The Secret Lair

Image by Evil King Macrocranios via Flickr

This is Doc Blue, transmitting again from my secret underground laboratory.

Let me start by thanking everyone for their kind welcome and particularly Natalie Metzger, Bruce Baugh, and John Cmar for their suggestions of magazines to read.

During my last Overlord-sanctioned outing, I was able to find only one of the suggestions: Cinefex. I will be honest, the title font and spelling put me in mind of some sort of pseudo-Celtic cultural magazine, but little could be further from the truth.

It doesn’t tell you anywhere on the cover or title page, but Cinefex is about movie special effects. (The title becomes obvious when you think about that for a little bit.) This issue focused on The Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Hugo, The Tree of Life, and Real Steel. There is not a lot of wasted space in this 120+ page magazine. A title page, a significant amount of high gloss and very industry targeted advertising, and four very dense articles. There is no fluff here, no letters page. This is a magazine about special effects for people involved in or with a deep interest in the industry.

I found the articles a bit hard to get through. Though there was a lot of explanation of each technique, there was also a lot of assumed knowledge – and a great deal of industry name dropping. In many ways, if it weren’t for the beautiful photography, it would be very easy to mistake this for an academic or industry journal (which I suppose it really may be). One thing I really appreciated was that each article tracked the basic narrative of the movie as it discussed the special effects. It may it a lot easier to parse what was going on and, combined with the multitude of images, it really enhanced my overall understanding.

But I promised that this would not be a review. The real point of this exercise was to avoid mental ruts and make new connections. The first task was definitely achieved this month. I would have never picked this up without the suggestion. (Thanks again to Bruce Baugh.)

So what did I take away from Cinefex?

(1)    Know your audience. Cinefex feels like it was written for special effects professionals, but I found it in a chain bookstore somewhere in the Midwest. As far as I know, there isn’t a huge cinematography community here. So I’m not certain who the magazine is really intended for. This is a beautiful and well written magazine, but as designed, it is going to be for a very focused audience.

(2)    Narrative is important. Were I to package an article about movie special effects, I would be tempted to ignore the story of the movie, or perhaps just provide a brief summary at the beginning of the piece to set context. I really appreciated that the story was threaded through the entirety of all four articles. This is clearly an editorial decision on the part of the magazine and it is really helpful. In my day job, narrative is almost an afterthought.  I am definitely going to think about how to package my analyses in terms of the story rather than in terms of the just the facts and the techniques.

(3)    Base Your Fantasy in Reality. The one thing that struck me about all four movies, and possibly about the process, is how deeply the directors embedded their stories in the real world. Hugo was based in historical France, but leveraged footage of modern Paris, as well as, historical photos. Rise of the Planets of the Apes and Real Steel were near future, but had to be filmed in the modern day. Effects were largely used to transform the real world and none of the directors wanted to create from digital whole cloth. Sometimes when writing, especially when crafting sci fi or fantasy tales, it is tempted to throw out the world and build up everything from the ground up. The discussions in Cinefex really drove home the power of starting with reality and making subtle alterations. Film the bottom 20 feet of those redwoods – and then augment to create your towering primeval forest. Weigh down your stunt martial artists to simulate the movement of combat robots.

I think this was very successful first stage of my year long experiment.

My current list of magazines to look for includes Imagine FX, Diabetic Cooking, and Fortean Times. My next Overlord-sanctioned outing is scheduled for the last weekend in January. Hopefully I can find one of these then. I also still need more suggestions to fill out my year of reading 12 new magazines, so please don’t hesitate to throw suggestions out.

Until next time, this is Doc Blue, signing off!

120x365x2009: 35mm movie-camera by domi-san, on Flickr

A long time ago, in a Twitter far, far away,¹ I commented that sometime I needed to write a list of things that really annoy me but that no one else seems to notice. Someone responded with, “That’s called a blog.”²

Well, since it appears that this is, in fact, a blog, I decided today to subject you to share with you the first entry on this list. And it is… (feel free to insert a drumroll here) the Mockumentary style in TV and movies!

