than the Star Wars sequel trilogy, and it’s certainly more watchable than the bulk of the Star Trek reboots.  J.J. Abrams apparently said his favorite Trek movie was Galaxy Quest, so that probably explains something.

      The protagonist has an effective arc as the conceited egotist who learns humility.  He thrives on the publicity his co-stars dread until he hears someone hurt his fragile ego, causing him to lash out at fans and question his worth. After he and the crew are taken up by the Thermians, he plays along gleefully but desperately with the delusion until he owns up to them during tragic moments.  He then bonds with the crew and defeats the villain in a way far more satisfying that what I tend to see in more recent fare.  “I am Iron Man,” whatever.  Give me “dragging mines.”

         The Thermians are also good characters. Their true form (brought to life by Stan Winston and company) is very Cthulhu-like, and I like how the movie is sympathetic toward non-humanoids.  Because fiction is an alien concept to them, they mistake Galaxy Quest( the show) for “historical documents” and recreate the show’s ship (oddly enough with devices they have no way of knowing how to recreate) and recruit the crew.  This movie also has honesty points over The Invention of Lying by allowing the existence of disagreement among these aliens in their past.  Their simpering mannerisms while in human disguise are justified, and you still feel bad for them as they’re disillusioned by heroes’ coming clean and when they’re being tortured by Sarris. You feel good for them when they overcome adversity and strike out on their own.

     Sarris (Robin Sachs) is a weak point in the movie. While his costume is nicely detailed, it does not allow enough articulation in the face.  His mouth is permanently stuck in an odd little smile, and the actor doesn’t do too well, either.  Combined with his lack of interesting dialogue and one-dimensional personality, this makes for a rather bland villain.  He seems a possible inspiration for the villains in the first and third reboot movies, but then again at least unlike them he has some style.  This style also comes in the form of his ship, which looks (probably intentionally) like the lovechild of the Planet Killer and a D’deridex and has an interesting interior.  The heroes’ ship, the Protector also has a great design.  Special effects are pretty good, but there is some dated CGI. 

      A long-foreshadowed plot point is the Omega-13, a mysterious device on the Protector, whose purpose no one actually knows. Despite the common assumption that it will destroy all existence, Nesmith uses it to reverse time (based on a vague hunch by someone else that it will do something else) when Sarris successfully murders the heroes.  It’s upsettingly similar to the plot point that ruined Superman, but more forgivable since it is not done so lightly.  I can confidently say that any mention of this device can be removed from the movie without losing anything.

      Galaxy Quest is definitely an effective spoof that pleased both fans and creators.  It remains the best parody about the franchise, except maybe for certain sequences in STD.  In contrast, Orville isn’t so much a spoof as it is an earnest rehash of TNG with more lowbrow comic relief.  I also consider comparisons to Spaceballs to be heretical, as Galaxy Quest is actually funny and its satire involves intimate knowledge of the work besides outside jokes about merchandising.  The latter was clearly made with love.  And to think, I’ve been spending all these years thinking it was overrated.  Good thing we have anniversaries.      

Wait, what, is....is that an STD Klingon?!

  

Christmas Carol Comparison, Pt. 10

<< MISC

OVERALL RATING

 10. A Christmas Carol (2009)

Jim Carrey

***********

Hit or miss. There’s a lot to like, but the stupid moments bring it down.  Not having the peevish "men of the cloth" line could have saved it from the bottom spot.  In fact it's even worse because it was shoehorned out of nowhere in an otherwise faithful narrative.  It's even more blatantly unearned than the "heroes on both sides" line from Episode III.  If they gave the story a a completely secularized Utilitarian/Malthusian overhaul, it wouldn't have been good but it would have been more aesthetically valid.

9. Bah, Humduck! A Looney Tunes Christmas Carol.  

Daffy Duck

**********

Mostly coasts on the popularity of the characters without living up to the franchise’s expectation. Looney Tunes focuses more on humor than Disney did, which is why it probably doesn’t do justice.  Then again, the movie is a very watered-down story that doesn’t make up for that in the humor department.

8. A Christmas Carol: The Musical (2004)

Kelsey Grammer

**********

Decent and faithful, but its artistic license yields mixed results.  It shares a major problem with the next entry…

7. A Christmas Carol (1999)

Patrick Stewart

**********

A well-executed and faithful straight adaptation.  But what’s the point of that if you’re not going to outdo the 1984 movie?  Out of principle I’m downranking this even though it’s technical better than some of the following.

6. Mickey’s Christmas Carol  

Scrooge McDuck 

**********

It’s a watered-down children’s cartoon version, but it’s well-executed for what it is and quite earnest. Well-animated as well.  Best unfaithful version.

5. The Muppet Christmas Carol

Michael Caine

**********

It remains faithful to the book while adding its own fun in creative ways.

4. Scrooged

Bill Murray

**********

An original, modern retelling, it does justice enough as an homage while being counted among the great comedies of the 80’s.

3. Scrooge (1951) 

Alastair Sim

**********

This classic and faithful black-and-white movie has aged quite well.  It’s regarded as the definite version before 1984.  Definitely worth checking out.

