The problem with collecting media in physical form these days is how easy it is to lose the opportunity to get it. This is true of anything with a limited shelf life or a short print run or a specific edition that may no longer be available. This is especially true of foreign media which has a shelf life even shorter than most. So here's a list of mostly forum and some domestic media I'd like to grab that will cost me various parts of my soul to access.
1. MAISON IKKOKU. This Japanese produced animated and print property from Viz Media has been around since manga switched over from the comic book format to these digest versions that populate our shelves. In it's animated form it's been around since the VHS days. It's 96 episodes long and 15 volumes of manga. Both are very hard to find. This story of an apartment manager and one of her tenants falling in love is sweet without being cloying and real without pandering. There has been movement lately on Artist Rumiko Takahashi's other work for reissue. My hope is this series gets another chance to run and I will have the funds to get it at the time.
2. BATTLE ANGEL. This is known as Gunm over in Japan and is currently split between two publishers. An earlier 9 volume run that is difficult to find and an 18 plus retelling and expansion currently in print from Kodansha. The OAV made back in the 90s is still kind of in print. I hope that the earlier run gets a reprint. If James Cameron is to be believed he wants to make this as an adaptation after the next Avatar trilogy is finished. I will believe that when I see it.
3. CHUNGKING EXPRESS. The OOP dvd is fairly easy to find. The OOP Criterion Blu Ray or DVD is not. The latter has the best special features and the best visual quality. My brain hurts watching the price rise.
4. JOHN WOO'S THE KILLER. This thing has been out multiple times but I would like the long out of print Criterion version as visual quality of the video doesn't change much between the blu-ray and various dvd versions.
5. NODAME CANTABILE. This is an animated, live action and print franchise that I wish someone could pull together. 16 of the 25 manga volumes are here in English but were not finqished when Kodansha continued Del Rey's catalog. The live action version never had a stateside physical release. The anime is available streaming through Sony's Crackle service but only the first season. This romantic comedy doesn't have a chance because it features students at a prestigious music college and features classical music.
6. YOU'RE UNDER ARREST. This is a Manga and Animated Franchise ( and one live action feature) that needs to be collated. The animated film is way oop and the second release with better quality is quite expensive. While the later second and third seasons are readily available the first season is oop but has the distinction of two of its volumes being impossible to find for no earthly reason. 37-44 of Season 1 must be more hilarious than the others. The manga only has 2 of 22 volumes here in English and that depresses me. No stateside release of the live action film.
7. ROBOT CARNIVAL. This anthology film never received the DVD treatment here and the vhs copies are dinosaurs. I wish Japan would remaster a blu ray. I'd gladly import it as we share the same region code.
8. THE LEGEND OF BILLIE JEAN. For a long time this wasn't available but a print on demand DVD exists and the visual quality is murky at best. This is dying for a remastered blu ray or hell even just a remastered DVD.
9. SANCTUARY. This 9 or so volume manga is way out of print and was released flipped originally. I'd like to see a re-release unflipped. Marketing this would be tough as it is very much of its time and aimed at adults.
10. READ OR DIE. The best way to get all of this is through a long oop blu ray set that mimics the Japanese pricing structure. I've priced out what would happen if I tried to get the original domestic DVDs and depending on the secondary vendors you're not really saving that much money. I am saving my pennies now.
Looking over this list I am surprised to see that most of the print side on this list is from one company Viz media. Battle Angel's case is unique as the artist jumped publishers and Viz only prints things from its Japanese counterpart. Dark Horse holds You're Under Arrest and they tend to do a good job keeping their stuff in print but You're Under Arrest must have had especially cringe worthy numbers for sales to kill it after two volumes.
The overall problem with seeing any of this come back is no one outside of the publisher knows exact sales numbers and how that squares with the licensing and production costs. Maison Ikkoku has a chance to come back only because they are bringing back Ranma 1/2. The latter had a lot more popularity due to the broad comedy. MI has a devoted fan base hence the crazy prices for the manga and anime but that may not translate for another dip in the well.
A lot of these things only get one shot before going away forever. The only lesson learned is if you love it, support it and vote with your wallet.
Monday, February 3, 2014
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
FAN REACTIONS AND THE DC VS. MARVEL CONNECTION
I've OUTLINED BEFORE about the supposed failure of boy's adventure films and I find myself revisiting those thoughts about the critical and fan reaction to PACIFIC RIM. In brief, in catering to a very niche audience it didn't work enough for someone outside those who already like this kind of material. It is too early to call it a financial failure but Hollywood overemphasizes domestic box office and it has underperformed here. Finances aside I think it's the best summer motion picture right behind Man of Steel and my inner twelve year old was sooo happy.
Man of Steel had a kind of split decision between critics and public unlike Pacific Rim where audiences and critics heaped universal praise. More people saw Man of Steel as everyone knows who Superman is even if they've never read a Superman comic. Not everyone knows what a Kaiju is. I think Man of Steel became polarizing because everybody has an idea of what Superman should be and this film may or may not have succeeded in selling the audience on their idea. For the record, it worked splendidly and I am a fan of the various versions of this character in multiple mediums.
In some ways I wish Hollywood wouldn't pay attention to the fans when attempting to adapt material. It is a losing game because no matter what is done it won't match what is inside the fan's head. The filmmakers responsible for this movie clearly have a lot of respect and love for the source and it is all up there on the screen. And yet, some fans hated this.