Wait, no, put down your pitchforks! Where the heck did you even get pitchforks on such short notice in this day and age? Is there a pitchfork wholesaler that I don’t know about? Anyway, pitchforks aside (please?), I should clarify what I mean. It’s not the mockumentary format itself that I have a problem with; it’s that when that style is used partially or at times when it doesn’t fit, it completely breaks my sense of immersion. When I’m watching a TV show or movie, I want to be able to believe it’s real for a little while without having to stop and think about how it’s  being made or being jarred by reactions that don’t make sense.

For me, this seems to happen most often with something that should be invisible:³ the camera. Here are two examples.

1) District 9, or the “Sometimes-It-Is-Sometimes-It-Isn’t” Syndrome.

Now, don’t get me wrong, District 9 was a great movie, and one that did a lot of things right. But it was inconsistent. It starts out in a documentary style, and that’s great. I really enjoyed that element of it, and I feel it added a lot to the realism of the film.

The problem, though, was that it stopped about halfway through. Just when I was starting to get really invested in the format (and the film), it breaks type and starts showing me scenes that couldn’t possibly be part of a documentary. Huh? I think to myself, how am I seeing this scene? Is this part of the documentary? Who’s filming it? Where’s the cameraman standing?

And the moment I’m thinking about the film as a film, I’m no longer really watching it. Instead of being drawn into the film, I’m pushed out of it; I’m no longer immersed.

Worse, when it does go back to the documentary-style segments, I’m jarred again into noticing the trick. This constant in-and-out shift keeps reminding me that I’m watching a fiction that someone has created, instead of letting me get wrapped up in the story. The TV show Modern Family, despite being an otherwise hilarious and well-written show, is also particularly bad on this point.⁴

2) Battlestar Galactica, or the “Who’s Holding the Shakycam” Complex.

Hang on a second, I have to put on my asbestos suit for this one. It’s one of the new models from our test labs: 20% less itchy, and this one hardly even smells like burnt minion at all!

Okay, now. When Battlestar Galactica got its reboot, one of the most prominent visual elements of the new series was its use of handheld or “documentary style” camera technique. Or, as it is affectionately⁵ known, the shakycam.

I know what you’re thinking. “But Jason,” you say, “I thought this was about things that annoy only you.” Well yes, that’s true, so let me– “But lots of people hate the shakycam!” I know that, but here’s– “I mean, you can’t throw a hand grenade in movie circles without blowing up someone who’s complaining about shakycam making them feel sick.” I get that, but… wait, a hand grenade? “I’m trying to keep with the movie theme here.” Ah, fair enough. But my problem isn’t with shakycam-induced motion sickness, it’s with shakycam breaking immersion.

The sad thing is, this is an example of trying so hard to keep immersion that you throw it out the window. According to TVTropes, “The use of Jitter Cam in Battlestar Galactica … was actually called for by writer/producer Ronald D. Moore… The idea was that … in conventional film-making it is important never to draw attention to the camera in order to avoid breaking Suspension of Disbelief… The CGI shots in Battlestar Galactica were therefore shot using only camera placements and techniques that theoretically could have been used if the show were, in fact a documentary.”

The problem is, seeing something like that immediately makes me wonder who the frak is holding the camera? When you show me a space battle full of camera wobble and snap zoom, it puts the camera right in my face. Far from not drawing attention to it, it makes it extremely visible. Who’s floating out in space and taking this video? Why are they out there? Are they getting shot at? Are they going to be left behind? Oh look, I’m thinking about the show instead of watching it again.

It’s not just limited to the space shots, either. When we get sudden pans and zooms on the characters, I wonder why they’re not looking at the camera. When you give the camera a personality, I want to know who that person is and what they’re doing there. Why a camera crew on the bridge of the Galactica during a Cylon attack? Why is no one reacting to the fact that someone is pointing a camera at them?

