Mind-walk with me: dérive in Pacific Rim

Recently I've been reading a book about walking--not an exercise manual but a general collection of thoughts on the literature, science, history, and psychology of walking. At one point the author, Geoff Nicholson, attends a conference of psychogeographers in New York City and talks a bit about the origins of the movement (har har). Before beginning this particular book I was familiar with the tenets of psychogeography, being someone who walks a lot in certain cities, but I haven't read any of Guy Debord's foundational works on the topic. Nicholson quotes from "Theory of the Dérive" the following passage:

One can dérive alone, but all indications are that the most fruitful numerical arrangement consists of several small groups of two or three people who have reached the same level of awareness, since cross-checking these different groups’ impressions makes it possible to arrive at more objective conclusions.

Given this, and the fact that "dérive" translates directly into "drift," what else was I to do but conclude that the concepts of the drift and drift-compatibility in Pacific Rim derive from Debord's theory? Of course I have no idea whether this is accurate, whether Guillermo del Toro is familiar with Debord's writing and used it in his own, but the similarities are there. What is drifting in the film if not walking: in another's consciousness and memories, in your own, in the bulk of a jaeger, in tandem with another individual to whom you are closely attuned, or in the case of the Wei triplets, another two individuals? 

(the Becket brothers)

The necessary core of drift-compatibility is that the "same level of awareness" has been reached by all parties concerned. A jaeger can't be piloted alone. Debord indicated that it was preferable for groups bent on dérive to change line-up each time, and this is where the two media diverge, as Pacific Rim emphasizes that although a jaeger pilot can be drift-compatible with multiple other pilots (as in the case of Raleigh and Yancy, and then Raleigh and Mako), when you've found a person to drift with, they're your co-pilot until things go belly up. The larger goal of this drifting is different from Debord's--the hip young things of the dérive are interested in viewing the concrete in new patterns and fractured ways, while the jaeger pilots of the drift have to take broken images and tender memories and build them into a cohesive whole. But the ultimate goal of dérive and drifting is to step out, to tread familiar paths made new by trust and heightened awareness.

(Mako and Raleigh)

Copilots

In case you hadn't heard, Pacific Rim is basically the greatest action film ever made. There's nothing I can say about it that hasn't already been said, so have a few on the topic that I've particularly enjoyed:

1. Pacific Rim, Raleigh, and Emotional Intelligence
2. Is Mako Mori a Feminist Hero?
3. my bud Nathan's review
4. Simple Does Not Equal Dumb
5. Beyond the Smashing
6. in case you needed convincing
7. Still not convinced?

(Mako will wait while you go buy your tickets)

Give them a reason to stay

Every two years the part of my soul that is a ride-or-die Fast and the Furious fangirl comes screaming to the surface like a sappy, excitable bear just out of hibernation. Now is that season, folks, since the latest installment--Fast & Furious 6--arrived in theaters last Friday. Did I see it opening day? Why yes I did. Was I sorry to not be able to see it with my Vin Diesel-obsessive mother-in-law? Yes, I was. Was it still awesome? Fuck yeah. See, despite not giving a shit about cars or even owning one, man do I enjoy watching hot people drive stick. I also like action movies where people hug a lot, Vin Diesel, action movies that make bank despite having only one white dude in them, Sung Kang, action movies that are set in places other than New York City and Los Angeles, Gal Gadot, and oh yeah, the Rock. And surprise!Gina Carano (whose acting is improving). And Michelle Rodriguez coming back to life, as her characters tend to do. And emotionally rewarding death scenes. And big-budget franchises with unexpected timelines, long-term plot goals, and mytharcs that boil down to "family is important; take care of yours."

(nine people on a movie poster and only one of them is white??!)