By hate, I mean hated the entire thing because it wasn't their picture of what Superman is to them. This is doing a disservice to the entire effort. Even as much as I like the film it isn't perfect. The destruction scenes are a bit overlong for example but that's like complaining about the cupholders in a BMW.
So, imagine what happened after the announcement of what Warner Bros wants to do as a followup to Man of Steel. It's a Superman/Batman team up film. It's 2002 again. I can see why they want to go in this direction as it gives them a chance to recast Batman and it can change the stakes for the sequel. Others pointed out that a sequel may be problematic as how do you top a planet destroying menace. With the teamup it forces an interesting question. What kind of problem would require Superman to ask for help? Fan reaction to the teamup has been just as polarizing as the reaction to Man of Steel.
DC wants to follow Marvel in success at the box office hoping for an eventual Justice League movie. Go team! But the path they are taking is odd. The teamup movie idea works but the rumors are The Flash is on the way. At the moment they are pushing for a Flash TV series by using Arrow for the backdoor pilot. A proposed TV series, Amazon, was supposed to chronicle the adventures of a young princess Diana-Wonder Woman. At the moment those plans are on hold.
I'd like everyone here to be a slightly braver and take a risk here. Superman and Batman are taken care of. They need to do an experiment on the audience. They should follow the Superman team up film with a Wonder Woman feature. There are some interesting reasons why HERE.
You know what happened when the Hunger Games smashed box office records? Hollywood didn't understand why a FEMALE LED ACTION MOVIE made that much money. This is one reason of many why we haven't had a Wonder Woman picture yet. They treated this success like an anomaly rather than the start of a positive trend. I have said this BEFORE but Diana can whether lots of interpretations. Even if Hollywood is even more risk averse than usual and doesn't know what they want when they develop a property somebody somewhere can come up with a way to translate Wonder Woman to the big screen.
I think that someone will be a fan of the source material and will have enough passion to pull through the act of God required to make a film. That passion will translate to the screen. The exuberance of Pacific Rim comes through on the screen because you can feel the director had fun making his monster mashup. Exuberance like that can overcome any preconceptions an audience has for the character.
Come on, DC & Warner Bros. Be brave. Trust the material. Trust the filmmaking team. Have faith the audience will show up. You all can make history.
POSTSCRIPT
The reaction to Ben Affleck being cast as Batman doesn't surprise me at all and I think confirms that Warner Bros and DC Comics are following their own model in producing a successful film franchise. "FANS" hate this casting but I think it's brilliant. I have no hope that Diana will make any kind of showing in this upcoming sequel or a potential followup film either but Jennifer Garner would be just fine with me.
POST POST SCRIPT
Apparently Gal Godot has been cast as Wonder Woman/Diana in the Man of Steel sequel. Also Jessie Eisenberg has been cast as Lex Luthor and Jeremy Irons is Alfred. Again DC is going its own way with this franchise. And I'm quite pleased. I hope fans come out and support this.
Man of Steel had a kind of split decision between critics and public unlike Pacific Rim where audiences and critics heaped universal praise. More people saw Man of Steel as everyone knows who Superman is even if they've never read a Superman comic. Not everyone knows what a Kaiju is. I think Man of Steel became polarizing because everybody has an idea of what Superman should be and this film may or may not have succeeded in selling the audience on their idea. For the record, it worked splendidly and I am a fan of the various versions of this character in multiple mediums.
In some ways I wish Hollywood wouldn't pay attention to the fans when attempting to adapt material. It is a losing game because no matter what is done it won't match what is inside the fan's head. The filmmakers responsible for this movie clearly have a lot of respect and love for the source and it is all up there on the screen. And yet, some fans hated this.
By hate, I mean hated the entire thing because it wasn't their picture of what Superman is to them. This is doing a disservice to the entire effort. Even as much as I like the film it isn't perfect. The destruction scenes are a bit overlong for example but that's like complaining about the cupholders in a BMW.
So, imagine what happened after the announcement of what Warner Bros wants to do as a followup to Man of Steel. It's a Superman/Batman team up film. It's 2002 again. I can see why they want to go in this direction as it gives them a chance to recast Batman and it can change the stakes for the sequel. Others pointed out that a sequel may be problematic as how do you top a planet destroying menace. With the teamup it forces an interesting question. What kind of problem would require Superman to ask for help? Fan reaction to the teamup has been just as polarizing as the reaction to Man of Steel.
DC wants to follow Marvel in success at the box office hoping for an eventual Justice League movie. Go team! But the path they are taking is odd. The teamup movie idea works but the rumors are The Flash is on the way. At the moment they are pushing for a Flash TV series by using Arrow for the backdoor pilot. A proposed TV series, Amazon, was supposed to chronicle the adventures of a young princess Diana-Wonder Woman. At the moment those plans are on hold.
I'd like everyone here to be a slightly braver and take a risk here. Superman and Batman are taken care of. They need to do an experiment on the audience. They should follow the Superman team up film with a Wonder Woman feature. There are some interesting reasons why HERE.
You know what happened when the Hunger Games smashed box office records? Hollywood didn't understand why a FEMALE LED ACTION MOVIE made that much money. This is one reason of many why we haven't had a Wonder Woman picture yet. They treated this success like an anomaly rather than the start of a positive trend. I have said this BEFORE but Diana can whether lots of interpretations. Even if Hollywood is even more risk averse than usual and doesn't know what they want when they develop a property somebody somewhere can come up with a way to translate Wonder Woman to the big screen.
