The Wolfman

The WolfmanThis movie is a remake of the 1941 classic by Universal Pictures. The Talbots, Lawrence and his father John, the gypsy involvement on the edge of town, and the ultimate ending are all taken from the original. There are some familiar crutches like the opening poem and the walking stick although these are given less significance in the sequel. The creators decided to shake things up by switching who the bad guy is, possibly in an attempt to surprise viewers familiar with the 1941 version. Unfortunately the result is an obvious plot twist and ends up much worse than no twist at all. Ironically, the movie is more predictable this way.

John Talbot

For a movie like The Wolfman to be successful it is important that the right atmosphere is created. It is vital that the setting and curse play into our romantic horror tendencies and remains a constant. Instead we are treated to an inconsistent mismash of genre archetypes that ends up feeling like an 80s movie. The gore in the movie is quick and thoughtless and deemed more important than any subtext of fear that having a beast closeby would arouse. There are too many cheap scare tactics, or what I like to call, “Oh, it’s just the cat!” Making the audience jump as a werewolf unexpectedly leaps on screen, then the realization that it was an imagination, then immediately after a werewolf leaps on screen AGAIN, then the realization that THAT was just an imagination – does not good cinema make. With a Victorian setting, mention of Jack the Ripper, and asylum subplots, much more could have been done to make this a truly horrifying experience.

Front and foremost among the reasons this is a bad movie is a wellworn rule:

Werewolf Rule #1: Wolfman can never be cool.

Werewolves can be cool. Lycanthropy is fascinating. The key word here is ‘man’. I have yet to see a rendition of a man with a human face but slight wolf features not look campy. And that’s because Wolfman can never be cool. In fact, if I may, I would like to take the liberty to modernize the wording of the rule.

Modern Werewolf Rule #1: Wolfman is ghey.

Wolfman- Old vs. New

Look at the 1941 wolfman next to the 2010 version. If you can tell me with a serious face that the 2nd looks 70 years cooler then you are a good liar.

CampinessIf The Wolfman was meant to be an old timey remake with a bit of the old Hollywood flair snuck into the horror performances then that would be commendable. While there were times that the wolfman reminded me of his cheesy predecessor, the creators never really went all out with the old fashioned campiness. The entire mess just didn’t fit together.

It seems like the movie production went through its fair share of drama. The release date was delayed a couple of times. The original director quit over creative differences (ie. he realized the movie sucked). A small turn of good fortune occurred when Danny Elfman left the movie since his music is so formulaic these days, but then the other musician leaves and Danny Elfman comes back. Sounds like the production couldn’t catch a break. Still, all these obstacles may be a reason for the bad end result but not an excuse.

Many creative differences were over the look of the wolfman. The decision to not use very much CGI was an interesting one. It’s hard to knock the idea (and ideal) on face value. On one hand I enjoy the opportunity of having something with a real physical presence and a good actor underneath but often the result is just a guy in a halloween mask turning to the camera and growling. It feels too cheesy. The obvious solution is to lean more wolflike. Take a look at this early marketing image of the wolfman in one of his other incarnations. That guy looks badass. Unfortuntely, this is NOT in the movie.

Early Marketing

The transformation is exactly what we’ve seen in older movies. There is nothing interesting about close up quick shots of hands and feet changing into a wolf these days. Camera cuts were methods used to get around the limited technology of yesteryear but there’s no reason for that trickery today. We deserve to see a man change to wolf in fullscreen. If you’ve seen An American Werewolf in London then nothing about this transformation scene will be fresh.

Asylum

The one interesting addition to The Wolfman is the idea that Lawrence Talbot might be insane. Is he a lunatic who murders indiscriminately because he thinks he is a wolf? Is lycanthropy a mental illness that can be treated in an asylum? Does the death of his mother torture him enough that he breaks away from his humanity? All of these are great questions that the movie doesn’t delve into deep enough. Instead of focusing parts of the story on these elements we are treated to a couple stock memory flashbacks and an asylum montage. I feel this, above all, is the film’s most egregious wasted potential.

