Movie Rights

This video by MovieBob is pretty fascinating.

 

It basically says that when movie studios hold the rights to certain properties, they can lose the rights if they don’t use them. What studios end up doing is pumping out bad films quickly to keep their licenses intact.

This is the complete opposite of what is good for movie viewers. Instead of someone taking a property and doing something awesome with it, we are instead treated to half assed shovel entertainment that is primarily a business move and not meant to be good. This means we get to see beloved comic book characters repeatedly raped just to make sure no one else can use them.

Ang Lee’s Hulk film did so poorly that they ended up selling the rights back to Marvel and we can all see how much better The Avengers is for it. Not being able to get Spiderman interacting with those guys because of a crappy teen reboot, however, is heartbreaking.

You know, in the video game industry we often comment about how we should look to Hollywood for superior business models but this is a case where I’d rather stay away. Video game licenses are often done on a per game basis, or for a predetermined number of games, rather than some muddled system where the rights holder can essentially besiege a property for as long as they want. I bet you all can’t wait for Ghostrider 3.

The Avengers

The epic saga that Marvel has been slowly laying the groundwork for has finally arrived and comic book junkies everywhere are rejoicing! So you’re expecting me to talk about how this is a hyped up blockbuster that nerds are gonna sing about even though it really isn’t anything special, right? Frankly, I was expecting the same thing. I think myself quite a talent at judging movies from their trailers alone and The Avengers promos had me yawning. Then this movie goes and gets released and completely shatters my presumptions. Not only was it good, it was awesome.

How did this happen? Iron Man disappointed and the sequel was pretty good yet deeply flawed. Captain America was overly cheesy. Thor actually was ok considering its 1950s era space background but plain and predictable. And no one has ever been able to create a good Hulk movie. So how did The Avengers pull off the superhero stew?

This is a case of the sum equaling more than the parts. When you throw a bunch of different superheroes together, the interplay between them is paramount. There really isn’t anything more important than that. Joss Whedon, who I just criticized for forcing the dialog in Cabin in the Woods, delivers a perfect blend of humor and sincerity. Every hero is cast extremely well and each actor gets to show off their skills in a number of scenes unhampered by special effects. I am astonished that even Samuel L. Jackson’s acting was decent. You need to give a director credit where it is due.

As a personal aside, there is another story aspect that I find satisfying, more for its noticeable absence. There is no love interest- no damsel in distress. There are too many characters to focus on each’s high school crush and the film is better for it.

Sure there are a couple of nitpicks. I always hate seeing the deus ex machina of a  destroyed mothership automatically disabling all the bad soldiers on the ground. The Hulk fought all movie to be in control of his monster but at the end it was effortless and sudden- he didn’t overcome his inner conflict, the plot just glazed over it. The classic ‘U.S. government who just wants to nuke everything’ annoyingly comes into play but it is kept to a minimum. So there are eye rolling moments, but when they happen they are over before you can dwell on them too long and you are back to being awed by action.

Speaking of which, the combat scenes feel ripped right out of the comic books. The action is better executed and more entertaining than any of the movies leading up to this one. Ever wanted to know what would happen if Superhero A fights Superhero B? The Avengers has a bit of that spliced about. But there are other interactions to sate our curiosity. What would happen if the Hulk tries to pick up Thor’s hammer, or if Thor slams Mjolnir into Captain America’s shield? Which team members would get along? All these answers are the keys to the film’s success, which is interesting, because the plot isn’t overly complicated and doesn’t have a legitimate ‘twist’ to it, but it unfolds slowly enough to stay fresh. Everybody knows from the get go what the big climactic clash at the end of the movie will be but the ride getting there holds your attention surprisingly well.

One final note. The post-credit reveal that all of these movies are famous for is bound to be very generic for those unfamiliar with the comics. I am not a big Marvel geek but I am overly excited by the possibility of future properties. Two words: Infinity Gauntlet.