By contrast, a lot of people⁶ criticized the movie The Blair Witch Project for its use of shakycam. While I occasionally thought it may have been a bit over the top, I found that the shakycam in that film actually increased my immersion rather than breaking it. The reason was simple: I always knew who was holding the camera. It made sense for it to be shaky, because the people holding the cameras were visible characters in the film, and when they were running scared they weren’t paying attention to the cinematography. Galactica, by contrast, never gave me a reason for the shakycam, except for the filmmakers getting in the way and saying LOOK AT ME I AM BEING EDGY.

You may think I’m being nitpicky here, but at times I found this so distracting that I couldn’t even watch the show. My preferred method was to treat it like an audio drama, listening to it and occasionally glancing at the screen.

Am I the only one who has these immersion problems? Do these things bother you? What other things break your immersion?

1. Actually, it wasn’t really that far away, but it sounded good at the time. [↩]
2. Unfortunately, I can’t remember who it was, and I can’t seem to find the tweet. Maybe it was the voices in my head? Or was it YOU? [↩]
3. Or at least nearly so. [↩]
4. “Now I’m a documentary! Look, I’m interviewing the characters! Now I’m showing you things a camera couldn’t possibly get to! Now the characters are looking at the camera again! Wheeeeeee!” [↩]
5. For very small values of “affectionately.” [↩]
6. Back, as the kids say, in the day. [↩]

By the power of the Internet, we bring you some stills from the official Avengers trailer for your desktops. Enjoy!

Last week, I had the opportunity to enter ThinkGeek Headquarters for the Marian Call + Art of Akira event, and it was a wonderful evening. I was only vaguely familiar with Marian’s music prior to that night, and had no idea what the Akira exhibit would contain, but I was intrigued by both. Additionally, the lure of peering into the inner workings of ThinkGeek made this a mandatory trip. Well, that and the insistence of a certain Moon Ranger that we attend.

One might think that the home base of an entity like ThinkGeek would be glorious and resplendent, not unlike (but, still, clearly inferior to) our own Secret Lair. I envisioned it to be festooned with ornate, redundantly secure gates, on a mountain covered with wolves, and with a vast amount of treasure contained therein. I am sad to report that this is not the case. Instead, nestled snugly in the bosom of Fairfax, VA, the ThinkGeek HQ resides in a nondescript office complex, counting mortgage and title agencies among it’s neighbors. That noted, the becubicled interior is guarded by a wampa, and is decorated with the gadgets and toys one would expect.

Marian Call’s concert was simply excellent. She played in the outdoor common area of the complex, which provided a setting that was both open and intimate for the deliberately limited crowd in attendance. Through some sort of environmental techno-wizardy, the ThinkGeekers summoned forth the first perfect summer evening for the show this area has seen all season¹, complete with a massive contingent of fireflies² that appeared at dusk.

While I’d previously listened to a couple of Marian’s songs online, this was my first meaningful exposure to her work, and I am now a certified fan. She describes her musical style as “acoustic folk-funk with a twist of jazz”, and she counts both a typewriter and a rainstick among her musical instrument proficiencies. Her vocal range is outstanding, and she has disarming humor and humble charisma that’s impossible not to be pulled into. While Marian is a certified geek, and this comes through in many of her songs, it’s often quite subtle; it’s clear that her musical passions are broad, and you are as likely to hear a song about her Volvo or her native Alaska as you are about Jayne from Firefly.

Another awesome thing about Marian is her passion for creating her music independently, and making it available in open and interesting ways. The concert was live streamed through her website, and she released a new song online – Good Morning Moon, written as a wake-up tune for astronauts aboard the International Space Station – at the same time as she played it live that night for the first time ever. Also, she teamed with ThinkGeek to have prize giveaways for those tweeting from the show, as well as for one lucky person who downloaded Good Morning Moon from her website during the event³.

The Art of Akira exhibit was set up on the inside of ThinkGeek HQ, and fascinating to peruse. I am forced to note that one of my personal geek sins is that I’ve never seen Akira, which I am led to believe is a landmark bit of anime filmmaking. The exhibit consists of original art from the movie, curated by owner and Akira-evangelist Joe Peacock. His enthusiasm for the movie and the vast collection of animation stills were quite cool to see, and have persuaded me to move Akira up a bit higher on my to-see list. Also, the limited edition Call/AKIRA poster by John Tyler Christopher that was available only that night is a thing of beauty.

