The Last Jedi (a movie review?)

Yeah, the question mark up there is legit. I think this is going to be less a review about the movie and more about a review of Rian Johnson, who thinks he is way more clever than he actually is.
But there will still be spoilers.

But let's get the most obvious question out of the way: Did I enjoy the movie?
Well, yes, yes of course, I did. It was, after all, Star Wars, and it did, as Leia would say of Han, have its moments.

But it also had its moments.
Like why are all of the resistance ships running out of fuel at the exact same moment. That this is a question that I was having during my first viewing of the movie is wrong on so many levels. I mean, when did fuel become a thing? Luke hyperspaces all over the galaxy in his x-wing during The Empire Strikes Back, and there's never a mention or need for fuel, which is good since Dagobah would have been a lousy place to find a gas station. And Han flies the Falcon between star systems without a need for fuel. And I'm not even going to touch the idea that the fuel consumption rates on all of the Resistance ships would have had to have been basically the same no matter the size of the ship (WTF!) for them all to be needling empty at the same time.
Clearly this was a plot contrivance by Johnson, who seems to believe that stupid ideas are justified if they provide for "cool" moments. To be fair, this is also a problem Abrams has.

So was all the dumb of this "chase" scene worth the moment when Holdo hyperspaces the Resistance command ship into Snoke's star destroyer? I don't really know. That was a cool moment, but my thoughts leading up to it revolved around: This is so dumb. And it was kind of painful to watch all of that the second time. Not the hyperspace moment -- that was still cool -- but all of the chase leading up to it.

I also think it's a little weird how Poe is kind of constantly running up to people and greeting them with extreme enthusiasm, "Hey, Buddy!"

And I could go on, bit by bit, with the things that poke at me, but let's just not do that. I'll sum it up this way:
There are no moments like that whole fuel thing in the original trilogy. There's no point where I stop and think, "Wait a minute... That's kinda dumb." The thing most like that is the dianoga in the trash compactor, but there are legitimate explanations for that, so I have to shrug it off. You can't shrug off the fuel thing, not after eight other movies have failed to mention a need for fuel and, not just not mentioned it, demonstrated a distinct lack of that need.

That's just an example of the kind of thing Rian Johnson must feel is clever but really just isn't.

However, that's not the thing that bother me most. None of the logic problems that Johnson introduced are the things that bother me most. No, what bothers me most is Johnson's lack of respect for the story. Not the Star Wars story but story in general.
Here's the thing:

In the movie, Kylo "reveals" to Rey that she's a nobody. No one from nowhere. And that would be fine if... It would be fine if it was the truth. It would be fine if it was Kylo lying to Rey to get her to join him. It would be fine if Kylo was just wrong, that he read things the wrong way. It would be fine if there was a story reason for Kylo to tell Rey that. But... there's not.
And Rian Johnson doesn't have any say in the matter.

In a recent interview Johnson revealed that the only reason, the ONLY reason, he had Kylo say that is that he believed it was the thing that would most piss off the audience. He wanted to get a rise out of them. This puts him on par with George RR Martin in my book. "I want to piss off my audience because it's fun so I'm going to kill this character they all love." He further revealed that Abrams is the one who has final say in who Rey really is and nothing he wrote about it actually matters. Sure, maybe Abrams will decide to go with it, but Abrams isn't bound by anything that Johnson did. I suppose that includes the death of Snoke (another stupid moment, cool or not).

Which reveals the further problem of no one being in charge of these things. There's no controlling vision. You can say what you want about Lucas and the prequels or whatever, but, logically and plot-wise, all of his movies work together. He knew what he was doing and had a vision for getting there. The new movies, despite being completely entertaining, are beginning to feel piecemeal... because they are. This is something that Disney needs to get a grip on before the franchise begins to drift apart. They need to actually take a good look at what Marvel has done in keeping all of their movies moving forward within a unified vision.

I suppose I feel about the whole thing the way Mark Hamill put it when he said he didn't agree with any of the choices Johnson had Luke make but, after all, it's just a movie. That and, despite the enjoyment factor of Force Awakens and Last Jedi, I would much rather have seen what Lucas had intended to do with these than watch clashing egos slowly erode the franchise.

Clone Wars -- "Sacrifice" (Ep. 6.13)

-- Facing all that you fear will free you from yourself.

[Hop over to The Armchair Squid for his take on this, the LAST, episode.]