The Draft

Dan Marino Wannabees
1) Damon Huard
2) Ray Lucas
3) Jay Fiedler
4) Brian Griese
5) A.J. Feeley
6) Sage Rosenfels
7) Gus Frerotte
8) Daunte Culpepper
9) Joey Harrington
10) Cleo Lemmon
11) Trent Green
12) John Beck
13) Josh McCown
14) Chad Pennington
15) Chad Henne
16) Pat White
17) Tyler Thigpen
18) Matt Moore
19) David Garrard
20) Ryan Tannehill

Well, let’s see how this one turns out….

Cabin in the Woods

5 stereotypical college students get in a trailer and drive out to the remote outskirts of town to stay in a cabin in the woods for a long weekend, but what starts out as simple fun is more than it seems and the group realizes their lives are in danger. Hmm, so what is it about this tired premise that garners a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes? Well, based on the not-so-spoiler in the trailer and the beginning of the movie, there is even more to this situation than there appears to be. You see, some underground organization is pulling all the strings and watching the horror unfold on a series of hidden cameras.

Essentially what Cabin in the Woods boils down to is a horror comedy that makes fun of horror movies. The problem is, this kind of self-referential humor has already been well overdone at this point. Sure there are a couple of moments that made me chuckle when the group decides that ‘splitting up to cover more ground’ would be a better idea than sticking together but numerous playful zombie movies and Scream sequels have well explained the horror movie laws to us by now: the slutty chick is the first one to die; the alpha male that everybody thinks is best equipped to save everyone isn’t the hero. Trying to make a new movie based on this premise alone will surely fall flat.

Luckily there is more going on here. While the overall plot and eventual conclusion are somewhat predictable, the final act feels very satisfying for audiences familiar with American horror. The carnage and dark comedy slant feel meta enough to be clever and an audience seeking fun should find plenty. All of this makes the first act all the more puzzling. I understand the idea is to convey that this is a classic horror movie and to play out the familiar tropes at the start before digging deeper, but the first act was slow and tedious to watch. I think the acting was alright but the dialog, a usual strength of Joss Whedon’s, felt forced and pointless. The fact that the opening scene of Cabin in the Woods shows there is more going on and continually interjects scenes of the group being watched and controlled makes me feel like the first third of the movie was a missed opportunity.

Where the movie excels, however, are the specific jabs it makes at pop culture. There is a nod to Hellraiser by including a demon with a metal puzzle toy- his name in the credits? Fornicus, Lord of Bondage and Pain. There are a couple references to Japanese horror cinema and if you are not laughing out loud at the last one then you have no sense of humor. But Cabin in the Woods is not just one of those low budget comedies that makes fun of all the currently successful flicks in a specific genre (aka Scary Movie) so it needs to find humor in more original spaces as well.

So should you watch this movie? Yes, if you like fun movies or the horror genre. Is it the movie of the year so far or does it totally blow away the old concept of scary movies? Not really. It’s kind of more of the same. It just makes fun of itself more than average.

Nerf Bullets

Everybody knows the worst thing about Nerf guns are the bullets. They fly ok and don’t hurt too much but you never quite have enough do you? After you empty a clip you are left with hunting bullets hidden all over the house and every day you repeat this process you will invariably find yourself one short. Don’t worry, you can shell out $10+ to get a couple refill clips. That should last you another week.

Well ladies and gentlemen, it is officially the future, because someone has finally found a solution to this problem. No longer must you hunt and retrieve your ammo, because now you are firing marshmallows!

I would just recommend perhaps buying a dog.

As an added bonus, here’s a blog post from an awful mother who has apparently figured out how to get around the whole ‘nerf uses safe bullets’ thing and gives her 5 year old a gun that shoots NEEDLES.

Dictionary-based Speeches

How familiar is this opening sentence?

“Webster’s Dictionary defines ‘blank’ as …” and then the author of whatever crappy article or book you are reading expounds on syntactical semantics for a paragraph or two.

It’s about time we throw this writing trope out with the trash (let’s include the entire Young Adult novel subgenre while we’re at it). This device may have been interesting at one time but it has lived far past its shelf life.