I think that someone will be a fan of the source material and will have enough passion to pull through the act of God required to make a film. That passion will translate to the screen. The exuberance of Pacific Rim comes through on the screen because you can feel the director had fun making his monster mashup. Exuberance like that can overcome any preconceptions an audience has for the character.
Come on, DC & Warner Bros. Be brave. Trust the material. Trust the filmmaking team. Have faith the audience will show up. You all can make history.
POSTSCRIPT
The reaction to Ben Affleck being cast as Batman doesn't surprise me at all and I think confirms that Warner Bros and DC Comics are following their own model in producing a successful film franchise. "FANS" hate this casting but I think it's brilliant. I have no hope that Diana will make any kind of showing in this upcoming sequel or a potential followup film either but Jennifer Garner would be just fine with me.
POST POST SCRIPT
Apparently Gal Godot has been cast as Wonder Woman/Diana in the Man of Steel sequel. Also Jessie Eisenberg has been cast as Lex Luthor and Jeremy Irons is Alfred. Again DC is going its own way with this franchise. And I'm quite pleased. I hope fans come out and support this.
Saturday, May 25, 2013
WHAT I WISH FOR IN A VIDEO GAME
A little while back a gaming theory webshow called Extra Creditz produced a show about the best starting point for your game. The take away from it was an interesting idea that you start with the game mechanics rather than a narrative.
I happen to agree and that has made me refresh some ideas, articulated here, about how I'd want to approach my ultimate game. When I'd done this before I felt I was stealing the best ideas from other games. But this question makes narrative secondary so it is actually quite freeing.
After all what do I really want to experience in a game? I want to care. I want a reason to push on even if the mechanics get too challenging.
The best way to experience what I like most in a game is something that not a lot of gamers like. It is the dreaded escort quest. At its most basic you and your charge navigate an obstacle course to arrive safely at journey's end. The biggest complaint levied against these games is your partner's penchant for actively hampering efforts to survive.
Successful games that use the escort quest do two things very well--make your partner endearing on some level that makes you care and has some kind of skill set that otherwise would make navigating the game environment impossible. ICO's whole game is centered around the protagonist creating a safe path for his partner who is nearly helpless. But without her you couldn't get beyond the first locked door. Resident Evil 4 involves rescuing the president's daughter and getting her to safety but without her you also wouldn't make it past the gates. Other examples abound. Enslaved and the 2008 reboot of Prince of Persia features characters who have complimentary skills in combat.
With this in mind I will put forth what I ultimately want in a video game. There is no preference here because I want all of these mechanics to work in tandem for the experience I wish to achieve.
THIRD PERSON PERSPECTIVE
Lots of games use first person to enhance immersion and might make interesting use of the escort mechanics. Bioshock Infinite looks to be in this camp but for my purposes I think third person is best for use of the environment and admiration for what you are seeing and doing.
AI CONTROLLED PARTNER
The player controls the avatar you inhabit but the object of the game, whomever you are escorting, isn't stupid. She can react to your own actions as well as others in the environment. Whatever obstacles that have been placed in your way are overcome not only by your own actions but by whatever skill set your partner has that you aren't capable of. An example might be the ability to fit into tight spaces simply because you are too heavy. Consequently there must be a certain sense of self preservation with your partner. If she's being hurt she won't just sit there and take it.
ILLUSION OF A PATHWAY
This is also known as the invisible wall syndrome. A lot of effort went into designing the environment. Let's see what else is out there to find. This means that the player can control the camera and while the objective is known they don't guide your hand in getting there. There are no corridors in this game when there are no obvious walls.
ENVIRONMENT AS STORYTELLING DEVICE
Everything you need to know about the game world should be conveyed to you in the environment. For example, Dead Space uses your own suit as a health meter and holography as your objective marker. Assassin's Creed did a remarkable job giving the illusion of a world as you are walking around listening to the NPCs react to what is going on. Keep your game within the game engine as much as possible.
CUTSCENES SHOULD BE A REWARD, NOT THE PRIMARY WAY TO ADVANCE OBJECTIVES
After completing a difficult task you should be rewarded with a beautiful scene showcasing the technical power of whatever machine you are playing on. It should convey a sense of accomplishment be it from a difficult fight, a successful negotiation of a path found or a conversation leading to a deeper understanding of character. Just make that scene noteworthy.
QUICKTIME EVENTS SHOULD BE CONTEXT SENSITIVE
Personally I would like these things to go away permanently but they do have their uses if they have the proper context. The best response I ever heard for why these things should die went something like this: "You're about to punch someone in the face and are suddenly asked to play a round of slot machines." This is immersion breaking. Asking to do a round of Simon Says at the end of a fight is just silly. Instead use a QTE where it makes the most sense either as a reward for a difficult maneuver such as countering an enemy attack or a way to build tension within a scene such as navigating a cliff face with difficult handholds.
INVENTORY MANAGEMENT DOES NOT MEAN BREAKING THE LAWS OF PHYSICS
Silent Hill Origins features a protagonist who's jacket can hold multiple TV sets for bludgeoning weapons that break over time. Placing limits on what you can do is part of the challenge of a good game. One of the best inventory management systems that was carried with the person came in Resident Evil 4. Leon was limited to a case, upgradeable overtime that had a grid. Every item took up space within that grid and made reasonable sense. It felt like packing a suitcase but that became a game in itself right there.