To feed the ravenous crowd of hungry pre-zombies, ThinkGeek brought in local food truck Stix to provide rations. Stix, as one might guess, serves food exclusively impaled on wooden sticks, from a rotating menu of marinated land/air/sea meat, to sides like potatoes or corn-on-the-cob, and even cake on a stick. Stix tends to roam about the DC area, and the best way to find out where they’ll be on a daily basis is to follow them on Twitter. The food was quite yummy, and I’ll be looking out for them during future trips into the District.

All in all, this was an immensely enjoyable evening. This marked the second time that Marian has done a concert at ThinkGeek HQ, and all indications are that this will definitely happen again in the near future. If you are within striking distance of northern Virginia, I heartily endorse checking out the next show. Even if you are not, you owe it to yourself to give her music a listen.

1. We are currently investigating their techniques for use in The Lair, because when the time of the Overlords comes, it will be sunny comfort for us and oppressive heat for the rest of you. [↩]
2. Given the obvious Firefly fans in attendance, this was not lost on the crowd. [↩]
3. This ended up being a certain Moon Ranger, which was perfect because of both spacelove and redheaded solidarity. [↩]

…that the Nazis are coming back next year…

…that some very strange things come out of Japan…

…and that The Shawshank Redeption isn’t what you thought…

Unless you’ve been under a rock for the last six months, you know that Thor, the latest in Marvel’s Avenger lineup, was released last Friday. I took a change, paid the 3D surcharge and watched the movie in brilliant 3D glory.   I had high hoped for the film, as I’ve been a fan of Kenneth Branagh for years, and the high drama of the Norse mythology seemed well suited to his skilled hand.  The casting looked interesting, and let’s face it, Chris Hemsworth looks so much like the Thor of The Ultimates line that it’s creepy.

I wanted to like this film. I truly did.  Yet…

(There be spoilers ahead. Thou hast been warned.)

It’s flat. Totally and completely flat. I’m not sure how you manage to completely emasculate the Norse pantheon, but by the gods, they managed it. Even Anthony Hopkins as Odin fails. Odin, the cleverest of the Norse gods, the the magic-forger, is shown to be a tired old man, and while he does portray the wisdom of a father to his overly rambunctious son (yes, that’d be Thor), he is weak and ineffectual. Yes, I understand why, and that the plot demands is, but Hopkins spends a lot of time looking mournful and sighing, then he “dies” then he comes back to help set things right again. Meh.

Thor himself is a cardboard cutout. I agree with what Roger Ebert said in his review, that the flaw of trying to make a movie about mythological gods is that they are defined by their attribute and powers, not by their personalities. Thor has two settings: overly-dramatic arrogent LARPer and cow-eyed insta-wisdom loverboy. That’s it. Period.

The Three Scientists On Earth are barely there. Even Natalie Portman could not add dimension to her character. They are incidental at best. Thor’s “changing” due to his “love” of Portman’s character is so forced that it is painful.

The best part of the movie?  Well, the effects are excellent, of course. That goes without saying, really. If you like effect, this movie should make you happy. From a story and character standpoint, the best parts of the film are Loki’s transition from dutiful son to subversive trickster and Heimdall. Heimdall being Heimdall was awesome.

I could keep venting at this point, but what would be the point?  This movie is a Saturday afternoon movie special, and doesn’t even come close the epic feel of Superman, Iron Man, Batman Begins, or even Spiderman. It’s one to watch on DVD while you are folding your laundry on a Sunday afternoon. Have a beer, kick back, and just let the simple “plot” wash over you. If you’re not expecting any more than that, you’ll be just fine. 

When I’m not engaged in the various activities my role as Chief Medical Officer requires here in The Lair¹, I am performing more mundane tasks² in the hospital setting. While it’s hard top The Lair in terms of the sheer oddity of both the Overlords and Minions, it turns out that my hospital has it’s own colorful cast of characters. Many of these are heroic, and others villainous, with a choice few attaining superhero/villain status. One such character may, in fact, be Tony Stark/Iron Man… at least in his own mind.