Yes, there are loud, fast machines. Yes, there are scantily-clad women...and men. Yes, there is a lack of non-heterosexual relationships. But when you stack Fast 6 against, say, other recent smash-hit action flicks, guess who comes out on top? The FatF series has, from the get-go, valued portraying people of color in a variety of relationships with one another. Women's relationships are given screen time and their characterizations are well-defined; Mia is not the same as Letty, who differs greatly from Elena, who is not a carbon copy of Gisele, who is not anything like Riley (except in terms of kickassery). You could expect a fight scene between Carano and Rodriguez to be half-dressed and hair-pulling, and you would be wrong; you could expect Elena and Letty to fight over Dom, and you would be wrong again.  Men's relationships, from the top-billed Diesel and Walker to Tyrese and the flawless Sung Kang, are also given screen time, significance, and depth, and director Justin Lin doesn't want you to forget that each film that came before--and the one that comes chronologically after--is important to character development. The attention to detail and relationships creates a film that feels like a real ensemble piece, with each character and their weight of history fitting into the puzzle. 

(my beautiful doomed OTP)

This is not to say that FatF is the be-all end-all of modern filmmaking, deserving of accolades, awards, and a place in the Criterion Collection. At its best, it's good action fun--but the action genre is a massive beast of moneymaking for Hollywood, and why should I bother with ridiculous Bay films when Lin and company have shown us that it's possible to make fun sexy blow-em-up flicks with a core of actual substance? A globally successful franchise, based around and respectful of a diverse cast, is worth talking about and supporting.

I don't ask much of my audience

But I am asking you to back this Kickstarter, because LORD IN HEAVEN I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR THE VERONICA MARS MOVIE FOR MY ENTIRE ADULT LIFE.

Edit: welp, the Kickstarter reached two million last night and has been going strong since. I guess the VM fans finally got our wish.

To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield

I saw Skyfall last night. Sam Mendes managed to do something lovely and tricky with this movie: he made a Bond film that is both homage and deconstruction. Over the course of two and a half hours, Daniel Craig, Naomie Harris, Ralph Fiennes, Ben Whishaw, Javier Bardem, and Judi Dench examine what it means to be James Bond in the 21st century--where "James Bond" is a metonym for Great Britain itself. This goal appears as a running theme of old Britain and new meeting, occasionally clashing, as when MI6 is forced to relocate to a WWII bunker, M quotes Tennyson to MPs, and Bond and Q meet up in front of The Fighting Temeraire (yes, I squealed). Bond's own past becomes the contingency plan as he and M travel to Skyfall, his ancestral home in Scotland, to outsmart Silva (Javier Bardem as one of the most effective Bond villains in some time), pulling a Home Alone-style series of boobytraps that somehow fit seamlessly with the helicopters and motorcycle chase scenes elsewhere in the film. There's a glimmer of self-awareness, of acknowledgment between Bond and M of how she has taken advantage of him for Queen and country, and how he will continue to allow himself to be weaponized. Skyfall also references the history of Bond movies--an ejection seat in the Aston Martin, Q's quip about exploding pens, the return of Moneypenny and the positioning of M as the film's chief Bond Girl--while settling the story and characters firmly in their own time with a cyberterrorist plot and high-tech guns.

(every film needs a charming nerd these days)

The question posed by Skyfall is whether Bond (and by extension MI6 as it is run by M, and further the United Kingdom as a political entity) is still the go-to in terms of national security. Is he fit, active, flexible, deadly? Is he still capable of competing? Or is he the warship hauled in for breakdown? As far as this query goes, the film is a success, reassuring everyone that the British stiff upper lip will prevail when backed up by big guns; in other realms, it's a bit more opaque. The devastating and underutilized Berenice Marlohe, whose character is a former sex worker indentured to Silva, is killed off with possibly even less fanfare than Caterina Murino in Casino Royale, and M dies as well, to be replaced by...Ralph Fiennes, not Helen McCrory for reasons I cannot fathom. Because there must always be a Moneypenny at the desk, Naomie Harris quits the fieldwork and starts shuffling papers--truly  I am torn in this regard, because as Moneypenny, there's a good bet that Harris will show up in at least one more film, but her sparkle and wit and savvy could be used to such greater effect. Then there's Silva himself, a perhaps queer man with vast mommy issues as the film's villain; Bardem is good enough an actor to bring some of the hallowed Bond-villain camp, but it sometimes skates close to Evil Gay ground (though it isn't clear if Silva is actually gay or bisexual, or if he is just willing to use every tool at his disposal, and at any rate, Bond is unmoved by Silva's advances--which may be the entire point). As the inverse of Bond, Silva, his machinations, and his relationships are intriguing, to the point where it becomes difficult to discern if Mendes has given us a straightfaced Bond movie or is trying to tell us something about the way he views the genre (and it is a genre by now). Everything about Silva is taken to the limit: he uses women literally to the point of death, he plays with bottles of fine Scotch as props, he wields sex as a weapon. So what does that say about James Bond?