2. A Christmas Carol (1971)

D: Richard Williams

**********

Like a weekday morning short Mass, this version impressively condenses the meat of the source material into 25 minutes without losing much substance.  Heck, even most of the good lines are maintained.  The animation is excellent, but its dark, haunting visuals might be too much for some kids.  Overcame the visual limitations of its time.

1. A Christmas Carol (1984)

George C. Scott

**********

This is the best, bar none.  It’s aged perfectly, and it’s faithful.  The casting is great and the visuals are gritty.  If you can only see one version of this classic tale, make sure it’s this one. 

Christmas Carol Comparison, Pt. 9

<<< BEST FUTURE


MISC. CATEGORIES

NARRATOR

Not much to mention, but the Great Gonzo (Dave Goelz) and Rizzo (Steve Whitmire) stand out for adding some humor to the movie.  Gary Oldman in the 2009 version has a silly 4th Wall-Breaking at the end.  Fred (Roger Rees, 1984) doubled well as the Narrator, even though that seems to clash with Fred's oblivious nature.

BELLE 

I find Belle to be a somewhat problematic character.  It’s not made quite clear how far Scrooge had fallen when she broke up with him, and her reasons are vague.  It doesn’t help that she waited until it was too late for the tough love and didn’t give Scrooge a chance to repent.  It almost seems like she just got impatient with his trying to build up a nest egg for them and, by dropping her role as Morality Pet, is actually responsible for Scrooge’s fall.

The version that best addresses this is the 2004 musical, which makes it clear that Scrooge has already become cold-blooded by the time of the break-up, refusing a loan to Fezziwig of all people, by the time Emily (Jennifer Love Hewitt) leaves him.

The Mickey Mouse version dodges this issue by reversing the roles of unrequited love.  Scrooge callously rejects Daisy Duck (Patricia Parris). My second-favorite emoting from this version is when a weeping Daisy leaves his office, but then stops and glares back at him as her sorrow hardens into hatred.

Scrooged has Claire Philips (Karen Allen).  It helps that Frank is warmer toward her, and she is implied to have become callous herself in the unaltered future thanks to his influence.  It’s a bit forced, but it’s different to have this Scrooge actually corrupt a good person.  Frank sees this and realizes he always secretly loved her for her selflessness, regretting his advice for her to tone it down.

FEZZIWIG

In terms of casting, you can’t beat Ian McNiece from the Patrick Stewart adaptation in this role.

Brian Bedford from the 2004 musical also deserves a mention for being the aforementioned victim of Scrooge.

FRED

Donald Duck (Clarence Nash) is an ideal character for this role, and Dominic West (1999) was good as well.  

CRATCHITS

It’s hard to beat Miss Piggy (Frank Oz) as Mrs. Cratchit, but Leslie Manville gives a nice, poignant performance in the 2009 version.  Robin the Frog (Jerry Nelson) and the Disney (Dick Billingsley) are appropriately sympathetic as Tiny Tim.  Anthony Walters (1984) benefits from the best makeup but has the most underwhelming performance.  

FINALE
One problem I have with this book is the finale.  Along with Marley and Belle, it's the part of the story that could use some pragmatism in adaptations.  The segue form the nightmare of the Christmas Yet to Come is a bit quick, and then it drags on too long after the conflict has been resolved.  It's not like its the run time either; it usually lasts about 5-10 minutes, and it even drags in the 25 minute animated short.  The problem is that it feels like a checklist of the following things one must sit through before the credits:
   1. Scrooge dances happily in his bedroom
   2. Scrooge negotiates a vicarious turkey purchase with some kid
   3. Said turkey is shown loaded onto a carriage to confirm that it was not delivered to the
       Cratchits via Flying Monkey
   4. Scrooge shyly asks to join Fred's party in a genuinely poignant moment
   5. Scrooge starts acting nice to Bob but not before playing a cruel practical joke on him
   6. Scrooge carries Tiny Tim on his shoulder while the obligatory verbatim closing narration
       is spoken
The funny thing is that most of this is not even necessary because it's implied that will sort these things out after his redemption.  Mickey's Christmas Carol at least condenses this.

PLAYING PRODUCER

People I would choose if to make a new version.

DIRECTOR

Denis Villeneuve or maybe Gareth Edwards

CINEMATOGRAPHER

Roger Deakins, Greig Fraser

COMPOSER

Hans Zimmer or Michael Giacchino (different but equally valid approaches)

SCROOGE

Ian McDiarmid, Hugo Weaving, Charles Dance, Gary Oldman

MARLEY

Ben Mendelsohn

YOUNG SCROOGE

Hayden Christensen, Christian Bale, Daniel Radcliffe, Domnhall Gleeson

MRS. CRATCHIT

Julie Walters

BELLE

Natalie Portman

FEZZIWIG

Roger Allam

GC PRESENT

Keith David, Tom Hardy (with a body double of course), David Harbour, Robbie Coltrane, Clancy Brown, Jim Cummings. it's difficult to beat the 84 version.

GC FUTURE

Doug Jones

OVERALL RANKING >>>