A new medical student recently started working with us, and from the beginning, he stood out as being a bit off. Naturally, I was drawn to observe his strange behavior, and quickly began to realize that he is either 1. Tony Stark made flesh and surreptitiously seeking The Mandarin in the bowels of my hospital, or 2. merely has delusions of Tony Starkhood. Being a good³ doctor, I have applied the scientific process to my observations, and so I present you my lines of evidence in this regard:

• A well-tailored, and accessorized, suit – We all know that Tony Stark likes to look his best, and is a fan of sartorial elegance in his public appearances outside of the Iron Man armor. Typically, medical students dress well and wear a white coat at all times, as a symbol of the profession they are growing into. Not this student. While wearing a white coat for clinical work, he is quick to stow it away at all other times in favor of an immaculately fitted suit, and hang out publicly to show off his be-suited body. This is easily a Stark-like trait.
• A Van Dyke of precise and unique grooming – Although it hasn’t always been this way in the comics, few things have defined the recent look of Tony Stark more than his loosely coiffed black hair and distinctively trimmed Van Dyke. Robert Downey, Jr. has epitomized this look in his recent portrayal of Stark in film. It should come as no surprise to you to learn that my medical student sports a very Downey-esque visage, complete with the distinctive angular Van Dyke seen in the Iron Man movies.
• Expensive, private schooling – Tony Stark is nothing if not filthy rich, and loves to focus that money on experiences that are expensive, exclusive, and beautiful. The student in question is training at an off-shore medical school on a tropical island that expensive, exclusive, and beautiful. Coincidence? I think not!
• Expensive, sporty cars – Another defining characteristic of Mr. Stark is a penchant for costly sports cars, both as a measure of wealth and for his interest in tinkering with all things mechanical. While he is with us in the hospital in the mainland US, my student is cruising about in a BMW. I need not say more.



• Tempted by a demon in a bottle – Perhaps the most well known of the classic Iron Man comic storylines is “Demon in a Bottle”, where Stark struggles with his addiction to alcohol. Knowing my interest in alcoholic beverages⁴, I am often quizzed by the student on the subject of extreme beers and gin varieties, which certainly establishes a particular interest in the topic. Much to my obvious pleasure but at the expense of this exercise, there is no evidence that he is an alcoholic.
• Buddies with the War Machine – One of Tony Stark’s best friends is James “Rhodey” Rhodes. My student once asked me if I was “Rhodey”. Actually, he may have just seen my long hair and have asked if I used to be a roadie. Work with me on this one, people.
• Carrying his costume in a briefcase – This is the final, and most convincing, piece of evidence. As most recently seen in Iron Man 2, Tony Stark has a suit of armor that can be portably contained inside a briefcase, in case of emergencies. My student is always carrying a briefcase, a habit which I didn’t originally think much of. Then, the following event happened: I was in a meeting with a group of residents, discussing patients. The medical student walked in without saying a word, and proceeded to sit down on a couch near me, just in the range of my peripheral vision. With deliberate movements, he set the briefcase on his lap, opened it, and in one swift motion, somehow removed his suit jacket, put on a white coat he had stashed in the briefcase, and smoothly stood up, all at the same time. He then proceeded to clench his fists and look the group over, as though he was basking in the power of just-donned armor. He then proceeded to leave the room swiftly, in order to fight crime. Or, see his patients. One of the two.

In conclusion, while the medical student in question may or may not really be Tony Stark, at the very least he certainly thinks he is. Why else would he come to do rotations at a hospital renowned for cardiac procedures, if not to remove life-threatening shrapnel from his chest? Perhaps there is a Mandarin plot afoot in our hallowed halls… or maybe Fing Fang Foom lies sleeping beneath the foundation of the new hospital building that’s under construction? These questions need answering, and so I shall engage in further scientific observations, for the chance to recruit Tony Stark’s resources and prowess to the side of The Secret Lair is an opportunity that the Overlords would be exceedingly displeased at me for missing. And I can guarantee you that the displeasure of the Overlords is something noone wishes to incur.