Instead, the biggest question we are left with is why? Why do none of the characters do anything in between full moons? Why does Lawrence Talbot get blamed for the murders when they started before he was in town and in fact he gets attacked along with others at one point? Why make this movie? Its style feels dated and borrows from many sources, the visual effects are subpar, and the scares are no more sophisticated than what you get in your average haunted house. As a remake it offers nothing new, and then there’s just no point anymore.

Wolfman Film History

The Werewolf – 1913 silent short, the first ever film about a werewolf, albeit untraditional. The daughter of a Navajo witch transforms to a wolf to attack invading white settlers. It is interesting to note that the modern Twilight werewolves are Native Americans.

The Wolf Man – 1924 silent film, about a man who would drink too much alcohol and go into a blind rage for the night. No surprise this was during the beginning of Prohibition. He thought he was responsible for gruesome murders but it turns out he wasn’t. Not an animal in any literal means.

Werewolf In London

Werewolf in London – 1935 film, first classic werewolf movie, where a man is bitten by a werewolf and tries to cure his lycanthropy whilst being a danger to those he loves. The makeup is very toned down and the more humanlike appearance was the first concept of a wolf man. It works better in this film because the afflicted could almost still pass for human.

The Wolf Man

The Wolf Man – 1941, the popularized wolfman movie introducing silver bullets as a vulnerability. A sequel soon after created the explicit notion of the full moon being the trigger. Full blown cheese.

An American Werewolf in London

An American Werewolf in London – 1981 horror/ comedy inspired by the original. Unlike its predecessors, went with a more traditional lycanthropy form and turned the afflicted into mostly a wolf. The transformation and makeup was so good at the time that the Oscars added an Outstanding Achievement in Makeup category for this movie.

Mirror’s Edge

Mirror's EdgeAnybody remember this captivating game trailer from a while back? A modern city populated with tall white and glass skyscrapers. A first person view of someone running, jumping over fences, sliding under obstacles, even disarming a big brother-esque police force. The parkour action was accompanied by a beautiful song that slowly faded into a climactic reveal of the main character, an Asian girl named Faith.

I absolutely had to get this game. It had a look and feel- and more importantly, game mechanics- that I had never seen before. And for that alone developers DICE deserve complete credit. This is a great idea and a pretty good game and I would easily recommend playing it. Unfortunately, as with anything that builds up such impractical expectations, all I am left with is a bitter aftertaste. Aside from what was accomplished and what I enjoyed, I am going to use lost potential as an excuse to break down the biggest failures of Mirror’s Edge.

Let’s start at the beginning, with the story introduction:

The near future. In a city trying to forget its past. Crime is nearly gone. Surveillance is pervasive. The old marks of civil violence, of strife, are now covered over or memorialized. Most people are content, ignorant, and docile. Few even remember the “bad” old days anymore.

Except Faith, a young girl.

Wait wait wait. There was a decent build up there. But you are going to tell me that no one remembers the past except a little girl who probably didn’t live through it? Umm, ok.

So here is the main character, Faith- a runner, a courier of information in a corporate age of control. Every time she tries to hop along the rooftops she is pursued by police. I’ve got to say, it gets old being up there and having my buddy come on the radio and say, “There’s Blue incoming!” yet again. I have an idea – how about Faith tries to be inconspicious and just takes a taxi to her next objective?

Overall, the story is horrible and disjointed. The levels have no meaningful connectivity in between them and the cutscenes often don’t move the plot forward. Playing Mirror’s Edge feels like you are just doing the same thing over and over again. I swear this actually happens:

Mirror's Edge Story

Okay, maybe story is not this game’s strong point (it’s not). Let’s move on.

Early on in my play experience I noticed that music was conspicuously absent. This was potentially one of the best features of Mirror’s Edge with the title track garnering internet hype and a separate soundtrack on sale. Where did all the music go during the levels? This was a missed opportunity for sure.