A bit of foreshadowing for your final episode? Yes, please.
This, the final released episode of The Clone Wars, doesn't exactly have what one would call "closure." In fact, it might ask more questions than any other Star Wars anything. Maybe, it's hard to tell. And there will be spoilers here so, if you think you might possibly watch this episode, you should stop reading now.

First, Darth Bane. That's really all I'm going to say about that since I'm only bringing him up because Mark Hamill voiced him.

Then all the other stuff...

Yoda is faced with one of those "would you kill Hitler as a baby" kind of questions, except it's not Hitler, it's Anakin. During a confrontation with Darth Sidious, Sidious tells Yoda he can spare the galaxy from what it's going to face if he will just allow Anakin to die. Of course, it would be Yoda's first step onto the path of the Dark Side to do so... I want to leave it at that, but I'm sure you all know which way that went since we already know Yoda didn't go to the Dark Side, and we all know that Sidious and Vader conquered the galaxy.

During the episode, Yoda is told, "There is another Skywalker." Now, here's the thing: The Clone Wars is canon. That means it's Star Wars fact. Which begs the question: What does that mean, there's another Skywalker. Is it a glimpse of  the future when Yoda will tell that to Luke and it will mean something real? Does it mean there will be another Skywalker and that it's referring to Luke? Or does it mean there is another Skywalker at that very moment? In which case, is it referring to Padme or to some other unknown Skywalker?

We don't get an answer!

And with the series cancelled... Well, this episode in particular makes me wish Clone Wars had kept going. As I've said before, Rebels just isn't the same.

With that, I would say that this two-parter is definitely top five for story arcs. One of the top four, actually.


"We have failed to break Master Yoda."

The Legacy of Tron

Greetings, Programs...

It doesn't always take great writing to make a great film. Of course, I'm sure there are many out there that would argue that Tron is not a great film. I don't feel like debating the definition of greatness, at the moment, though, so I'm just going to say that based upon it's cultural impact and cult status, it's a great film. After all, how many movies get an actual sequel after almost 30 years. Not a re-boot. Not a re-make. An honest to goodness sequel. It's almost a singular achievement (it may be a singular achievement, for all I know).

Tron is the movie that opened the door to computer generated special effects. In fact, John Lasseter has said that without Tron there would have been no Toy Story as it was Tron that opened his eyes to the potential of computer animation. Despite that, Tron contains far less computer generated material than most people might suspect, but what was there was completely new, much of which was never used again due to the costs involved. Interestingly enough, Tron was not even nominated for a special effects Oscar possibly because of the use of computers, which was considered "cheating" by many in the Academy, at the time.

The story of Tron is fairly straightforward and ironically appropriate for Disney. The conflict revolves around a corporation (Encom) taking advantage of the little guy (Kevin Flynn) by stealing his work and the little guy trying to prove the work is actually his. Even at 12, when the movie came out, I knew that the story was just the vehicle to get Flynn into the "digital" world of the computer so they could show off their stuff. Still, it's a solid plot even if it's not original. We still seem to be having issues with that aspect of corporate greed in America, so I can't say it's not a story that needs to be told anymore. They may have done better to have centered Tron: Legacy on that same type of story since it opens with those same overtones, but Disney isn't brave enough to do that story again, or, perhaps, realizes it's a message that strikes at the heart of their business model, so they abandon it as soon as the younger Flynn enters The Grid.

There is, however, one bit of story genius that I was struck with at the time, and it has always stayed with me. This one thing made the movie for me, made it great in my mind, as it completely fascinated me at 12. I thought it was SO cool, and, yet, most people miss it entirely (along with the significance of it within the confines of the story), and some have even argued that it didn't happen that way at all. The key to the weight of the story of Tron is getting Flynn into the digital world himself. Flynn is our connection, the eyes that allow us to see this digital world as real. But they have to get him inside the computer. Utilizing another emerging technology (lasers), they have him zapped by a laser that is being developed as a quantum teleportation device. Early in the movie, we get to witness this laser being tested on an orange. The process only takes a few seconds. Zap target with laser. Digitize target. Reintegrate target. The implication, then, is that Flynn's sojourn in the digital world happens within this span of a few seconds.  [They support this idea in the sequel by quantifying the time discrepancy, although I'm not remembering the ratio, right off the top of my head.] It was a fabulous notion.