1. Between the crackpot schemes of Minister Lynn and the frisky enthusiasm of the shetland-bonobos, it’s a wonder I ever leave. That’s not even taking the ever-pressing requests of Overlords Johnson and Miller into consideration. [↩]
2. Such as curing syphilis, for one. [↩]
3. Or, in this case, Bad [↩]
4. Alcohol kills germs. Also, microbes are required for that whole fermentation thing. Also, I’ve taken care of a few people with serious infections due to brewer’s yeast… not pretty. [↩]

• 1970: Liquid crystal watches go on market
• 1971: CAT scan
• 1972: Pocket calculator
• 1973: Car airbags
• 1974: Barcodes on supermarket products
• 1975: Birth of the home computer (various now-extinct manufacturers)
• 1976: VHS and Betamax
• 1977: First complete genetic structure of an organism found (Great Britain)
• 1977: First flight of the Space Shuttle
• 1977: First commercial flight of supersonic Concorde between New York, Paris, London
• 1977: USA admits testing Neutron Bomb
• 1977: Trans-Alaska Pipeline starts oil flowing Prudhoe Bay to Valdez
• 1978: Louise Brown born (first In Vitro Fertilization “Test Tube” baby)
• 1979: Graphical User Interface developed at XEROX PARC (led to Macintosh, Windows)

At the Drive-In:

• 1970: Colossus, the Forbin Project
• 1971: A Clockwork Orange
• 1972: Silent Running
• 1973: Soylent Green, West World
• 1974: Young Frnakenstein, Zardoz
• 1975: A Boy and His Dog, Rollberball, The Stepford Wives
• 1976: Logan’s Run, King Kong
• 1977: Star Wars, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Wizards
• 1978: Superman: The Movie, The Lord of the Rings
• 1979: Alien, Mad Max, Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Time After Time

On Television:

• 1970: Jon Pertwee becomes the Fourth Third Doctor
• 1971: All in the Family and The Electric Company debut
• 1972: Sanford and Son, Emergency!, M*A*S*H*, and Are You Being Served? debut
• 1973: The Six Million Dollar Man debuts
• 1974: Happy Days, Shazam!, Little House on the Prarie, Chico and the Man, and Nova debut
• 1975: Barney Miller, Welcome Back Kotter, Space: 1999, Fawlty Towers, Wonder Woman, and Saturday Night Live debut
• 1976: The Olympics draw one billion viewers
• 1977: Eight is Enough, The Amazing Spider Man, Soap, CHiPs, and The Love Boat debut
• 1978: Blake’s 7, The Incredible Hulk, Dallas, Battle of the Planets, Taxi, WKRP, Mork & Mindy, and Battlestar Galactica debut
• 1979: The Dukes of Hazzard, You Can’t Do That On Television, The Facts of Life, Benson, Buck Rogers in the 25th Century, Scooby and Scrappy Doo, Spider-Woman, and This Old House debut

Nebula Award Novels for the 1970s:

• 1970: Ringworld by Larry Niven
• 1971: A Time of Changes by Robert Silverberg
• 1972: The Gods Themselves by Issac Asimov
• 1973: Rendezvous with Rama by Arther C. Clarke
• 1974: The Dispossessed by Ursula K. LeGuin
• 1975: The Forever War by Joe Haldeman
• 1976: Man Plus by Frederick Pohl
• 1977: Gateway by Frederick Pohl
• 1978: Dreamsnake by Vonda K. McIntrye
• 1979: The Foundations of Paradise by Arthur C. Clarke

1. The type of perspective made infamous by the Total Perspective Vortex [↩]

Movie: "Now, we retake Los Angeles!" Me: "...why?"

Dear Battle: LA,

Thanks for showing me an interesting time last weekend! I did enjoy myself, but I’m afraid that most of what you tried to do on our date didn’t work out quite like you intended it to. I appreciate the effort, I really do… but I don’t think we can see each other again.