The continuing travails of a Star Wars fan

As you may have heard yesterday, Lucasfilm is being sold to Disney for $4 billion. George Lucas will be a "creative consultant" but otherwise plans to retire.

Now.

After the initial shock, I have decided that this may not be the end of the world. My only real side-eye goes to Disney's apparent plan to release a new Star Wars film "every two to three years" because really? Really? I feel like that may be reconsidered once the new projects get off the ground. However, all told, I like Disney (with caveats) and the thought of someone besides Lucas making films for my favorite franchise is not a bad thing. I do have many questions: will Marvel start publishing Star Wars comics now, rather than Dark Horse? Will someone try to shoehorn Harrison Ford, Curmudgeon Extraordinaire into playing Han Solo one more time? Will Disney World finally get an all-SW theme park? Will the first three new films utilize Expanded Universe canon or will they be totally original efforts? Most importantly, will there be Mara Jade??

That last query leads me to the real point of this post. As I see it, the Star Wars franchise coming under Disney's control opens up the universe to...really anyone whom Disney sees fit to write or direct a movie. Some of Disney's live-action films have been really great (The Princess Diaries, Remember the Titans, The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, The Muppets, and of course The Avengers come to mind), and I would love to see something stellar come out under the Star Wars banner. Given the wealth of sudden new directions and opportunities for Star Wars, what would I want from a new Star Wars movie? Well--it's not like it would ever happen, but I'd kill for a Mara Jade movie set before the events of the Zahn novels, a nice pulpy shoot-out directed by Tarantino and starring Bridget Regan that sneakily calls to events taking place in the Empire as Mara serves as the Emperor's Hand, but never quite Goes There. A hack/slash Rodriguez flick about the Nightsisters would be fun. A taut political thriller by Bigelow about the second Galactic Civil War would not be unwelcome. And I'd watch a creepy, beautiful travelogue of the known universe directed by del Toro in a heartbeat.

Probably none of these will happen. Probably Disney will hand the reins to one of the directors that immediately came to my mind as people I didn't want around the SW franchise (Abrams, Whedon, Jackson, or--heaven forfend--Bay). But that is the chief blessing and curse of the Star Wars fan: there is always room to hope. Right now, my hopes are high. Please don't dash them too badly, Disney.

Male-pattern badness

So I went to see The Expendables 2 for my birthday, as one does (surely you all recall how I feel about The Expendables). Possibly even more exciting than the most homoerotic fight scene ever filmed outside of gay porn is the inkling that an all-ladies Expendables movie might possibly happen. 

I KNOW you all can tell how I would feel about that. Of course I have some suggestions as to who should be involved in such a venture: Maggie Q, Michelle Rodriguez, Gina Carano, Milla Jovovich, Gina Torres, Zoe Saldana, the flawless Lucy Liu, and of course a cameo by Pam Grier, to name just a few. If I can't get my Birds of Prey film or All DC Ladies All The Time miniseries, I'll settle for a gynocentric Expendables venture.

Ok, back to the really gay fight scene. I canNOT, dear readers. See, the best thing about this sequel is that Jean Claude Van Damme is in it--playing the baddie, no less, sleek Eurotrash in sunglasses who's trying to sell plutonium to...whoever wants it. His name, obviously, is Vilain. So inevitably he and Sly Stallone's main bad-mother-do-gooder have to mix it up, and though there could have been more actual fighting in their Thunderdome showdown, the lines spoken make up for it. "I'll man you up," Sly snarls. "You must really want to hurt me," JCVD hisses back. "Taste good?" Sly grits as blood drips from JCVD's jaw.

