Star Wars: A Discussion (Episode VII)

My first 3D movie was way back in 1983, Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone. I can't say I thought much of it. What I remember is the movie being pretty terrible and the 3D being blatant. What I mean by blatant is scenes where something comes right out at you for no other purpose than coming right out at you to show off the 3Dness of the movie. That's not always a bad thing, but it usually is. Probably the only significant thing about this movie is that it was Molly Ringwald's first "big" movie, right before Sixteen Candles. It did not make me ever want to see another movie in 3D, though.

That was a thing I pretty much succeeded at. At least, I can't think of any other 3D movies I saw through the rest of the 80s. It lasted all the way up to U2 3D, which came out in 2007 in Real 3D. The U2 concert movie was the first to use the Real 3D technology and, frankly, it was amazing. At times, it felt like you were in the arena, the show was so immersive. And that's probably about as close as I'll ever get to seeing U2 in concert, so I was glad to have seen the movie in the theater.

Of course, it was quickly followed by other movies using the technology: Journey to the Center of the Earth, Coraline, and who knows what else since 3D quickly became a "thing" and Real 3D faded into the sea of new digital 3D technology. However, I was hooked. Unlike the old red/green 3D thing, the new 3D stuff, when done well, could make you feel almost like you were in the scene.

However, it didn't take long for theaters to raise the prices on the 3D shows high enough to make them not worth it. Not when you have a family of five, at any rate. So, except for special exceptions, we don't do 3D movies anymore. One of those exceptions was the re-release of The Phantom Menace in 3D but, rather than talk about that here, I'll direct you to my review of that.

In relation to The Phantom Menace, I have to say that I was upset when Disney called a halt to the 3D conversion of the other Star Wars movies. Star Wars was made for 3D. The Force Awakens just reinforces that. So, yes, we went to see Episode VII in 3D. I think that's the first 3D movie I've seen since we saw Episode I in 3D back then in 2012. The 3D experience of Force Awakens was amazing.

It's not because there are things flying at you and being blatantly 3D in your face, either. I actually don't remember anything like that in the movie. With Force, it's all about the environment and how much more rich and interesting it becomes in 3D. The 3D actually allows you to see more of what's in the movie, like steam being released from the Falcon after it lands, than you can see on the flat surface of the 2D presentation. It was... impressive.

Which is not to say that the 3D is perfect. There are still issues when a character is in the foreground but not completely onscreen. That can give a sort of warped appearance as the character is both coming out of the screen at you and being framed in by the wall. But those instances are few. I suppose until movies are actually holographic VR presentations, there will be some issues, but The Force Awakens is the best 3D I've ever seen. Not that I've been watching much 3D but, as I said, but, still...

The short of it is that, if you have opportunity, you should check this one out in 3D. It's worth it. And I hope Disney resumes the conversion of the other five Star Wars movies into 3D. Just... well... I want to see the trench run in 3D. That would be amazing!

Pacific Rim (part 1) and "The Bitter Fruit"

As I've mentioned before, I have a friend that works for LucasFilm. Actually, I have two friends that work there, but one of them is being let go because of the Disney acquisition. His department was gutted, so it wasn't like he was singled out.

Anyway, every so often, these guys and I get together to see a movie and catch up, so we made tentative plans back in May to do that. At the time, I listed out all of the summer movies I was interested in. Pacific Rim was on that list, but I also stated that it was probably the movie I was least interested in seeing. I expected it to be eye candy, and, although I enjoy the occasional eye candy, I will almost always choose story over it. Or, at least, something I think will have story. However, my buddies, all three of them, chose Pacific Rim, so I sighed and came to terms with the fact that giant brawling things have more appeal for the age group of my buddies (a bit more than a decade younger than me) than they do for me.

So we made plans for the opening weekend of PacRim. They would all converge to where I live for a Saturday showing, which is good with me, because, as the only married one of the group, it's a lot harder for me to get down to San Francisco than for them to get to where I live. BUT, the day before the release, my buddy at Lucas let me know that they were doing a showing down there since ILM had done the effects. We had a change of plans.