Now, I get what you were going for, and like I said, I did end up having fun. Kicking back to enjoy a movie with plenty of combat and lots of explosions is cool, and something I certainly like to do. I must say that there was plenty of both, and it all looked quite pretty. I loved how you used the shaky cam during the fight scenes to add tension, and to the chaos of the battlefield. Even better, it did a great job of helping to keep the alien invaders mysterious for the first part of the flick, which was a nice touch. That, I liked!

What I did not like was that you used the shaky cam throughout the rest of the film too. Seriously, why did you think it was necessary to have a jerky hand-camera in a scene where two men are calmly talking to each other in an office? I know, I know – you were trying to pull me into the action with a sense of immediacy, but it ended up being a bit weird. There wasn’t a character holding the camera, so maybe you meant to evoke a documentary-style feeling? Whatever your goal, it was a bit too much, sort of like the lens flares in that Star Trek movie I went out with a few times recently. Oh, and I should tell you that one of the other people that was on our group date last weekend was getting over a massive migraine, and your damn shaky cam brought it right back for her. Yeah, she was the one who stopped watching after the first few minutes. I know you didn’t do it on purpose, but that was not cool at all.

Listen, I know you tried really hard, and you had a great idea: an alien invasion told from the perspective of a team of marines on the ground should be awesome. You even scored the always excellent Aaron Eckhart as the main protagonist Nantz, and he did a great job with what he was given. Sadly, you didn’t give him much, and most of the dialogue was just uninspired. Yes, you tried to get me to care about all the other marines too by introducing snippets of their personal stories in the opening sequence. But here’s the thing – ignoring the fact that it felt like you were running through a roster of classic soldier-movie cliches (the married one with a pregnant wife, the about-to-be-wed one, the one who’s brother was just killed, the one who’s about to retire, and the rookie, to name a few), you killed several of them too early in the story for it to matter. Between not being able to keep track of most of the individual marines in the shaky-cam combat, and that many of the personal stories set up in the beginning are never revisited later, I ended up not really caring about most of them. In fact, apart from Nantz and one other solider, the other focal protagonists of the flick aren’t even among the marines that you took such care to establish in the beginning, which was just bad storytelling.

Speaking of storytelling, there were a couple of spots where you botched the science in a way that was so wrong, it broke me out of my pleasant suspension of disbelief. The worst was when you said that the Hubble space telescope was able to take thermal images of multiple objects that had suddenly appeared in earth’s atmosphere. That’s just not possible. Hubble doesn’t do that. Period. I know most people don’t have a great understanding of what Hubble’s capabilities are, but since you put the scope in your script, you had damn well better know yourself. The sad part is that you had any number of other satellites that could have done the same thing for your story, that you either didn’t bother to research, or chose not to use. Thor above, you could have even said it was an astronaut with a thermal camera on the International Space Station. The other painful science bit was when several scientists used the phrase “liquid water” to distinguish it from water in other states. While the point you were making was that it was not ice or water vapor they were talking about, “liquid water” as a turn of phrase wasn’t the right bit of dialogue to stick in the scientists’ mouths, and it was odd enough to throw me off. These may seem to be small things to you, but you know that I am a man of science, and so to wine and dine me, it matters.

Now, like I said, I did enjoy your movie, despite it’s faults. The combat and the explodey bits were intense and very well done. The design of the aliens and their tech was detailed and cohesive, and I enjoyed how new extraterrestrial weapons were rolled out at regular intervals during the course of the film. And, naturally, it had a happy ending… well, for the story I mean, not the other kind of on-a-date happy ending. Battle: LA, my dear, you won’t be getting another chance at one of those from me. It was a pleasant enough time, but I’ve moved on. Good luck with your future endeavors!

Regards,

The Bad Doctor (who kind of regrets this blind date)

“George said if I directed the first one then I would have to direct a trilogy. He had three stories in mind. It turned out George did not have three stories in mind and we had to make up subsequent stories.”

-Steven Spielberg on George Lucas and the Indiana Jones movie franchise

I dare not speculate on what the accompanying Queendom is of, both in terms of material and anatomy.