I mean really. This scene is a gift from the gods of war.

(also, Jason Statham joins the roster of sexy Hollywood priests)

Belts are ripped off! Guns and knives are tossed aside until the only phallic objects around are actual phalli! And at last Sly triumphs (which would totally not happen, said the Jean Claude fangirl) and his reward is a heart-to-heart with Maggie Chan, the team's lone female member. Dear talented, badass Yu Nan, what are you even doing here? Bruce Willis coins the phrase "male-pattern badness" early on in the film and really, that's what the movie is about and the reason why anyone goes to see such movies. Shoehorning in women as a nod to diversity or as romantic interests is really beyond the ken of a movie that is only trying to be a slugfest. There's nothing at all wrong with slugfests but I don't necessarily enjoy it when they try to be more than what they are. This is not to say that women can't be action stars or that there are no action films that utilize female characters skillfully. Being the only person alive who enjoyed Haywire and Salt and who can't stop going to all the Resident Evil and Underworld films, I consider myself a big fan of ladies shooting and/or stabbing things. But action movies that work with female characters are ones that don't make a big deal about them being there. Maggie, of course, gets to go through the mild gauntlet of being underestimated by Sly and hit on by Dolph, until finally she has proven herself as good as one of the boys. Hopefully, if a female-cast Expendables comes to fruition, the plotline will be something other than this. In the first Expendables movie, Giselle Itie's character Sandra had a  fairly solid plot-driven purpose for being present, but in this sequel, Maggie's purpose is more tenuous. As a government agent, she could be anyone, and she has no real investment in the plan going off without a hitch other than "not dying". Ultimately both Sandra and Maggie's higher purpose is to serve as the mode for Sly's introspection. Will they help him out of his shell? Will he eventually open his heart to luv? Sorry, but no thank you. Barney Ross will continue to seek refuge in blowing shit up.

Final words: Stallone and his cowriter seem to have made a drinking game out of fitting into the script as many action film references as possible. Chuck Norris is that kid who follows you around on the playground but demurs when you invite him to play with you. Charisma Carpenter is sorely underutilized by these movies. And will someone please, please cast Terry Crews to play Luke Cage already?

Thing relevant to my interests #82: Tampa

So, Magic Mike. Here were the things I knew about Magic Mike prior to seeing it:

• Channing Tatum is in it
• So is Matt Bomer, otherwise known as Dick Grayson
• Channing Tatum used to actually be a stripper
• Matt Bomer AKA Dick Grayson wasn't (except in various fics where Dick is TOTALLY a stripper, and, you know, if you want to read those I will link them)
• Strippers
• Lots of junk flying around presumably
• Ew, Matthew McConaughey, please keep your clothes on please please please
• Made by Steven Soderbergh

These things are all true (there is a lot of junk flying around. Also ass). Here is a thing that is also true, which I was not aware of until right before seeing Magic Mike, and which makes me unfathomably happy: Magic Mike is set in Tampa, Florida. This makes a lot of sense, if you think about it; Tampa is known for having oodles of strip joints, and not all of them are geared toward straight men. When I found out this film's setting (it shot there too, AND CHANNING TATUM IS FROM TAMPA WHAT THE HELL) and told some of my fellow Tampa expat ladyfriends, they all made the same expression: confusion, followed by delight. I will be honest; the thought of seeing Matt Bomer and Joe Manganiello shake their stuff in very little clothing is nice, but the thought of another movie paying attention to my fair former city is even nicer. I have my priorities.