Here's the thing:
Special screenings of movies used to happen at Skywalker Ranch, which is somewhat north of San Francisco and easier to get to (and you don't have to deal with parking, which is always an issue in the city); however, the Ranch was not part of the sale to Disney, so screenings don't happen there anymore, because that's where Lucas lives. Well, it was always where Lucas lived, but... well, it's complicated, because Skywalker Sound is still at the Ranch, but... Anyway, the screening was going to be held in the screening room at the Presidio, where LucasFilm is housed. Let me just say that the screening room there is one of the finest theaters in the world, as you might imagine. And the screening was in 3D, which we hadn't known about ahead of time. When we go to movies, we don't do 3D; it's just inordinately expensive. So the 3D was like a special bonus.

But let's back up a moment:
The building with the theater in it at the Ranch is pretty cool. There are a lot of vintage movie posters and the theater is underground and it's the place where I saw George Lucas that one time. But, aside from the movie posters, that building isn't full of cool stuff. At least, not that I ever saw, and my buddy and I did get lost in it one time trying to leave a screening of something through one of the back exits. There were some shopping carts and a Darth Maul bicycle, but that was about it for "interesting items." Aside from the fact that building has a movie theater in it, it's pretty much like any office-type building.

Now, I've been to the offices at the Presidio before (for an event for the release of The Clone Wars movie and the following television series), but I'd never been inside any of the buildings except to see the special Clone Wars exhibit they had set up for that release, which, of course, is long gone. The only other thing I'd ever seen was the Yoda statue (so cool) in the courtyard. Yes, I need to get a picture of it. This screening of PacRim was my first time to really inside. And, initially, it seemed like it was the same kind of thing as at the Ranch. Just a lot of vintage movie posters. That's what I saw before the movie.

Oh, yeah, the movie! Visually, the movie was AMAZING! And, I'm sure, seeing it in one of the finest theaters (and 3D theaters) in the world didn't hurt it any. I mean, this movie is seriously impressive to look at, especially in 3D. There's a lot of holographic imaging involved in piloting the Jaegers (the giant robots), and it looks super cool in 3D since you're seeing it the way the characters are supposedly seeing it. It's certainly a movie that I'm glad I saw in the theater, because a television set just would not do justice to the Jaegers and the Kaijus (giant monsters) fighting amongst skyscrapers and, frequently, knocking them over.

So, in short, if you want to see a film with lots of action and fight scenes, especially involving giant combatants, this movie is for you. Seriously, I think it's safe to say that there will not be a better looking film this year.

But... you'll have to wait for part two for the rest.

In other news!
Today is the FREE! release of "Part Twenty-six: The Bitter Fruit"! Remember, if you want to read the whole Shadow Spinner right now and get the exclusive short story "Like An Axe Through Bone" by Bryan Pedas,

you can do that by clicking on the link.
However, if you're  invested in the serialization, here is a list of today's (Monday, July 22) FREE! parts:
"Part Twenty-six: The Bitter Fruit" (This one is also FREE! Tuesday, July 23)
"Part Twenty-five: The Light of Knowledge"
"Part Twenty-four: The Serpent"
"Part Twenty-three: The Harlot"
"Part Nineteen: Lost in the Garden"
"Part Eighteen: The Angel"
"Part Seventeen: The Tree of Light"
"Part Sixteen: The Dark Tree"
"Part Fifteen: Food of the Garden"
"Part Thirteen: The Clearing"
"Part Twelve: The Gash in the Floor"
"Part Eleven: The Kiss"
"Part Ten: The Broken Window"
"Part Nine: The Shadow of the Tree"
"Part Seven: The Moth and the Shadow"
"Part Six: The Man with No Eyes"
"Part Five: The Police Car"
"Part Four: The Cop"
"Part Three: The Bedroom"
So there you go: 19 of 26 parts available for FREE! Go! Tell your friends! Tell them to tell their friends!