The jumping mechanics feel nice but they are not quite there yet. Like everything else in Mirror’s Edge, there is an obvious lack of polish. Landing from jumps will often result in you sliding off a ledge. It is usually hard to tell where you are supposed to go. The load times are excessive even after watching cutscenes. There are collectables scattered throughout the levels that have no purpose or reason for you to bother with. Judging distances of jumps is difficult and often only solved by trial and error, meaning you will fall to your death and pray there was a well placed autosave checkpoint.

On that note at least, falling to your death is very cool. The whole screen blurs out and shakes savagely while the noise of wind rushing past your face drowns out anything else, and then black. There are moments when you stop short of falling off a ledge and look down as the sound of rocks trickling down hammers home how close to death you are. Vaulting fences, touching walls, and slamming through doors are all genuine experiences with style. If this game sounds schizophrenic in its implementation, that’s because it is.

There are very few in-engine cut scenes that DICE tries to blend into the game but it is not a seamless transition. It is quite jerky and there is a white flash when the switch happens. This isn’t the biggest sin of a game engine, but there is a miniboss fight with quicktime events that blends back and forth between the game and the in-game scenes. Who’s idea was it to cut back and forth like that with choppy transitions and try to play it off as if it wasn’t horrendous? The controls were useless in the non-interactive portions and many times I died because my input wasn’t detected during a switch.

But, ladies and gentlemen, these gripes are nothing compared to the biggest control issue of the game: the Trip button.

Mirror's Edge Controls

No joke, using this button will more often result in failure than success. If you are merely running forward and you push this, you will spin around backwards and fall on your ass. If you are in a gunfight and try to press L2 to shoot but press L1 instead, you will turn your back on your attacker and get shot in the back of the head and die. The only reason this button exists is to perform a wall jump – you would think there is a better, perhaps more context sensitive way to perform this maneuver than always having a ‘Trip unless you are wall running’ button.

Moving on to macro design. Gameplay is a bit one-dimensional – you can only run from cops for so long before it gets old. Sometimes it is hard to tell where you should go under stressful circumstances. The few chase sequences are an ingenious way to solve that problem since you can always see where to go by imitating the target ahead of you. But there are some questionable decisions.

It was touted that you could play the entire game without shooting but that is a load of horseshit. While the idea of disarming a cop and using the remaining clip on other enemies until you need to move on is cool, the fight sequences are not the game’s strong point. Many times you can run away but near the end of the game you are forced into extended battles that you haven’t been prepared for and the aim controls are not very forgiving. If you play this game make sure to start with the Easy setting because that basically makes combat more tolerable without losing all the cool platforming.

The design is also very heavy-handed. There is not more than one way to do anything in Mirror’s Edge and you will find this out very quickly. Sometime you hang from pipes and can turn around to jump back, while other times your are clearly not supposed to turn around and the game doesn’t even bother letting you. It ends up feeling less like you are navigating a world than merely trying to guess what the designers want you to do.

The end of the game really starts falling apart. There is an entire level section that involves you jumping out of a building onto a bunch of others, avoiding snipers, slowly taking them out one by one, and when you finally finish you need to perform a very long jump back in to the building you started in. If you miss this jump and die you need to replay the entire segment over again. Either DICE intentionally tried to make the game harder by placing less frequent autosaves or they were rushing to meet a ship date, but the last couple levels are not fun.

The budget for Mirror’s Edge was not on par with the hype it had built up. The majority of the cut scenes were done in a 2D cartoony style that EA tried to play off as ‘stylish’ but I interpreted as ‘discount’. The hilarious thing is there is this police chief who Faith is in contact with the entire game in these cutscenes and finally, during one of the last levels, I came up face to face with him in the 3D engine. I had no idea who I was looking at because he looked completely different from the cartoon version. I had to listen to a few lines of dialog and ponder a second before I realized what was going on.