image via Just Jared

Anyway, "confusion followed by delight" is a pretty accurate tag for my general thoughts about this movie. I think most people were expecting it to be Showgirls except with dudes, which would have been fine. But Soderbergh wants you to think about the human condition of male strippers. And this movie is actually good. WEIRD RIGHT. The general plot is a tale as old as time--party boy is getting older, trying to figure out what he's going to do with his life--but the acting carries it through. I think I'm turning into a Channing Tatum apologist, but I have great love for She's the Man and I think he's gotten quite a bit better as his career has progressed. Alex Pettyfer was convincing as Adam, the skeezy and irresponsible douchewaffle baby stripper Tatum's character takes under his wing. And Cody Horn, well, haters can hate but I really liked her character, Brooke (Adam's sister). I'm sort of a buzzkill myself and I don't think there are enough characters like Brooke: responsible to a fault, totally aware of what it takes to be an adult without any help, unwilling to put up with shit, sort of stiff and rigid. Let's get a beer and bitch about work and horrible family members, Brooke! All things considered, the three major female characters in the film don't come off too badly despite the strip club owner's belief that audiences of ladies are cash cows and nothing else (though don't be fooled by the marketing--the movie is still largely a male fantasy): Brooke is responsible, controlled, and caring; Joanna, Mike's hook-up partner, is  ultimately sort of villainous but more for not telling him she had a fiance, rather than for being voraciously sexual; and Nora is a person you stay away from because she's into drugs and carries around a piglet, not because she has casual sex. I'm sorry to report that Matthew McConaughey keeps his clothes on for 95% of the film and then you see all the way up his colon. Nas-ty. The rest of the dancing is pretty impressive, though...any excuse to whip out "Pony." All told, Magic Mike is a good choice of film for a goofy night out with friends; the theater I went to was sold out (literally sold out) on a Tuesday night, we smuggled in some hard lemonade (topical!), and had an uproarious good time. My friend was intrigued and amused by my muttered outbursts of "I've been there!" at various points throughout.

Basically, once Magic Mike is on DVD, it will be purchased by me and watched in conjunction with The Punisher on days when I really miss the Bay environs. Maybe that's sort of sad, but everybody gets homesick. Sometimes I like to be reminded of Dale Mabry, drunkass Greek parties, St Pete Beach, the Amphitheatre. And if I was tearing up at the end, it's Steven Soderbergh's fault for sticking "Feels Like the First Time" over the credits.

Can you tell I'm still thinking about Brave?

I've been seeing a lot of beautiful fan art for Brave since the film came out. Here are a few of my favorites:

Merida and Rapunzel admire each other's hair (from skyneverthelimit)

Merida and Angus (from islandinthesun) 

Merida and her brothers (from Osato-kun)

Brave (spoilers)

So, apparently a lot of people didn't like Brave. I will be honest: I don't understand where most of them are coming from, but then I have never been one to fellate Pixar the way a lot of people do (what's the point, when Studio Ghibli exists for all your absolutely fantastic animated film needs?), and it seems that a lot of the criticism is based in "this is a good Pixar film instead of a great one and we are used to Pixar making great movies."

...ok. Well then, from the perspective of someone with no bar for what Pixar films should be: I really liked Brave. As far as this summer's fairy tale movies go, Brave is one thousand times greater than Snow White and the Huntsman. The animation is beautiful--everything you have heard about Merida's hair is true--and I thought the story was very solid. But I like fairy tales! And princess movies, despite all of Disney's flaws! If you aren't into either/both of those things, YMMV with Brave. Here are a few things I specifically enjoyed:

1. Merida and Elinor. It is...hmm, pretty rare in TV and movies to see a thoughtful presentation of mother-daughter relationships with neither side unfairly demonized, and even more rare to find this in what is in many ways a quintessential fairy tale kid's movie (Disney loves its evil/absent mother figures). Elinor and Merida have a pretty realistic relationship which I imagine lots of viewers of the film can relate to--they squabble about how Merida should act, how she would wear her hair and her clothes, and what she should be when she grows up. Shockingly true to life! I was surprised and pleased to find the movie revolving largely around the mother-daughter relationship as it changed through Merida and Elinor's actions--because that is what this movie is about: the part of growing up that means you have to deal with your mom as a person, and she has to deal with you as a person. It's about realizing that your mother isn't infallible, and that your daughter isn't an extension of yourself. I found it very satisfying to see Merida and Elinor come to an understanding and compromise. And yes, I was very scared that Elinor would stay a bear! Oh man I was so nervous. TEARS EVERYWHERE.