There is a particular television network¹ that tends to serve as background noise in our humble abode when it is determined that television must be “on” without necessarily being paid close attention to. Said network is notorious for several things, including using Law and Order for half of its programming, generating various original series of reasonable quality², and running frequent marathons of pretty much anything that they consider Character Approved. This past weekend, the marathon of choice was all four Indiana Jones movies run in reverse chronological order, for reasons unfathomable.

While the focus of my weekend was various crafty and nefarious endeavors unrelated to television³, I paused enough times in front of that infernal contraption to catch snippets of all four flicks interspersed with each other. After seeing Kingdom of the Crystal Skull in the theater back in 2008, I mentally filed them away as follows – Raiders of the Lost Ark=great, Temple of Doom=awful, Last Crusade=great, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull=fairly okay. Seeing them again in this random bite format was interesting, and it led me to compare the films in terms of theme and content in a different way than just by sitting down and viewing them all straight through in order. As such, I have reconsidered the filmography of Dr. Jones:

• Raiders, Crusade, and Crystal Skull are all on equal footing – All three flicks have a sense of fun, and tell a ripping good pulp adventure yarn. Crystal Skull lives up to the other two in this regard moreso than I originally gave it credit for, both in ridiculous action sequences and in the fact that there is no functional difference between the the Nazis of the first two and the Russians in the latter as villians.
• Raiders is the genetic superior of all the films – I had forgotten how badass the opening sequence of Raiders is⁴ at establishing Dr. Jones’ character and setting the tone for the rest of the tale. Crusade is full of far more goofiness than I remembered from previous viewings… I think I gave it “Connery points”⁵ that made me remember a level of awesomeness that wasn’t quite there.

Character Approved... to melt your face.

• Crystal Skull still gets pulled below Raiders and Crusade by a few distractions – While much has changed with Dr. Jones in the 19 years between Crusade and Crystal Skull, his brief patriotic anti-communist exchanges with several foes were enough out of his previous character that it yanked me out of the story a bit. Also, in what strikes me as a possible Star Wars prequelitis mild co-infection, the script isn’t quite as sharp in terms of dialogue, leaving us without classic quotables on par with the prior films⁶. And even for a pulp adventure tale, having a group of monkeys psychically download vine-swinging skills to a partially-concussed greaser and then accompany him on a cross jungle Tarzan race to catch a speeding military vehicle, for me, a bit too much.
• Mutt is a perfectly acceptable character – In the story portrayed in Crystal Skull, he works, and works well. If you consider the cast of characters Dr. Jones has shared the screen with, there are far worse to be had. As to the rumored consideration of continuing the movie franchise with the Mutt Jones, that’s where I have an issue, as there isn’t enough character growth (or likeable traits, period) about him by flick’s end to turn him into someone I’d want to see more pulpy action tales about. Unless the psychic monkey download fixed that, too.
• Temple of Doom remains an awful Indiana Jones movie – I would argue that Temple can be enjoyed on it’s own unique merits as a darker, bizarre pulp adventure… but it is a complete miss in terms of the qualities that make the other stories of Dr. Jones great. Actually, if you swap Harrison Ford out here for Bruce Campbell, this would have made for a far better installment of the Evil Dead series.

Revising Temple of Doom as an Evil Dead flick? Minister Lynn, I think we have a new Crackpot Scheme afoot…

1. Their name just might have something to do with the letters “USA”. Just sayin’. [↩]
2. I loves me some Burn Notice, if for nothing else than it gives Bruce Campbell some steady work. It also keeps me guessing medically as to why Gabrielle Anwar is so cachectic. Ms. Anwar, you could stand a touch more gravy in your diet. [↩]
3. Things I learned: the Pathfinder RPG allows you to play an Alchemist who mixes and imbibes mutagens to Hulk out, among other things. Also, craft supplies stores are a bit cagey when it comes to pointing you to their acid-free matboard. [↩]
4. and not recognized until now that Satipo is Alfred Molina in his first feature film appearance [↩]
5. Another movie that got “Connery points” was Highlander II. I think we can all agree that no amount of “Connery points” could balance that flick’s equation to the positive. [↩]
6. “He chose… poorly.” [↩]