UPGRADES SHOULD CHANGE NOT ONLY STATS BUT APPEARANCE AS WELL.
This is one of those things that has gotten better with the tech so there really is no excuse for it not to be there. This allows personalization for the avatar you inhabit within the game and can help with how feel about the person you are escorting. This should also apply to upgrading abilities to suit your play style. In the case of this hypothetical escort mission an ability upgrade should enhance how you want to protect your partner.
TREASURE HUNTS RESULT IN TANGIBLE REWARDS
If you are going to reward the explorers make sure the rewards benefit the player. It could be something to help the player or partner within the game or extra content for a peek behind the curtain. It might even be something that gives insight into the world created within game. If you simply went from point A to point B you would not lose understanding of what is going on. But for the explorers the extra rewards enhance whatever interest you already have in the experience.
CONVERSATIONS ARE OPTIONAL AND ALWAYS FULLY VOICED
Technology has caught up with ambition here. Voices enhance emotional attachment and this goes for the player's avatar as well. I think Bioware's Mass Effect series implementation of the dialogue wheel where you are given an idea of your response before you hear it fully voiced is revolutionary. It gave you control in how you responded and built anticipation at the same time.
ENDINGS SHOULD REFLECT CONSEQUENCES NOT BINARY PATHS
I have already detailed here my thoughts on how Mass Effect 3 brilliantly handled this because the path always has an end point. How you get there defines your experience and ultimately how you feel about it. Silent Hill 2 had three different endings that corresponded with your play style throughout the game and ultimately made a statement about the protagonist's guilt with the ending you got.
WRITING AND WHERE IT REALLY FITS WITHIN A GAME
If you care enough about a character chances are.you will follow them anywhere into whatever tale you can craft. Video games should be no different. Good writing will make you care about your partner let alone the protagonist regardless of story. We all know what bad writing is when we encounter it but we forget what good writing is when we don't notice it. We are too wrapped up in the adventure to notice. Hopefully we will come to care about the characters so.much that we can overlook things like gender, sexual orientation and race and just appreciate them for what they are-a companion on the adventure of a lifetime.
POST SCRIPT
Based on everything I've been hearing about this I think I'm getting closer to my ultimate video game.
I happen to agree and that has made me refresh some ideas, articulated here, about how I'd want to approach my ultimate game. When I'd done this before I felt I was stealing the best ideas from other games. But this question makes narrative secondary so it is actually quite freeing.
After all what do I really want to experience in a game? I want to care. I want a reason to push on even if the mechanics get too challenging.
The best way to experience what I like most in a game is something that not a lot of gamers like. It is the dreaded escort quest. At its most basic you and your charge navigate an obstacle course to arrive safely at journey's end. The biggest complaint levied against these games is your partner's penchant for actively hampering efforts to survive.
Successful games that use the escort quest do two things very well--make your partner endearing on some level that makes you care and has some kind of skill set that otherwise would make navigating the game environment impossible. ICO's whole game is centered around the protagonist creating a safe path for his partner who is nearly helpless. But without her you couldn't get beyond the first locked door. Resident Evil 4 involves rescuing the president's daughter and getting her to safety but without her you also wouldn't make it past the gates. Other examples abound. Enslaved and the 2008 reboot of Prince of Persia features characters who have complimentary skills in combat.
With this in mind I will put forth what I ultimately want in a video game. There is no preference here because I want all of these mechanics to work in tandem for the experience I wish to achieve.
THIRD PERSON PERSPECTIVE
Lots of games use first person to enhance immersion and might make interesting use of the escort mechanics. Bioshock Infinite looks to be in this camp but for my purposes I think third person is best for use of the environment and admiration for what you are seeing and doing.
AI CONTROLLED PARTNER
The player controls the avatar you inhabit but the object of the game, whomever you are escorting, isn't stupid. She can react to your own actions as well as others in the environment. Whatever obstacles that have been placed in your way are overcome not only by your own actions but by whatever skill set your partner has that you aren't capable of. An example might be the ability to fit into tight spaces simply because you are too heavy. Consequently there must be a certain sense of self preservation with your partner. If she's being hurt she won't just sit there and take it.
ILLUSION OF A PATHWAY
This is also known as the invisible wall syndrome. A lot of effort went into designing the environment. Let's see what else is out there to find. This means that the player can control the camera and while the objective is known they don't guide your hand in getting there. There are no corridors in this game when there are no obvious walls.
ENVIRONMENT AS STORYTELLING DEVICE
Everything you need to know about the game world should be conveyed to you in the environment. For example, Dead Space uses your own suit as a health meter and holography as your objective marker. Assassin's Creed did a remarkable job giving the illusion of a world as you are walking around listening to the NPCs react to what is going on. Keep your game within the game engine as much as possible.
CUTSCENES SHOULD BE A REWARD, NOT THE PRIMARY WAY TO ADVANCE OBJECTIVES
After completing a difficult task you should be rewarded with a beautiful scene showcasing the technical power of whatever machine you are playing on. It should convey a sense of accomplishment be it from a difficult fight, a successful negotiation of a path found or a conversation leading to a deeper understanding of character. Just make that scene noteworthy.