Faith

In the end, we are left with a game that had a lot going for it but the developers dropped the ball. DICE had a remarkable vision but I blame them for not following through with the promise. EA needs to get credit for funding a more experimental project like this but they should also bear the blame in this mess. To release a game prematurely does not do justice to the idea and they should have known better.

Even with all these failures, Mirror’s Edge will have lasting effects in the years to come. And who knows? With an iconic heroine and a better managed second effort, we just might get a sequel that delivers on more than just potential.

Art Movement Terms

Art Nouveau is a wonderful art style that is a mix of practical function and curvy form. The name means ‘New Art’ so it makes perfect sense that its popularity peaked at the end of the 19th century. … If ‘new’ and ‘the 1890s’ don’t jive with you, then, well, you are a normal person. What I don’t understand is why the people living at the time thought Nouveau was an appropriate label. Did they not think ahead?

To be fair, most art movements have more fitting (read: descriptive) names: Cubism, Impressionism, Minimalism, Photorealism. Even a ridiculous name like Dadaism works. But then along came the Modernist movement and everyone was left scratching their heads. Maybe not immediately, mind you, since the term ‘modern’ applied for a little while. Inexplicably, it came time to modernize Modernism and what did we get? Postmodernism.

Is that it? Are we left to tacking on an extra ‘Post’ prefix every 20 years now? Post-Postmod? Is there no better solution?

It’s too bad we used up Futurism in the 1920s because that term could really bail us out today.

Stevie Wonder

Stevie WonderI was recently at the 2009 Spike Video Game Awards. Several celebrities and musical guests made appearances and handed out trophies to game developers. At one point, Stevie Wonder came out and said that video games have a lot of potential and he likes the industry, but he would like to see more video games made for blind people.

That’s great Stevie and I feel bad for you and all, but how much music did you make for deaf people?

Bowl Championship Series and Polls

BCSEverybody despises the BCS so it is not a shock if I pour on some extra hate as well. The problem is, besides almost universally wanting a playoff, critics of the current system identify a number of different failures in how we choose a college national champion. It is hard to argue that the BCS isn’t at least better than what we had before, where teams would just play in random bowl games and get ranked afterward, where #1 and #2 were not even guaranteed to play each other as they are now. So where can improvements be made? I want to specifically discuss the computers, polls, conference champions, bowl games, and of course, a playoff bracket.

College sports do something that their pro counterparts do not – they keep track of national rankings. The reason is fairly simple: 32 teams are much easier to manage than 120. BCS rankings have a computer component, of which fans criticize the algorithms, and the human poll component, which is often blamed for playing favorites.

The computers themselves aren’t so bad. Whether or not the statistical calculations need tweaking over time, we can all at least rest easy knowing that everybody is on the same level field. There will be optimal strategies for ‘gaming’ the system – scheduling strong or light, running up the score, favoring offense or defense. This is no different for any sport (or game really) where people are operating under a set of rules. This actually gives the NCAA power to guide the sport in new ways as well. If they feel like teams aren’t playing enough home games or are playing too many Division II opponents then the computer algorithms can reward or penalize teams across the board. This is no different from how the game evolves whenever penalties are added and removed from the game.

The other two-thirds of the rankings formula are much less objective and that’s why human polls are horseshit. Coaches and media members tend to vote favorably for old school powers and not give enough respect to up and comers. This immediately brings bias and unfairness into play. Compounding the problem are preseason rankings, which are official rankings based purely on speculation. It is media masturbation at best, but at worst it puts overhyped teams above legitimate contenders, making it hard for the lower ranked teams to pull ahead. Human voters will usually not let a team drop in ranking unless it loses, so if you climb to #2 by beating better opponents than #1, you will still be stuck below them. It is exactly why Alabama was a lot better than Florida but remained below them until they beat them.

As bad as preseason rankings are, with human polling abolished and computers recalculating every week, there is no bias against being ‘jumped’. We can let the media and coaches rate teams based on whatever they want but as soon as the season starts and the computers are turned on those ‘guesses’ are thrown in the garbage.