Listen, if the totality of your reference material is looking up one word in the dictionary then you might as well not even reference anything. You obviously did the minimum research necessary and it’s safe to say your thesis is on shaky ground.

Race in Games

Seeing as how I’ve worked in Ye Olde Games Industry for a while (as an indie before the scene existed and since as a AAA developer), I’ve been wanting to post more about the state of the industry rather than just reviewing a small selection of games. There are a great many debates to enter into, however, so I didn’t really know where to start but I slowly noticed a pattern as I read the introduction to Game Developer magazine every month. Brandon Sheffield, the editor-in-chief, would chime in on the current hot debate with somewhat predictable wisdom and I would vehemently disagree. As a dedicated contrarian and counter culture advocate I felt the need to vent.

In an article titled The Predictable Protagonist: Embracing Diversity in Interactive Entertainment, Sheffield tackles the problem of many player characters in video games being white heterosexual males. Whether this is a real problem or not is certainly part of the debate but let’s first focus on what the stated issue is.

“[The games industry] diversity is definitely weak, both within studios and in our game characters.”

The first half of this problem is that game studios (presumably US based, more on that later) are overrepresented by white males. Sheffield goes on to say that he doesn’t mean to call for affirmative action but then quickly drops the particular point and doesn’t address it again. So we are left with the premise that not enough minority students are getting art and engineering degrees and joining the industry.

As a whole this is a tough problem to fix and the onus certainly isn’t on the game developers. With the rise of gaming specialized degrees literally everywhere and the saturation of gaming enabled devices in everyday life, I suspect this issue will start to work itself out. But this is a change that will take time.

I am less concerned with the current snapshot of society than with actual opportunity. What I mean by this is, as long as minorities are able to secure jobs in the games industry and are not unfairly discriminated against, their actual representation in the industry is less important. As an example, consider that in 1997 blacks represented 79% of NBA rosters (several other sources claim 70%-80% over the last decade). Is there a societal problem that other races are underrepresented according to their Census statistics? I would say no, that the interest and participation of the various races in various professions is somewhat irrelevant. What is key is that diversity is not discouraged. My studio of 200+ is fairly internationally and racially diverse despite being dominated by white males. This is a demographic that I have seen changing over the years at my workplace alone which I consider a good thing.

So we are now left with the main thrust of Sheffield’s forward, where he focuses on the problem of game characters being too white.

“USC researcher Dmitri Williams looked into ethnic portrayals in games, using the bestselling titles from 2006-2007. They sampled 150 games, recording a half hour of gameplay from each, logging the ethnic makeup of every character they came across, for a total of 8,500. They compared this data with that of the U.S. Census.

What they found was that white characters were overrepresented by 7%, and Asians were overrepresented by 26%, while black characters were underrepresented by 13%, Hispanics by 78%, Native Americans by 90%, and biracial characters by 42%.”

Before getting into the numbers of a scientific study I like to examine the methodology. The fact that the games sampled were not US-only games but they were compared to US Census statistics is immediate cause for concern. This is comparing apples to oranges and has no material meaning.

Disregarding the sloppy comparison and looking to the numbers, white people are only overrepresented by 7%?!? That is not bad, especially considering that popular countries not named the United States that develop and purchase games include Canada and assorted European nations. The numbers are vague but suggest that these countries have a larger white population than we do.

There are other minor quibbles. Native Americans only make up 1% of the United States population so any mismatches in percentage will be pronounced- if that means 1 in 200 games have a Native American instead of 1 in 100, is that really a big deal? Wouldn’t the fact that there were only 150 games tested skew this specific result? And I don’t even want to ask how the researchers attempted to identify biracial characters in games but, needless to say, it is a little bit more difficult when participants aren’t explicitly asked what ethnicities they belong to (unfair advantage: Census).

It appears the USC researcher’s conclusion, that "the in-game representations didn’t match the U.S. population [but] did match the ethnic makeup of the IGDA”, was more of a curiosity rather than a meaningful observation. Still, after picking apart Williams’ study, I tend to agree with Sheffield’s take-away.