QUICKTIME EVENTS SHOULD BE CONTEXT SENSITIVE
Personally I would like these things to go away permanently but they do have their uses if they have the proper context. The best response I ever heard for why these things should die went something like this: "You're about to punch someone in the face and are suddenly asked to play a round of slot machines." This is immersion breaking. Asking to do a round of Simon Says at the end of a fight is just silly. Instead use a QTE where it makes the most sense either as a reward for a difficult maneuver such as countering an enemy attack or a way to build tension within a scene such as navigating a cliff face with difficult handholds.
INVENTORY MANAGEMENT DOES NOT MEAN BREAKING THE LAWS OF PHYSICS
Silent Hill Origins features a protagonist who's jacket can hold multiple TV sets for bludgeoning weapons that break over time. Placing limits on what you can do is part of the challenge of a good game. One of the best inventory management systems that was carried with the person came in Resident Evil 4. Leon was limited to a case, upgradeable overtime that had a grid. Every item took up space within that grid and made reasonable sense. It felt like packing a suitcase but that became a game in itself right there.
UPGRADES SHOULD CHANGE NOT ONLY STATS BUT APPEARANCE AS WELL.
This is one of those things that has gotten better with the tech so there really is no excuse for it not to be there. This allows personalization for the avatar you inhabit within the game and can help with how feel about the person you are escorting. This should also apply to upgrading abilities to suit your play style. In the case of this hypothetical escort mission an ability upgrade should enhance how you want to protect your partner.
TREASURE HUNTS RESULT IN TANGIBLE REWARDS
If you are going to reward the explorers make sure the rewards benefit the player. It could be something to help the player or partner within the game or extra content for a peek behind the curtain. It might even be something that gives insight into the world created within game. If you simply went from point A to point B you would not lose understanding of what is going on. But for the explorers the extra rewards enhance whatever interest you already have in the experience.
CONVERSATIONS ARE OPTIONAL AND ALWAYS FULLY VOICED
Technology has caught up with ambition here. Voices enhance emotional attachment and this goes for the player's avatar as well. I think Bioware's Mass Effect series implementation of the dialogue wheel where you are given an idea of your response before you hear it fully voiced is revolutionary. It gave you control in how you responded and built anticipation at the same time.
ENDINGS SHOULD REFLECT CONSEQUENCES NOT BINARY PATHS
I have already detailed here my thoughts on how Mass Effect 3 brilliantly handled this because the path always has an end point. How you get there defines your experience and ultimately how you feel about it. Silent Hill 2 had three different endings that corresponded with your play style throughout the game and ultimately made a statement about the protagonist's guilt with the ending you got.
WRITING AND WHERE IT REALLY FITS WITHIN A GAME
If you care enough about a character chances are.you will follow them anywhere into whatever tale you can craft. Video games should be no different. Good writing will make you care about your partner let alone the protagonist regardless of story. We all know what bad writing is when we encounter it but we forget what good writing is when we don't notice it. We are too wrapped up in the adventure to notice. Hopefully we will come to care about the characters so.much that we can overlook things like gender, sexual orientation and race and just appreciate them for what they are-a companion on the adventure of a lifetime.
POST SCRIPT
Based on everything I've been hearing about this I think I'm getting closer to my ultimate video game.
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Silent Hill: Revelation and the Love of Adaptation.
This makes the second time in as many months where I attended a movie with less than ten people. I'm beginning to think I have awful taste.
The first was Dredd 3-D that while awesome became a box office bomb here in the U.S. The verdict is still out on Silent Hill: Revelations as it just opened this week. And while not as good as the first one--it's weakened by a slightly more exposition heavy script--it's still an awesome representation of the source material.
If you look at this trailer and this writeup and interview something very cool comes through that overshadows perceived weaknesses in the adaptation. There is a love of the source material here and all that love is up there on the screen.
This sequel and it's predecessor are on that shortlist of best video game adaptations but more than that, these filmmakers managed to create the movie I wanted to see from this material. Directors Christopher Gans and Michael J. Bennet managed to recreate the experience inside my head as I was navigating my digital avatar around the fog shrouded town of Silent Hill.
That's the best kind of adaptation there is.
The first was Dredd 3-D that while awesome became a box office bomb here in the U.S. The verdict is still out on Silent Hill: Revelations as it just opened this week. And while not as good as the first one--it's weakened by a slightly more exposition heavy script--it's still an awesome representation of the source material.
If you look at this trailer and this writeup and interview something very cool comes through that overshadows perceived weaknesses in the adaptation. There is a love of the source material here and all that love is up there on the screen.
This sequel and it's predecessor are on that shortlist of best video game adaptations but more than that, these filmmakers managed to create the movie I wanted to see from this material. Directors Christopher Gans and Michael J. Bennet managed to recreate the experience inside my head as I was navigating my digital avatar around the fog shrouded town of Silent Hill.
That's the best kind of adaptation there is.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Elementary: Holmes/Watson Everywhere!
CBS has a new crime drama called "Elementary" which puts the iconic character in a modern setting and changes Watson's gender. You can see the trailer here.
Holmes at his most basic is the brilliant socially crippled genius paired with the practical supporter. The practical person is usually our POV to guide our understanding of the eccentric person. And like all good characters they are fine on their own but taken together are so much better. In the original stories Watson was Holmes' chronicler of their adventures and our viewpoint character. This new show takes that formula and runs with it.