Made for 3D

Over this past weekend, I had the opportunity to go down to Skywalker Ranch and see a screening of the new 3D release of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace. Before any of you say anything, I highly doubt that there is a single one of you out there that would have turned that down, no matter what you feel about The Phantom Menace. However, I happen to like the movie. Really like it. So, no, it's not my favorite of the Star Wars movies, but even the least of the Star Wars cannon is still Star Wars which puts it miles ahead of everything else. And, honestly, I love the movie. Even Jar Jar, as I've said before. [Scoff if you want, but I think if more of you were able to look at the movie based upon its own merits apart from your expectations, you'd see a different film. But more on that in a bit.]

It's been more than 12 years since I last saw this on the big screen, and it was so worth it to go see it again. And the 3D was AMAZING! Seriously. Of course, I saw it in Stag Theater on Skywalker Ranch, and, as the man said before the movie started, you won't see it anywhere else at a higher quality. I believe it. My children are not happy with me (because, unfortunately, I can't take them with me when I go down there for things like this).
And here's what makes it so awesome: there are no gratuitous 3D shots. I love the new Real 3D; however, I'm not always thrilled with the movies made in 3D. I hate those shots that have no real place in the movie, but the producers really wanted an over-the-top 3D shot for the trailer. It's annoying, to say the least. However, the Star Wars movies weren't made with 3D in mind, so there are none of those shots in the movie. I have to say, though, that Star Wars was just meant for 3D. I think that must be the way Lucas' mind works, because the movie was just incredible. AMAZING! I really don't care how you feel about Menace, you shouldn't let this opportunity to see it in 3D slip past you.
I also have a new respect for the lightsaber duel in Menace. The one from Empire has always been my favorite. It's just so classic in its style, and I love it. Just after that falls the duel at the end of Sith. However, the one from Menace may actually push it out of the #2 slot. After seeing it again on the big screen, I think it is the best example of what it must be like to be a Jedi involved in a lightsaber duel. Most of the credit there has to go to Ray Park. He made that duel.

On the question of gratuitousness (which wasn't really a question, but I'm making it one), this 3D stuff makes an excellent example of the pitfalls for writers in adding things in just because they're cool. Not that there's anything wrong with having cool things in your work, BUT. But sometimes it's out of place. Seeing Menace  in 3D, there is nothing out of place. There is amazing 3D, but nothing jumps out and pokes you in the eye and screams, "I'm here to show you how cool 3D is!" A long while back there was that Spy Kids movie done in 3D, and it's full of shots that are there just to highlight the 3D. Even Coraline, which is a great movie, has specific shots made just for the 3Dness of it.

I suppose what I'm saying is that you have to be really careful with this stuff. When the audience becomes aware that something was added in just to please them, the audience actually, usually, is displeased by it. Yes, the definition of irony. As a writer (for whatever medium), you can't be too overt with these things. Avatar, actually, is a good example of this. There are some shots in the movie that are there just to display the 3Dness of the movie (like the shot in the control room with all the holographic screens (and I can't wait to see the 3D holographic image of the Death Star in Jedi, by the way (and it's totally not gratuitous))), but they are melded into the film so flawlessly that you can barely tell. It seems natural. And it is even though it's shown the way it is just to be 3D. However, one might say that the whole prospect of re-doing Titanic in 3D is the very definition of gratuitousness.

There's a balance that must be maintained between the integrity of the story and giving the audience what it wants. Audiences are fickle in a lot of ways, and, if you give them too much of what they want, they no longer like it. Sort of like allowing kids to gorge on sugar until they're sick.

Which brings me to my next point: audience expectation.

The Phantom Menace disdains audience expectation. People wanted another A New Hope. Maybe, they wouldn't say it that way, but that's what they were looking for. They wanted to relive that experience of seeing Star Wars for the very first time as a kid. And, most of all (I think), they wanted Han Solo. But you know what? Lucas already made that movie. It was called A New Hope. Why make it again? He's said as much in interviews, and I agree with him. He can never make that movie again no matter how hard he tries because the adults, now, that experienced that movie for the very first time back in the 70s can never relive that experience again. You can't go back to being a kid and have that joy and awe that you had when you first saw Star Wars.