2. Fergus and his family. Fergus, Merida's father, managed to straddle the line between goofy Scotsman archetype that we're familiar with and all-around good dad and husband. It is clear that he and Elinor are in love, and that he's a great father to both Merida and his three small sons. He's an effective ruler, he has a good sense of humor, he's brave, and he's loving. I want Fergus to be my dad!

3. The animation. Now, one of the reasons that I'm not a ginormo Pixar fan is that I vastly prefer traditional cel animation. That said, the animation in Brave is fantastic, really beautiful. Merida's hair, as mentioned, is very notable, as are the gorgeous forest and water backdrops. I found Angus, Merida's horse, particularly impressive, and the will o'the wisps that lead Merida on her quest were charmingly eerie. 

4. Holy shit, no prince?? No prince! Well, actually there's three sons of Scottish clan lords, but none of them marry Merida and none of them are important characters. This film is not about princes: it's about Merida and her personal journey. Refreshing.

Merida defending her mother, via  Pixarblog

 

And the princes bring me to my final point, which is both a good and a not-so-good thing: gender! Yay gender, everyone loves talking about gender, especially in Disney films. See, Merida is really good at some traditionally "manly" pursuits, including archery and serious rock-climbing, she doesn't like sitting still or wearing pretty clothes, and she eschews getting married, so some short-sighted people think she must be gay. That isn't what I'm concerned with, although if there happened to be a Brave sequel where Merida was indeed involved with a lady, well, that would be nothing short of a miracle. Still, beside the point. The major conflict in the film stems from Merida's ideas about what she wants to do with her life versus her mother's. This is not unfamiliar territory, but the way in which it is resolved I found interesting. Ultimately Merida and Elinor reach a compromise and work together to solve their problem of how to settle the clans without Merida having to marry any of the clan lords' sons. This scene is really sweet, I thought, involving Elinor (in her bear form) coaching Merida through what is really her first diplomatic speech to four reasonably het-up leader men. This is good practice for Merida's eventual queenship, and also signifies that she and her mother are reaching a place in the middle where they can work together with their separate strengths and ideas to present a unified solution. 

But there's one more problem: Elinor is still a bear, oh noes! The climactic scene combines the things that are great about both women to protect their families from the monstrous bear Mor'du and to turn Elinor back into a human. Part of this involves Merida repairing a tapestry of she and her parents which her mother had sewn and Merida had torn in anger, part of it involves bear!Elinor fighting Mor'du, and part of it involves Merida using her bow against Mor'du and defending her bear-mum from angry and terrified Fergus. A lot of people, it seems, did not like the tapestry-repair angle, as they saw it in terms of Merida capitulating to traditional femininity, but I saw it as more of that compromise between the past and the future, a blending of where Merida comes from (her mother) and where she's going (who knows? That's part of of the fun of growing up!). Elinor is never painted as a bad mother, only as one who has strong ideas about what she wants for her child, and Merida is never painted as a bad daughter, only one with her own, pretty teenage-typical, ideas about what she wants for herself. 

These are good things, by my lights. It's a good message in a good movie. Brava, Brave. Honestly, this movie hit me where I live, I think because anything that goes beyond the surface of moms and daughters gives me All The Feels. No, issues with forced marriage are not out of date in 2012--not even in the US and certainly not in many, many other countries. No, not everyone has a rosy relationship with their mother. Not everyone reconciles and not everyone even wants to reconcile, but seeing Merida and Elinor make it up and move forward together is really touching. Am I wrong in thinking that some of the dismissal of this movie stems from dismissal of women's stories and relationships?

Whose body? (Prometheus spoilers)

YES IT'S STILL GOING I CAN'T HELP MYSELF. This is what happens when Ridley Scott makes Alien movies. Anyway, you know I had to talk more in-depth about the Big Damn C-Section.