Even conferences and divisions are bad. Conference champions are not always the best representative for the conference. Two 11-1 teams in one division can only send one to try and win it. Meanwhile, the best team in the other division is 8-4. If that 8-4 team happens to upset the 11-1 team, how does the other 11-1 team feel not being able to have a shot at the conference title? Surely one of the two 11-1 teams should have gotten that title. The NFL isn’t a good analogy. Not only does it have the same problem but it is smaller with a more difficult barrier to entry for new teams. The NFL has a much more controlled climate and a balancing mechanic called *the draft*. Balancing NCAA Football teams and conferences aren’t feasible.

The idea of conferences and regional titles itself is outdated. It makes sense on a less national stage. In high school football you want to know who the best is in Florida. But college conferences span large areas of the US, college teams travel, and television creates a national stage. I say do away with conference championships completely. Why force #1 Florida and #2 Alabama to play before the postseason?

What can green do for you?

In college, of course, the post season is dominated by bowl games. And because of the money tie-ins to all the schools and investors that is not changing any time soon. Who gets bowl bids? Why guarantee a team from every conference is in a BCS bowl game? Why automatically give a champion of a weak conference a bid when other, more deserving teams are out there? We are starting to see the messes that this backroom dealing has created.

The ultimate and eventual cure is a playoff system. You can talk to 10 different people and they will have 11 different schemes for how the playoffs should work. It is not an easy task but it can be done. To get this out of the way right now, anyone countering that a playoff system would add too many games is using a weak argument because Division II does it. Here is a playoff scheme that would work: 8 teams, top ranked, only computer polled, strength of schedule taken into account but not the end all and be all.

What are we talking about here? If things were in place now we would take the top 8 teams based on the computer rankings only. None of them would have been in danger of a lower ranking because of conference championships because those games weren’t played. The top 8 teams would all be respectable- no one is undefeated or nearly so by padding their schedule with cupcakes because their rankings would reflect these shortcuts. Right now there is a lot of grumbling about whether a #3 team was screwed out of a championship game – wouldn’t the same thing happen with #9? Well, between 8 and 9, you lose your bitch card. There is a galactic difference between, a) possibly being the best in the country and not playing for the title and, b) having 2 losses while another 2 loss team is deemed more worthy to get beat down by the top rated seed. In other words, there will be no national sympathy for #9.

Playoffs

It is important to note that there will still be many bowl games outside of the playoffs. That is ok. If a team doesn’t make the playoffs but finishes with a winning record and gets invited to a random December bowl, I have no problem with that. In fact, the playoff games themselves would eat up a few of the most important bowl games now. A team making it to the national championship game would play in 3 playoff games – if you subtract the conference championship and the bowl game they were going to play anyway, you only added 1 extra game to the season – and this is only for the best two teams in the country.

It makes sense. Remove the human polls, remove the bowl bids, remove the impropriety. You think people love bowl season? You think people love March Madness? It is nothing next to the fanaticism that will emerge with a true college football playoff.

Prince of Persia (2008)

Prince of PersiaDon’t get me wrong – this is a pretty good game. Its American fantasy animation style makes for some beautiful visuals and a unique setting, which should be noted involved neither a prince nor Persia. The animation and running on walls and climbing, while not inspired, is solid traversal stuff. There’s also a couple cool pieces of tech that the developers experimented with- cloth tech for the character’s clothes and blobby tech that reaches out to the player as he walks by.

Vista

Ubisoft Montreal, the developers, put a lot of good into Prince of Persia. They, however, broke the golden rule of game design: A game is not the summation of its parts. They tried to cram everything in and hope it came together without a care for what the final experience was like. Ubisoft has been guilty of this before (see Assassin’s Creed aka. why I didn’t buy Assassin’s Creed 2) and doesn’t understand that making a player repetitively perform the same tasks is not fun.