Still, it took time for Tron to really grow on me. And repeated exposure to the video games. There was, of course, the Tron arcade game, which made more money than the movie. We owned it for our Atari. Although I liked the game, it was never one of my favorites. However, Discs of Tron... that one, I loved. It was more than just a joystick game. None of my friends liked it because it was "too hard," and, indeed, it was one of the most complex games around. For years. But I loved it. Except for one thing, it wasn't just a quarter to play it. I don't remember what the actual cost was, but I remember being constantly put off by the fact that it cost so much. However, when I was in college, they put a Discs of Tron in the student center (at the one quarter/play cost) during my freshman year, and I ruled that game. Literally. Not only did I have the high score, but no one could beat me at head-to-head play, either. I was extremely sad when they removed the game at the beginning of my sophomore year. For that game alone, Tron holds a special place of nostalgia in my heart.

And, then, there's Jeff Bridges. Between Harrison Ford and Mark Hamill, Bridges had a lot of competition back when I was 12, but I noticed him, which is saying a lot. I noticed him more with Starman in 1984, but it was Tucker: The Man and His Dream that really convinced me of how great an actor he is. I spent my 20s telling people that he was the most underrated actor in Hollywood, and I wasn't wrong. It's great that he's now getting the recognition that he's deserved for so long. The fact that he has been so instrumental in the return of Tron says a lot both for whom he is and the film. The legacy of Tron.

My boys were immediately excited when they heard there was going to be a sequel (to the original), and the initial trailers for it sent them both into a frenzy of excitement over it. It's hard to fault them for that. The trailers were nearly as visually stunning as the movie. And it was. Visually stunning. The film is worth seeing just as a visual masterpiece, and it was... well, it was spectacular in 3D. It's true that the plot is a bit more contrived and, therefore, weaker than the plot for the original, but, again, the story is really only there as a vehicle to display the digital landscape they've created. I will say, though, that it's only upon reflection that the holes in the story become apparent. Bridges' talent is enough to make everything believable, and Garrett Hedlund, who plays Flynn's son, is more than adequate in supporting him. Truthfully, the film is dazzling enough just on its own that it's hard to contemplate any weaknesses while watching it. At least on  the big screen.

A new Tron trilogy is supposedly in the works. At any rate, there should be a Disney television series next year and, at least, one movie sequel. Assuming that Bridges is now out of the equation (although I don't know that I believe that he's gone for good), I hope they actually write a really compelling story. It would be a shame for this to become another fiasco like The Matrix. It could. There is some promise, though, in that Disney is planning ahead on this instead of just having the "oh, this made buckets of money,  let's make another" reaction. I have to say that I'm very curious to see where Tron takes us next. I only wish it could take us there on our very own light cycles.

end of line

The Middleman and the History of Television

Okay, so I'm not really going to give you the history of television. I mean, how boring, right? Actually, I'm not sure if that would be boring or not seeing as how I know absolutely nothing about the history of that most predominant of items in homes. Did you know that on average there are more television sets per household than there are people? How scary is that? And that doesn't include computers which can serve a similar function. It's no wonder, though, that what we watch, how much we watch, has such a huge influence on the way we write. But that's another story.

TV wasn't a huge thing for me when I was kid. Except on Saturday mornings. I wouldn't do anything without my Saturday morning cartoons.The rest of the time, I was more interested in playing. And by playing, I mean playing outside. TV was only for when there was absolutely nothing else to do. The problem was that, as I got older, the times when there was nothing to do became more and more frequent. By the time I was in middle school, I ruled the television set from the time I got home until the news came on at 10. That was my cue to shuffle off to bed and read for a couple or few hours.

All of that changed my freshman year of high school. There's a story that goes with that (I have stories that go with pretty darn near everything), but, near the end of my freshman year, I discovered there was life outside of TV, and I gave it up. Not that I made any kind of declaration, "I'm giving up TV!" or anything like that, but I just lost interest in it, and I've never gone back. Which is not to say that I never watched TV again, but it's never dictated my schedule to me again. There was a period during college when my best friend and I were addicted to Stand Up Stand UP, Whose Line Is It Anyway? and a couple of other shows like that on the newly formed The Comedy Channel (yes, it wasn't Comedy Central, yet, in those days) which was difficult because neither of us had a TV, at the time, so we snatched viewings at my parents' house (a couple of times a week when we were there) or wherever we could.

You have to remember, this was before DVDs and the wide proliferation of TV shows available for purchase. If you wanted to watch something, you pretty much had to be there at the designated time slot on  the designated day. Or, you know, know how to program a VCR for which you had to take advanced courses in college to be able to do. Fortunately, at the time, I invested in those courses. Which are totally useless today. At any rate, it took an extra effort for any show to catch my eye in the first place, and it had to be pretty spectacular for me to bother myself with recording it. Like I said, I no longer bent to the whims of television schedules.