So this is another fine line to walk. Although, I agree with Lucas in that he made the movie that he wanted to make (except not exactly, because Qui-Gon was added in because they couldn't do with Yoda, yet, what they wanted to do with him, and Lucas knew that the puppet Yoda could never perform a believable lightsaber duel), he may have gone too far the other direction. That's a hard one to call. And, see, I'm actually on the side of Lucas. My kids love all of the movies, and my kids love Jar Jar. In fact, I don't know of any kids that didn't love Jar Jar. And I think that's great, and I think the problem lies within the adults if they can't get past the fact that Jar Jar is in the movies. [I'm sorry. Remember back to when you first saw Star Wars and take into account how old you were. Now, put yourself at that age in front of Menace and tell me (honestly) that you wouldn't have loved it.]

That doesn't change the fact that Lucas failed to meet the expectations of the greatest proportion of his audience, and his audience has been roasting him for it ever since. As an author, what should you do? Should you strive to meet audience expectation? I'd say no, because it doesn't matter how hard you try, you'll never achieve that goal. Of course, that's me, the author, talking. Most people that are just audience would say, "yes, meet my expectations! Throw in gratuitous 3D shots to show me how cool everything is!" And, then, they wouldn't like it anyway. So, really, it's a no-win situation, and I don't have any good answers.

Well, that's not true, I think we, as the audience, have to learn to accept things as what they are and quit demanding that story tellers write our stories for us. If you feel so strongly about how a story should be written, go write it yourself. I guarantee it will change your perspective.

Other short reviews (because I won't have time to give these the attention they deserve):

Real Steel
I highly enjoyed this movie. Hugh Jackman was great. When is he not great? The kids was a bit to precocious (beyond his years), but it was a good exchange the two had going. The robots were cool. You can boil it down and say this was Rocky with robots, and, in many ways, it was, but the dynamic of the father/son relationship makes it worth watching.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Great movie. Seriously. I can't even begin to explore this in the time I have to do so, so you'll just have to see it. James Franco was great as was John Lithgow. Of course, it was Caesar that stole the show and Serkis certainly deserves some kind of recognition for his performance. I think they did a fabulous job of going back and setting the stage for the old Apes movies, and it made me want to go back and watch them all again (I haven't seen them since I was a kid). I think I'll be doing that, in fact.

Other News:
"The Evil That Men Do" is almost finished. Well, it is finished; I just have to finish with the formatting and the notes. I'm hoping to have it ready for Thursday but, certainly, by the end of the week.

Nostalgia vs the Transformers (pt 2): Dark of the Moon

Transformers: Dark of the Moon is a spectacular movie. I mean that literally. It is full of spectacle. And it's more than worth the price of the 3D admission because of it. Say what you want about Michael Bay and his talent (or lack thereof), but he knows how to make a visually stunning movie. And, you know, I think there might not be anything wrong with that. Let me give you an example:

1998 saw the release of two movies in which Earth would face destruction: Deep Impact and Armageddon. Deep Impact focuses on relationships in the face of tragedy. Armageddon is directed by Bay. My preference, by far, is Deep Impact. It has more story (and scientific accuracy). Wait, let me rephrase that. The story of Impact is about the people, the relationships, and what they do when faced with a catastrophic event. The impending catastrophe could have been anything, really; it's just that it happens to be a comet. Armageddon is about the catastrophe itself, dealing with the thing that is the catastrophic event. It's full of spectacle. One is a drama, one is an action movie. I've known more than a few people who cited Armageddon as their favorite movie ever at one time or another, and the film grossed more than half a billion dollars, 200 million more than Impact. People, for good or ill, like spectacle.

These two movies took the same story (literally, since Disney copied the story of Impact and initiated Armageddon as a counter film), but Bay was able to realize the story's potential for dazzlement, drama (not in  the sense of being a drama but of capitalizing on the drama of the event), and sheer Wowness and make the higher grossing film. I'm not saying he made a better film, certainly not a better story, but he made the more appealing one. There is talent in that. Probably a lot of talent.