There are basically two sides to this game:
1) Traversing the level, killing an enemy or two before battling the boss,
and
2) Traversing the level collecting soul power seeds to unlock later levels.

These are both very traditional game mechanics that we are all familiar with. The problem I have with these two parts is that the developers make you go through every level once for the first thing, then populate the level with collectables and make you traverse the very same level again before you can move on.

Mind you, collecting games can be fun. Mario and Sonic had a healthy amount of collecting *mixed in* with the combat. But separating them out to be done at two distinct times over the same level? This is just lazy design. It is basically doubling the length of the game by making you play it twice.

Imagine a level that is a tower. I climb the tower and kill a couple guys on the way up. At the top, I kill the boss. Then the land is healed and magical light seeds appear everywhere. I go down the tower (a different and faster way than I came up) and collect seeds on the way. Now, at the bottom, I can move on to another level, or I can go BACK UP the tower again to collect the seeds on the way up. So now I repeat the initial level again just so I can obtain a reasonable amount of light seeds. Now I am at the top again with nothing to do there, needing to go back down. I go down, again the way I went down before, without even any seeds to collect this time around. Well, that was a lot more work than i wanted to do. And the most annoying part is that Elika, your sidekick, keeps urging you to hurry up to the temple or something even though the game wants you to go on an Easter egg hunt.

Making the game longer by stuffing filler in doesn’t only make the game less fun, but it means you’ll be playing a less fun experience *longer*. That, sir, is not the way to entertain. You cut the fat, let the players play the good parts, and have them finish the game wanting more. That’s how you sell sequels. And expansion packs, apparently, since you can purchase a few download-only levels from the PlayStation Store.

With the underlying fundamental flaw of Prince of Persia out of the way, there are still other problems. The combat system in the game attempted to be intuitive by assigning a button to ‘magic’, ‘throw’, etc. but in practice came across as a Dragon’s Lair button reaction game. There is a complicated combo list of what buttons can be hit at certain times that I only started to get the hang of at the end of the game. And by that I mean I used the one combo I knew over and over.

Combat Controls

All the animated attacks look very cool in combat but the experience didn’t end up as freeform as what I think the developers initially envisioned. Every fight takes place on a raised platform and you can instant kill guys by knocking them over the edge. Imagine my surprise when I fight a boss, and after a cut scene where he says how bad ass he is, I position my attack correctly and knock him off the edge in one hit. It took me about 1/3rd of the way through the game before I found an enemy who wasn’t this easy to kill, and I was thrilled for the challenge.

The theme of the bosses, on the other hand, is very cool. There are some obvious Shadow of the Colossus influences at work here. Most of the game is level traversal and boss fighting, with very few generic fights in between. You almost feel sorry for the bosses when they are killed. Even the concept of using a dark god to bring a girl back to life, at the sake of the land, is copied. But Prince of Persia fails to match the elegance of Shadow on almost all fronts.

You can choose your own path in this game, and I honestly don’t see the strength in that. If there are 4 levels per boss and I can beat them in any order, then there is no feel of progression. Instead of feeling like you are slowly defeating a boss, you simply fight it in 4 identical battles with the same generic evil dialog beforehand. Linearity could have been a strength to this title and allowed the story to be presented much better.

Instead, we are treated to stilted and disconnected dialog. And might I add, horrible dialog at that. The two characters squabble back and forth without making a semblance of a point. Oftentimes when one of them mentions something important the bickering takes over and the subject matter is lost. Sometimes you are treated to lengthy explanations of mundane things to flesh out the world, and other times you have to sit through bad jokes. The game doesn’t even take itself seriously- one time you are fighting a boss and you keep pushing him into a wall to defeat him, and the hero says, “I hope he keeps falling for this.” This breaking down of the fourth wall with chatter became more of an annoyance than anything else. What’s worse, the two main characters follow the hollywood romance model of fighting until they are attracted to each other. So when it comes time for me to save Elika from death, well, I don’t really want to- she likes to argue too much.