I bet you're wondering what kind of shows I would go out of my way to record, aren't you? I bet you're thinking that if I would go to such lengths as to program the VCR to record them that they must have been pretty spectacular. Are you getting your pad of paper and a pen to make notes about the incredibly sophisticated and deep viewing I'm about to lay out before you? Are you ready for it? The list isn't very long. In fact, there are only three shows that ever demanded such loyalty from me. Are you ready? They're Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman (which I misplaced my dedication to after the second season), The Flash, and Animaniacs. Yes, I'm serious. Best cartoon ever. EVER!

The Flash was the first series that I loved that just didn't make it however much it deserved to. But a higher profile show keep using up all its blue screen time and forced delay after delay upon it so that it couldn't maintain its viewers because new episodes came out only about once every three weeks. However, Mark Hamill's two episodes as the Trickster are incredible, and it's unfortunate that the show couldn't sustain an audience.

Eventually, I moved out to CA and got married. At this point, my wife and I actually did make a premeditated decision that we weren't going to have TV in our house. It's one of those things that, if it's available, it's hard to control. It starts with just one show. I had avoided watching TV up to that point by never being home (or shut up in my room painting), but you can't really run a marriage that way, so we chose no TV.

For a long time, that really meant no TV. At all. The television set was, basically, a miniature movie screen in our house, because that's all it was ever used for. Later, there was the DVD player, and, later still, Buffy. And that's how we watch television. We hear that something is really good, so we decide we'll try it out. That's extremely easy to do these days with Netflix

My wife and I don't have enough shows to keep us viewing all year long (or even most of the year long), so, between DVD releases of the shows we follow, we try out new things. One of the disappointing things we've learned is that we tend toward shows that, for whatever reason, didn't make it. Like The Flash. And Deadwood (which may be my wife's favorite show ever). Firefly. The one we just discovered, and we knew it had been cancelled before we watched any of it, is The Middleman.

I don't have a good way of describing The Middleman in any concise sort of way. Yeah, I hear you thinking. Why would I bother with concise? When am I ever concise? Maybe, one of these days, I'll explore the genius of Kevin Smith, and, then, you will understand. Or, probably, not. Yes, I've always been this way.
Anyway...

The Middleman is about this super hero guy called the Middleman and his Middleman in training, who happens to be female. They work for an organization they refer to as O2STK (Organization Too Secret To Know), and that's just the tip of the awesome that is this show. The fact that the villains are continually saying, "My plan is sheer elegance in its simplicity," as they monologue about their convoluted schemes to take over the world (or destroy it) is frosting goodness.

It's a tongue-in-cheek look at pop culture that pokes fun at it while simultaneously celebrating it. The far too few episodes tend to revolve around a specific theme and are full of references to the pop culture landmarks that inspired them. However, don't mistake my praise for the show as being any kind of suggestion that you should rush out and watch it. In all likelihood, you shouldn't. By the second episode, I was fully aware of why Middleman got cancelled.

It's not that it's too intelligent for the average viewer, although it is. Despite it's campy appearance (yes, it does wear camp clothes, dressing itself up to resemble the Batman series of the 60s with such things as the Middlemobile), it is, in many ways, too sophisticated for the average viewer. If you can't catch the subtleties, you'll just think it's silly. To make matters worse, if you're not pretty well grounded in your pop culture lore, the vast majority of the jokes will go right over your head. There's nothing worse than a joke you don't get in a show meant to be funny. And, if it's meant to be funny, and you're only getting every 3rd or 4th joke, you tend to, well, think it's not funny. It's like being the person in the room staring at Monty Python and the Holy Grail with a glazed expression while everyone else laughs uncontrollably.

So... it's not a show I can actually recommend, but I liked it so much, I needed to write about it. The sad part is that it did have some really interesting sub-plots developing, and we'll never know what was to come of them. The only real reason I could suggest watching it is if you really wanted to know how off center I am. Either you'd get the show, and say "oh, wow, this is great," in which case you would be revealed to be off center, too, or you'd make the yuck face and think (or, maybe, even say out loud), "He likes this? What's wrong with him?"

Of course, Middleman did get a fairly good critical reaction. Like Arrested Development. But, when everything comes down to how much money it can generate, the bits on either end of the bell curve (the great and the horrible) become indistinguishable to the profit gurus. Which is just too bad, because everything becomes the same old bland mass market crap. Whit rice, white bread, and white TV. Read anything you want into that statement. I'm sure you won't be wrong.