This isn't the first show to try this. Robert Doherty, creator of "Elementary," mentioned in an interview that a lot of shows these days have a kind of Holmes character in them. He isn't wrong. My favorite TV show of all time is The X Files and Mulder played Holmes to Scully's Watson. House, MD was the Sherlock Holmes of Medicine and his team plays the role of Watson. Law and Order: Criminal Intent had Detective Goren in the role of Holmes while Detective Eames played Watson. "Bones" has Tempe Brennan in Holmes' role while Seely Booth is her Watson.
Doherty's version is not the craziest revision I've every heard of with these public domain characters. The Guy Ritchie films turn Holmes and Watson into superheroes despite the period trappings. Dan Simmons has an insane take in bringing Sherlock Holmes into a story that I'm praying he writes it in the future.
However, in the realm of TV/Film I think my favorite take comes from John Rogers, co-creator of a fun caper drama called "Leverage." I pulled this from his blog where he recreates a favorite rant of his.
-----------------
"At the beginning of "A Study in Scarlet", Watson has just returned from Afghanistan with a nasty case of PTSD. He went straight into the Army from medical school, and straight to Afghanistan the next year. So he can't really be more than 26 or so when the novel starts - Victorian doctors went to university at 18 or so and studied for five or six years. And Holmes is about the same age if not younger - he's studying at the university, he's had no previous job that anyone mentions, and Watson doesn't describe him as significantly older than himself.
John Watson is a twenty-six year old combat hard-ass with mujhadeen shrapnel buried in his leg (or shoulder, depending on the story), not some foppish fuckwit with a bowler hat. Sherlock Holmes is your substance-abusing perpetual grad student solving cases for the London underworld/working class that the cops won't touch. THAT'S why everybody fucks up Holmes and Watson including, probably, my favorite writer in the world.
About two years ago I was developing that version of Holmes and Watson with a director to do a TV pilot, and our agents correctly argued that no network was really looking for that. However, it's my fondest wish to someday do that show.
Oh, and they're women. Did I mention that?"
------------------------------
Come on, who wouldn't want to see that?
Of course, being late to the party for lots of things, I just discovered that the BBC has already done a modern Sherlock Holmes show and some comparisons have already been done between "Sherlock" and "Elementary."
I will be looking at both with great interest in the future.
Holmes at his most basic is the brilliant socially crippled genius paired with the practical supporter. The practical person is usually our POV to guide our understanding of the eccentric person. And like all good characters they are fine on their own but taken together are so much better. In the original stories Watson was Holmes' chronicler of their adventures and our viewpoint character. This new show takes that formula and runs with it.
This isn't the first show to try this. Robert Doherty, creator of "Elementary," mentioned in an interview that a lot of shows these days have a kind of Holmes character in them. He isn't wrong. My favorite TV show of all time is The X Files and Mulder played Holmes to Scully's Watson. House, MD was the Sherlock Holmes of Medicine and his team plays the role of Watson. Law and Order: Criminal Intent had Detective Goren in the role of Holmes while Detective Eames played Watson. "Bones" has Tempe Brennan in Holmes' role while Seely Booth is her Watson.
Doherty's version is not the craziest revision I've every heard of with these public domain characters. The Guy Ritchie films turn Holmes and Watson into superheroes despite the period trappings. Dan Simmons has an insane take in bringing Sherlock Holmes into a story that I'm praying he writes it in the future.
However, in the realm of TV/Film I think my favorite take comes from John Rogers, co-creator of a fun caper drama called "Leverage." I pulled this from his blog where he recreates a favorite rant of his.
-----------------
"At the beginning of "A Study in Scarlet", Watson has just returned from Afghanistan with a nasty case of PTSD. He went straight into the Army from medical school, and straight to Afghanistan the next year. So he can't really be more than 26 or so when the novel starts - Victorian doctors went to university at 18 or so and studied for five or six years. And Holmes is about the same age if not younger - he's studying at the university, he's had no previous job that anyone mentions, and Watson doesn't describe him as significantly older than himself.
John Watson is a twenty-six year old combat hard-ass with mujhadeen shrapnel buried in his leg (or shoulder, depending on the story), not some foppish fuckwit with a bowler hat. Sherlock Holmes is your substance-abusing perpetual grad student solving cases for the London underworld/working class that the cops won't touch. THAT'S why everybody fucks up Holmes and Watson including, probably, my favorite writer in the world.
About two years ago I was developing that version of Holmes and Watson with a director to do a TV pilot, and our agents correctly argued that no network was really looking for that. However, it's my fondest wish to someday do that show.
Oh, and they're women. Did I mention that?"
------------------------------
Come on, who wouldn't want to see that?
Of course, being late to the party for lots of things, I just discovered that the BBC has already done a modern Sherlock Holmes show and some comparisons have already been done between "Sherlock" and "Elementary."
I will be looking at both with great interest in the future.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
MATURING TASTES AS READER AND WRITER
If my experience is anything like other writers who are trying to get published there are probably four books in storage and the fifth or sixth one works the best. My frustration doesn't come from whether or not I can get someone else's attention with the product. It's the fact that it's taken this long to feel this confident to get material out there. Until I read stories like this. Then I don't feel so bad.
Sometimes it takes a long time to get a tale correct. And hopefully, regardless of how long it takes, that tale will be the best it can.