Relationship Development models

In the end, it sounds like I am being much harder on Prince of Persia than I should be. I almost stopped playing it because of its faults, but about 40% through the bosses get more challenging and the necessity for light seed collection goes down. I actually trudged through and beat it, which is more than I can say for a lot of video games these days. It was fun, but it could have been outstanding. Using Shadow of the Colussus as a roadmap was not a bad decision but Ubisoft didn’t have the heart to see that through.

Prince of Persia is like that relationship you had that lasted a couple months and was never incredibly exciting. Sure, you are broken up now and are glad it is over, but at the same time you can appreciate the experience as a pleasant distraction where hopefully you learned some things and got a couple blowjobs.

NFL TV Coverage

Ah, football – the greatest sport of all time. Americans love the violent collisions and acrobatic catches. And with HD, multiple camera angles, and replay, the game seems tailor-made for tv.

I can watch college football games multiple ways. Several major channels show games with some backing up others for local coverage. ESPN Gameplan can be gotten from several cable companies if you want to see a game that is not playing nationally. And streaming a game online with ESPN360- live or after the fact- is easy.

The NFL is a step up from the NCAA. It is la creme de la creme of talent and professionalism. The tv productions have had so many advances throughout the years. So why is it that I can’t watch the Miami Dolphins play whenever and where ever I want?

DirectTV monopolizes the NFL contract with the NFL Sunday Ticket and they charge exhorbitant prices because they show you ALL the NFL games. Guess what? I actually don’t want to watch ALL the games. I just want to see my team play even though I am not in the local market. How hard is that to do?

NFL is all about fantasy football. It has probably the largest fanbase of all online games if you consider it as such. And why is this so good for the League? Because fans have to care about every team, every player. Are you more likely to order the Sunday Ticket or call your cable company and demand they carry NFL Redzone now? Sure you are.

It’s not about making it more convenient for fans to watch the teams they like. It’s about making the NFL a complete culture, a complete Sunday commitment, and having you be happy you are making your wallet a lot lighter in the process.

Well, their strategy is having the opposite effect on me. I can’t watch my team play so I care less about the League. It starts with me not knowing who is playing, then not keeping up with who won the game, then not thinking about the team and not buying merchandise, until soon I don’t give a crap about the NFL. It’s really sad because I love the sport but they are screwing themselves out of fans like me. I wish more people felt the same way and would boycott the Sunday Ticket and stop paying a $350 premium to watch football.

Just let me watch my game online for 10 bucks. In this age of the internet it is amazing that I can’t do this. Until then, let me know if we make the playoffs.

V (2009)

V1983 was the era of Star Wars and tv execs responded with V, a two part miniseries about benevolent aliens coming to Earth. They offer a mutually beneficial trade – their scientific and medical knowledge for supplies of common elements that their dying planet desperately needs. The Visitors, as they come to be called, look human except their voices are slightly modulated and their eyes are sensitive to light, so they wear dark sunglasses a lot. As they slowly maneuver themselves in positions of power, their charismatic promises and military uniforms take a page from the Nazis as they turn the world’s countries into police states. Even worse, it turns out the Visitors are reptilian wearing fake skin – they eat humans and are stealing the Earth’s water.

Uniform

A four part miniseries, dubbed V: The Final Battle, took place a year later that ended the conflict. And a single season run of regular episodes soon followed, although they weren’t very good. Still, V had its place in science fiction history and it was fun for me to recently rewatch some of the episodes.

Reptile Face

I was excited to see that there was a reimagining of the series in the works. Of course I was concerned that it wouldn’t be very good, but it would be cool to see a modernized version of alien big brother. The first bad sign was when I found out that the 2009 episode run was supposed to start with 6 episodes but it had to be cut down to 4. On top of that, it would be near impossible to have the aliens visit, greet us as benefactors, then reveal their true nature all within an hour timeslot. So describing my mood as cautiously optimistic is being nice.