At any rate, Dark of the Moon, like Revenge of the Fallen, has taken a critical bashing. However, it has grossed more internationally than Transformers 2 (it already has the highest gross of the the three Transformers movies and isn't finished, yet) and may pass it domestically, also. All of that to say, despite what is probably a weak story, people like it. And the critics hate, and I do mean hate, Bay for it.

Here's the thing, my wife and I are extremely hard on sci-fi shows. We routinely scoff at them and make fun of them. Even shows we like. Like Stargate. We watched a whole season of Warehouse 13, groaning and making fun of it the whole time. I watch Eureka with my kids while rolling my eyes at the ridiculous plots and bad science. And don't even get me started on Star Trek (I have just two words: red matter). And yet... and yet... I give Transformers a pass on all of this. Why? Because I loved it as a kid. There it is: nostalgia at work. I don't care if it has bad science.

The story for Dark of the Moon, when looked at objectively, is... I don't even have words for it. The idea of transporting a planet across the galaxy through a man made, well, robot made wormhole... Let's just say it more than stretches the fabric of science. Or even science fiction. But you know what? That was the plot for one of the early story arcs in  the cartoon back before I bothered to question that sort of thing, so my reaction is more "wow! I remember that!" rather than "wow! That's so stupid!" And I can't help it. Oh, and the thing with the Autobots going up in  the rocket and faking their deaths... that's from the cartoon, too.

All of that to say that the critics can bash the movie all they want, it's not going to change anything. They should have spent more time watching Transformers when they were kids. Or something. Maybe they need lessons in the suspension of disbelief. I guess what I'm saying is this:
I'm not a bandwagon kind of guy. Not by any stretch of the imagination. I'm cynical (just ask my wife). I'm critical (my wife would say overly critical). I'm suspicious, especially of things that are popular. However, I'm also not going to bash something or forsake it merely for being popular. [I have a cousin who did that with U2 back when The Joshua Tree came out. Although he had loved them prior to that, because they were suddenly the popular band, he decided he couldn't like them anymore. Because other people did.] Mostly, I just make my own decisions about what I like, and I'm not going to allow what other people think about it influence me one way or the other.

So, yeah, I had a lot of fun with Transformers: Dark of the Moon.

However...

Say what you will about Megan Fox, Bay shouldn't have dumped her. Or, at least, if he really  had to dump her, he should have found a better replacement. It's not like Megan set the bar very high. Yeah, she's attractive, but attractive actresses in Hollywood are a dime a dozen. Shake a tree, and they'll fall out on your head. What I'm saying is if all he wanted was attractive or hot or whatever, he could have done a better job, because the new girl is not Megan Fox. And! And! Here's the real issue: the new girl makes Megan look like Meryl Streep in the acting department. That's saying something... I'm not sure what, exactly, it's saying, but it is. Not Megan Fox was easily the worst part of the movie.

Megatron looked cool in a tattered cloak. Yeah, a giant robot wearing a tattered cloak is kind of dumb, but it looked cool!

I liked Patrick Dempsey. I thought he did a great job in that role.

And, of course, Shia. I think he's a good actor; I just wish he didn't think so highly of himself. But this is about the movie, not about him as a person.

I love John Turturro and how he brings off the crazy, conspiracy theory persona.

Oh, and John Malkovich, whom I always want to like but often can't, was great.

I suppose, in the end, what I can say is this: If you like the Transformers, there's a good chance you'll like this movie. Especially, if they are something out of your childhood. If you like lots of action and don't really care about whether the story makes any sense, you should like this movie. However, if Transformers mean nothing to you and story is the most important element of your movie-going experience, you'll probably want to stay away.

And just to add as a disclaimer:
I'm not a Bay fan, no matter how this sounds. I didn't care for Armageddon. The Island sucked. I've never been a fan of Bad Boys even though I really like Will Smith (he just wasn't enough to make those movies work for me). However, I do think he has a certain amount of talent. Or a certain kind of talent. Certainly a talent for making big, blockbuster movies. And I could tell you stories, weird stories, about him from being at Skywalker Ranch, but I'm not going to go there, right now. I do like what he's done with the Transformers, though. I'm already looking forward to the next one.