So! The Big Damn C-Section! Apparently people are really squicked by this? Someone I follow on Tumblr mentioned vaguely that a scene had caused a fellow viewer with her to nearly pass out--after I saw Prometheus, I tried to decide which scene that was, since most of the Alien-typical scenes didn't strike me as that bad, comparatively. My manfriend pointed out that it was likely most viewers had a serious problem with the alien C-section bit, and I guess that's what my Tumblr friend was referring to. Incidentally this scene was also what tipped Prometheus into an R rating. Because giant tentacle monsters and oral rape are waaaay more family friendly than C-sections with abortion undertones! Please feel free to imagine how boring a PG-13 Alien film would be.

Obviously, it didn't bother me that much. Here's why: I hate the trope of monstrous pregnancy. I think it's totally overused and played out. However, in Prometheus I thought it was wielded to good effect, for the sheer reason that most people who are afflicted by monstrous pregnancy (both in the Alienverse and in other sci-fi and horror media) are forced to carry "to term" or to "give birth" in deadly fashion. But this isn't the case for Shaw; she finds out she's knocked up and takes immediate, efficient action to get the damn parasite out of her. She gets herself into a med-pod despite the objections of David, keys it to perform a C-section, and then gases the shit out of the Alien fetus. It doesn't kill the thing, but it allows her to get out of there and down to other business.

Needless to say, I found the scene satisfying. It's rare to see abortions mentioned, let alone performed, in major films and television shows, and even rarer to see the victim of a monstrous pregnancy deal with it in a way that allows him/her to come out on top. Notably Shaw refers to her operation as a Caesarean, not an abortion, and since the fetus isn't actually killed I suppose it doesn't count as an abortion, but the intent is to remove and destroy, Shaw's bodily autonomy has been taken from her, and it isn't for lack of trying on her part that the Alien manages to live. I suppose my enjoyment of this whole shebang kind of ties into my other apparently-unpopular feelings about this movie, besides actually liking it in general: I felt that the tentacle Alien near the film's end--the larger version of what was growing inside Shaw--was somewhat of a let-down. Or, if not exactly a letdown, a monster which took more time to absorb, as it were, than other Aliens. Again my manfriend didn't quite see what I was seeing--he found it quite scary enough and thought that the choice of tentacles was tapping into a universal fear of such. Me, I guess I've been on the Internet for too long, but tentacles remind me immediately of certain segments of Japanese animated porn, and so I sort of associate them with a specific portion of a specific culture (is tentacle rape a universal human fear?). However, there's also a possible call-back to Lovecraft and Cthulhu, which I appreciate. I certainly don't mind the idea of the Elder Gods being intertwined in the Alien mythos; that is effectively terrifying. But compared to the various Aliens of Alien, the tentacle Alien in Prometheus didn't quite measure up for visceral impact, for me at least. Dan O'Bannon, co-writer of Alien, noted that the monsters of the film were designed to make men cross their legs, and the overt gendering of their threats and these implications are some of the things I admire and enjoy about Alien. The tentacle alien has a bit of that, what with its penetrating, phallic tentacles and vaginal multiple mouths, but the mode of its attack  (absorption) is generalized rather than specific. Another factor might be that we only see it really attack an Engineer, rather than a human.

Yes, yes, I enjoy seeing men squirm, look at me and my man-hating. But come on--the majority of horror films employ threats that are specifically gendered masculine in order to be threatening to women. That was part of what made Alien so disturbing and so subversive. It forced men to consider what it would be like to exist in a feminine body. Prometheus is more concerned with broader themes of what it means to create and destroy life, how life is transmitted and evolves, and the compulsions to give, take away, or hoard. There is certainly a whole thing present in which images of destructive creation repeat themselves, from the mysterious opening sequence to Shaw's alien C-section to the dichotomy of David's decapitated-yet-still-speaking head. Ritual sacrifice, the killing of the king so that life continues to flourish, is an age-old tale found in legions of civilizations. So too is the warning story of sorcerers and greedy men who refuse to give up their power (what of the king stag when the young stag is grown?).