James Cameron can take all the time he wants with his own work. You write a book to fill a publisher's slot and make a movie to fill a release date. It's been said that Cameron's treatment for Avatar was written in 1994 but he couldn't do it until he felt the tech would be ready. I'm hoping he'll hold onto the Battle Angel adaptation rights long enough to complete the project. There is an awesome character at the center of that saga and a lot of the themes in it Cameron has handled in other stories. He and his team would do it justice.
Lately I've been re-experiencing a fantasy series called "Wheel of Time." I gave up on it in high school but I find myself enjoying it a lot more now that I'm older. I appreciate the characters more and though the style is a little unwieldy the sense of scope overwhelms everything and makes it quite compelling for me. The original author died and a new author was commissioned to finish the volume. He has an interesting post here about how all that came to be. It's also a great essay about the commitment to a story. The wait is long but I think the payoff will be worth it.
For my own work I have a few ideas beyond this setting and these characters. One of them is a horror story that scares me on a conceptual level because I don't know if I'm mature enough as a person let alone a writer to tackle the tale and do it properly. I can say this with a little confidence because the current books I'm working on all revolve around a character that's been in my head for the better part of fifteen years. And now do I feel confident enough to give these characters a story worthy of them.
The take away from this should be that the best story will be ready when it's ready. We as storytellers have a responsibility to the audience whatever medium we use to convey the tale. That responsibility is to give our best. Anything less is a betrayal of a contract whenever you engage with the story.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
MASS EFFECT AND THE JOY AND HEARTBREAK OF CATHARTHIS
Let me get this out of the way first. I want to thank the team at Bioware responsible for this magnificent saga. They hit it out of the park and smashed all my expectations. This is one for the ages and I can't wait to see what you all have in store for new projects and your existing franchises.
Now I get to defend myself from the Internet.
Bioware's Mass Effect series has caused me a lot of heartbreak and joy and not because of a controversial ending. I think the best response to the broughhaha over the latter is found here so I won't say anything else about that. Reviews and impressions of the first two games came from writer Greg Rucka, found here and here, and a review from Adam Sessler of G4's X Play reflects a lot of my own thoughts of the final game.
What's amazing about this series in the five years it took to release the saga, Bioware evolved the game as they went along, almost as if Game 1 was a Beta Test and Game 3 was the final product. But the foundation laid in Game 1 was so strong that it was like making improvements on a mansion. Incredibly smart writing gave us thrilling action in a convincing universe and top notch voice acting cemented emotional connections to characters that by game three felt like old friends.
It made subsequent plot developments heartbreaking. Their greatest success is they made me care about the characters and by extension the consequences of my decisions. I wanted to do everything I could to help them. Even if in trying to help resulted in some very ugly situations.
The overall illusion this game series did best was making you feel responsible for the state of this corner of the universe. By the time this game ended I think it's safe to say that this Commander Shepherd was yours, regardless of how the avatar looks.
I didn't have a problem with the ending, either, as I felt my first decision made with the final problem was the right one as my version of Shepherd would do it. And I applaud Bioware for doing it the way they did.
Now, to justify this opinion I'm going to have to mildly spoil it. So, if you haven't finished the game don't read any further. If you don't care, read on.
Still here?
I part company with the outraged fans here because of something very simple. They misunderstood where this ending of the series actually took place. It's not in the last fifteen minutes. By my clock it's about twenty hours or so in to the third game itself where the ending really starts. For those of you keeping score each game takes about 40 hours max to complete, allowing variance for completionists to speed runners. So, all told it's about 120 hours to complete this saga give or take. So, at about hour 100 you get a sense that things are wrapping up--permanently.
The ending started not with combat but with a conversation. It occurs between you and Admiral Hackett who is coordinating earth's defenses while you rally galaxy forces to take back the planet. After priority missions that take you to the Far Rim you can ask why you got drafted into this and Hackett explains, including call backs to what you've done before and who you were before you took command of the Normandy back in game 1.
It's at this point even knowing how the plot is more or less going that I thought Shepherd wasn't going to make it out of this alive. And it made the connections already established even more endearing. If you pursued a romance (and I did) there's an air of melancholy about it. Your crew from the second game makes appearances with missions and other things and it felt like saying goodbye to them whenever they were around--sometimes in the most brutal way possible.
Every mission felt like a sense of closure. As if you knew you were going to die and wanted all your affairs in order before you pass. When the others in your crew get a chance to shine, especially the one you chose to romance, it's some of the best writing in the game. Later on you're given one final time to say goodbye during the multi-stage ending that results in some well wrought emotional catharsis.
Bioware pulled off an interesting trick with the ending because they had to find a way to make the ending logical even accounting for all the decisions the player made from game 1 onward. And they do this by bypassing it entirely and making half the internet mad.
But I maintain that this was probably the only way they could do it. I think people misunderstood where they wanted their closure to the story happen. The closure has been happening for hours at this point, not in the last fifteen minutes. The last decision falls to you to decide the state of the universe. Everyone else at this point has had their final moments, of sorts. Now it's time for yours.
We all know how this was going to end--in a confrontation with the reapers. And what's making people angry is the outcome is generally the same with each path you take. But there's something else going on here when you approach that platform. It's not about the action of dealing with the Crucible. It's how you feel as a player (and by extension how Shepherd feels).
I said earlier I was happy with my initial choice and I still am because it actually did reflect everything I was trying to do--being the ultimate diplomat. I base my feeling on how I felt after two key missions from this game and the overall sense of what happened in games 1 and 2. In those key missions one outcome resulted in a hopefully bright future for a race, the other resulted in the destruction of a race. The decision I made at the very end could be the result of how I was feeling about that as she walked to the platform for the final time. Namely, this has to end because one path clearly wouldn't work based on who I was and the other carried the risk of repeating what already happened.