The pilot episode was some of the worst writing I have ever seen.

First of all, they took away the few distinctions that made the Visitors different. No dark sunglasses, no cool voice, no uniforms. People like seeing these nuances. It is what makes alien movies cool. Instead, we are treated to a pilot episode where we basically only see one alien, the leader, who came from the ship above New York. There is nothing special or different about her except that she comes off as mildly retarded because she likes to smile and stare a lot.

Hot To Not

And I’m sorry, the business power suit is not a cool look for an alien.

Of course, there is a reason that the writers want the Visitors to look and sound exactly like humans, and that is because they are introducing a new plot element to the series. Many Visitors have been here for years masquerading as humans and causing strife on our planet. They are hinted as causing JFK’s assassination and 9/11. In fact, an FBI agent in the pilot is killed and revealed as one of them. Now, I could sit here and nitpick about how unrealistic it is for reptiles wearing cloned human skin to live on Earth undetected for 50 years. A single car accident would foil that plot. I could also blame the writers for taking the easy way out and always using the reveal that someone was really a Visitor whenever they are in need of a plot twist.

But instead, I am shocked that the writers didn’t realize that this plot crutch completely negates another major story element- that the Visitors recruit humans into service as helpers and informers. They convince a news reporter to, “not ask questions that would paint them in a negative light.” If the aliens have been here for 50 years and can pass for human, then why do they need a human news reporter to be their spokesperson? If they wanted to control the media, they didn’t do a very good job of seeding the planet.

Some may argue that story inconsistencies are unimportant as long as the show is entertaining. I am not going to get into the awful dialog. Or the fact that the aliens refer to themselves as ‘Visitors’. Or that the new slang is the ‘Vees’. It was a horrible experience watching this thing. But I watched it to the end, hoping that even with as big of a hole as the writers dug themselves into, that something decent could climb out.

One of the final scenes shows a ragtag band of humans forming a resistance at a secret meeting. They are attacked by Visitors, and even though the good guys have no weapons, for some reason the aliens disappear after everybody but the main characters are dead. It’s as if the writers just wanted to start the next scene without bothering to finish the previous one. FBI lady kills her partner and finds out he is a reptile alien, and she walks away with another human as they wonder how they are going to build a resistance against the Visitors who are winning everyone over with charm.

Well, let’s see, how about showing everyone the dead reptile body? Better yet – there is a Visitor sympathizer on Earth who wants to help the humans. Why not just walk to the nearest news station or post a video on youtube? The secret of their reptile nature would be exposed immediately. If, of course, all the characters on the show were not complete idiots. And how am I supposed to like these characters when they are all morons? And how am I suppose to like the show if I don’t like the characters?

The 1983 show wasn’t without its faults. It was pretty cheesy but the original concept stayed focused on the theme of charismatic leaders turning the nation into a police state. The new show is just all over the place, and so are the plotholes.

Bad Halloween Puns

“Good evilning, boys and ghouls. Get ready for a spooktacular night of puns and rhyming fright. We will be serving a meal … to die for. Bone Appetit!”

Why exactly did Halloween become the holiday of stupid puns? I am sick of hearing this crap every year. And hey, if you have kids and are busy ingraining this stupid tradition into their heads, I can understand it. But getting an email at work from the HR department full of this stuff makes me question some things. It is not reassuring that these people are responsible for my paycheck every week.

But maybe the deeper question is, why Halloween?

You don’t hear this stuff for Christmas.

“Here is a Christmas ham you’re really going to ‘savior’.”

Or Easter:

“You’ll love the Easter Egg Hunt! Not even being crucified will stop the kids from ‘rising’ to this event.”

I just don’t get it.

Quickie

Sorry, but tonight I just saw a guy walk into Popeye’s and ask, “What are your specials tonight?”

!

“Well sir, tonight we have a lovely pacific salmon glazed in a bearnaise sauce garnished with truffle potatoes.”