“So, it seems, we make characters that look like us, not like our players.”

Ignoring the inconsistencies in methodology and the absence of any true statistics of game player ethnicities, I wouldn’t be surprised if this statement was at least partially true. Korean movies are probably dominated by Korean actors but it is difficult to determine if this is a function of the movie watchers or the movie creators. However, when dealing with a dominant US market that exports to much of the world, this will be a difficult imbalance to avoid.

But the question truly raised by this analysis is whether or not this is wrong. Are game developers required to tell multicultural Family Circus style stories? Are game developers irresponsible or racist if they don’t? Of course not. That would be ridiculous. To Brandon Sheffield’s credit, he stops short of making these accusations. But he does end with an unfortunate analogy.

“Spike Lee, Pedro Almodovar, and others have done great work to bring other viewpoints into the public sphere through entertainment. With our interactive medium, couldn’t we do better?”

Whether one agrees with the endorsement of ‘great’ or not, it is true that these filmmakers have been successful in their craft without overreliance on white males. But is this something they should be lauded for? Aren’t black and Spanish directors making movies about black and Spanish people the same thing as white males making video games about white males? Isn’t this the behavior previously admonished?

To come full circle, I believe the demographics of video game creators and video game content are already changing. If a snapshot of both categories today are mostly white and Asian overrepresented, I don’t see that as a problem. Shouldn’t art be a reflection of the artist? Isn’t music that panders to an audience relegated to ‘pop’ status? I’m not asserting that I only want to read about white people doing white things. Diversity is great. But do we need a call to arms for not mapping to the latest Census data properly? I think that’s criticism for criticism’s sake.

QR Code for Taxi

The Consumerist ran a story about how Michigan’s Office of Highway Safety Planning is passing out coasters with QR codes to a bunch of bars. When patrons scan the code in their smartphone, a list of local taxi services will come up. As long as everybody agrees that this is a gimmick and won’t actually help anybody then I have no objection. But srsly.

Now, I’m all for calling a taxi when you need it, but this doesn’t seem very well planned. The Consumerist linked to a study that shows most college students don’t really know what to do with QR codes. That may certainly hamper their plans but that’s not my main gripe. If you are targeting a tech-savvy young crowd equipped with smartphones, don’t you think this audience can figure out how to call a taxi? We already have things called Google and Siri that can take care of this type of stuff for us.

Free WiFi

More and more places offer free WiFi now – coffee shops, hotels, airports. Small locations that make more money by attracting you to their stores, like Starbucks, have decent WiFi but it isn’t really free – you need the right cell phone plan or something. Excluding these and looking at larger locations, even considering the payment of large amounts of money for hotel rooms and airfare, the service delivered with free WiFi is almost universally atrocious.

First off, there’s the major annoyance of having to login through a custom portal. Often this doesn’t automatically happen if you are using something like an app instead of just a browser. And even when you do get connected you can never be confident that it won’t time out in 5 or 10 minutes. God forbid you put your device down to go to the bathroom (like a civilized person) and find yourself a stranger to the system when you get out. But these are just minor annoyances.

Call me crazy but my number one rule for WiFi is that it should be faster than a 3G cell connection. In other words, the point isn’t only to save on paying for data but to be faster and more convenient than having to wait for web pages to load. At Oakland Airport my iPad was loading pictures so slowly that I thought I was on a dialup modem back in the mid 90s. I was forced to read my Cracked articles without being able to look at pictures of boobs or other random novelties. Believe me, generic stock photos with clever captions are not nearly as humorous without the image loaded.


Pictured: A dog thinking about converting to Judaism.

My hotel room in San Francisco, which I consider a pretty connected city, had such a slow connection that, at one point, my phone couldn’t even return results from a google search until I manually disabled WiFi so my data connection would take over. And the kicker is that the WiFi wasn’t even free. It cost $50 for the week, which is more than I pay for my high speed internet service every month. How are companies getting away with this?