I don't know what Bioware has planned next for their RPG franchises. But this one is closed for now. And if this is all we get I will be satisfied. They have created something special and have set the bar incredibly high not only for their future works but for other game studios working on RPGs. I am grateful for having the opportunity to play it.
PS
While I have the floor, PAX East, PAX Prime and E3 are coming up. Bioware would make my year if they would announce Jade Empire 2. Or Dragon Age 3.
Post Post Script
Well, I will be one of the ones who won't need this but it is interesting that there's some appeasement for those that absolutely hated the ending to this saga.
Now I get to defend myself from the Internet.
Bioware's Mass Effect series has caused me a lot of heartbreak and joy and not because of a controversial ending. I think the best response to the broughhaha over the latter is found here so I won't say anything else about that. Reviews and impressions of the first two games came from writer Greg Rucka, found here and here, and a review from Adam Sessler of G4's X Play reflects a lot of my own thoughts of the final game.
What's amazing about this series in the five years it took to release the saga, Bioware evolved the game as they went along, almost as if Game 1 was a Beta Test and Game 3 was the final product. But the foundation laid in Game 1 was so strong that it was like making improvements on a mansion. Incredibly smart writing gave us thrilling action in a convincing universe and top notch voice acting cemented emotional connections to characters that by game three felt like old friends.
It made subsequent plot developments heartbreaking. Their greatest success is they made me care about the characters and by extension the consequences of my decisions. I wanted to do everything I could to help them. Even if in trying to help resulted in some very ugly situations.
The overall illusion this game series did best was making you feel responsible for the state of this corner of the universe. By the time this game ended I think it's safe to say that this Commander Shepherd was yours, regardless of how the avatar looks.
I didn't have a problem with the ending, either, as I felt my first decision made with the final problem was the right one as my version of Shepherd would do it. And I applaud Bioware for doing it the way they did.
Now, to justify this opinion I'm going to have to mildly spoil it. So, if you haven't finished the game don't read any further. If you don't care, read on.
Still here?
I part company with the outraged fans here because of something very simple. They misunderstood where this ending of the series actually took place. It's not in the last fifteen minutes. By my clock it's about twenty hours or so in to the third game itself where the ending really starts. For those of you keeping score each game takes about 40 hours max to complete, allowing variance for completionists to speed runners. So, all told it's about 120 hours to complete this saga give or take. So, at about hour 100 you get a sense that things are wrapping up--permanently.
The ending started not with combat but with a conversation. It occurs between you and Admiral Hackett who is coordinating earth's defenses while you rally galaxy forces to take back the planet. After priority missions that take you to the Far Rim you can ask why you got drafted into this and Hackett explains, including call backs to what you've done before and who you were before you took command of the Normandy back in game 1.
It's at this point even knowing how the plot is more or less going that I thought Shepherd wasn't going to make it out of this alive. And it made the connections already established even more endearing. If you pursued a romance (and I did) there's an air of melancholy about it. Your crew from the second game makes appearances with missions and other things and it felt like saying goodbye to them whenever they were around--sometimes in the most brutal way possible.
Every mission felt like a sense of closure. As if you knew you were going to die and wanted all your affairs in order before you pass. When the others in your crew get a chance to shine, especially the one you chose to romance, it's some of the best writing in the game. Later on you're given one final time to say goodbye during the multi-stage ending that results in some well wrought emotional catharsis.
Bioware pulled off an interesting trick with the ending because they had to find a way to make the ending logical even accounting for all the decisions the player made from game 1 onward. And they do this by bypassing it entirely and making half the internet mad.
But I maintain that this was probably the only way they could do it. I think people misunderstood where they wanted their closure to the story happen. The closure has been happening for hours at this point, not in the last fifteen minutes. The last decision falls to you to decide the state of the universe. Everyone else at this point has had their final moments, of sorts. Now it's time for yours.
We all know how this was going to end--in a confrontation with the reapers. And what's making people angry is the outcome is generally the same with each path you take. But there's something else going on here when you approach that platform. It's not about the action of dealing with the Crucible. It's how you feel as a player (and by extension how Shepherd feels).
I said earlier I was happy with my initial choice and I still am because it actually did reflect everything I was trying to do--being the ultimate diplomat. I base my feeling on how I felt after two key missions from this game and the overall sense of what happened in games 1 and 2. In those key missions one outcome resulted in a hopefully bright future for a race, the other resulted in the destruction of a race. The decision I made at the very end could be the result of how I was feeling about that as she walked to the platform for the final time. Namely, this has to end because one path clearly wouldn't work based on who I was and the other carried the risk of repeating what already happened.
I don't know what Bioware has planned next for their RPG franchises. But this one is closed for now. And if this is all we get I will be satisfied. They have created something special and have set the bar incredibly high not only for their future works but for other game studios working on RPGs. I am grateful for having the opportunity to play it.
PS
While I have the floor, PAX East, PAX Prime and E3 are coming up. Bioware would make my year if they would announce Jade Empire 2. Or Dragon Age 3.
Post Post Script
Well, I will be one of the ones who won't need this but it is interesting that there's some appeasement for those that absolutely hated the ending to this saga.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)