Something I found notable is that Shaw is a very clear stand-in for Mary. Established as barren, she gives birth to an extraordinary "child" between Christmas and New Year's, and that "child" ends up being a "salvation" as she uses it to attack the Engineer who is trying to attack her. It is somewhat problematic that Shaw wants desperately to rid herself of the thing inside her, yet doesn't quite manage to do so, ends up beholden to it in a way, and also beholden to the guy who slipped her boyfriend an Alien roofie, ultimately teaming up with David to carry the quest forward. It seems that bodily autonomy will never, not even in the distant future of spaceflight and aliens, be a thing which the marginalized fully possess. Too, the Christian bent of "2000 years ago, something on Earth happened to piss the Engineers off" (especially given LOST's ultimate answer and Ridley Scott affirming that yes, Space Jockey Jesus is a thing), David washing Weyland's feet and delivering the news of an impossible child to Shaw, and three men sacrificing themselves to save others is a bit much for agnostics or non-Christians to enjoy with reflection, but from the standpoint of someone who likes world mythology, there are a lot of stories across cultures which feature pale otherworldly figures. Furthermore, the idea of Space Jockey Jesus is most likely one of those things which, had it been stated baldly (or "answered"), would have enraged those viewers who are currently enraged that no answers are given. It's an answer that people don't want to hear. The eternal hubris of humanity is the belief that we are ready to meet our makers.

And honestly, all told, the various threads Prometheus weaves together display a tapestry of extreme hubris--specifically white, male hubris. The only Engineers we see are ostensibly male; all of them are very white. The med-pod Shaw uses is only calibrated for men, apparently (she has to spell out for it that she needs invasive abdominal surgery), and it is most likely that the pod is specifically for Weyland. The implicit or explicit presence of Space Jockey Jesus. The opening sequence of a male Engineer's body being the literal cradle of life. Weyland being a character so arrogant that he thinks that not only can he live forever, he should. The various white male scientists are without exception of the superiority-complexes-breed-death variety. I'm not willing to cut Scott and co. the slack of assuming they're just another crew of dudes who think the universe revolves around their penises. At the end of the film, the only characters left to carry on the search for knowledge are Shaw and David, a woman and a robot. Both are white--the two characters of color having sacrificed themselves aboard the ship--but neither is male. There is a whole 'nother conversation to be had about David's "masculinity," whether he codes as gay, whether he has functioning male genitalia, why he is invulnerable to Alien infestation/what would happen if he was infested, whether he was always acting on Weyland's commands, why the Engineer reacted so badly to him, and whether or not he classes as posthuman/superhuman or robot-approaching-human. For my part, the moral of the movie might be the never-ending journey toward knowledge, but the underlying emphasis is that the way we've been going about it for millennia--since before humans existed, if the Engineers are anything to go by--isn't working and needs to end.

He who liveth and was slain (Prometheus spoilers)

Notes on a few of the themes in Prometheus: that of survival and that of humans becoming gods. 

Vickers is the character Charlize Theron plays in Prometheus, a cold, capitalistic, survival-oriented woman who by default of the Alienverse's hatred of corporations seems to be a villain, but isn't really. In contrast to the other major female character, Noomi Rapace's Elizabeth Shaw, who is emotional,  earthy, and directed by her heart despite being a scientist, Vickers is all the things we associate with Alien films (hard edges, sleek lines, vague and encroaching menace). Eventually we find that not only is Weyland (Weyland Corp's CEO) alive, but that he is also her father and she harbors some serious resentment issues toward his desire to be immortal. Vickers too is driven by her need for self-preservation, and she acts out this theme in various interesting ways. In a scene which is a near-replica-with-significant-differences of one from Alien, she refuses to allow an infected scientist to come aboard the ship, but what's more, the scientist in question requests to be killed. And Vickers obliges, with the help of a flamethrower. In Final Girl terms, it really seemed that Vickers was going to be the one to get out alive--I was betting against Shaw, but that's what the movie wants you to do. Ultimately, the need to know and the need to survive intertwine--in effect the need to know becomes the vehicle for survival--and since Shaw possesses the desire to ask the question, she prevails.

My gent and I spent a good amount of time last night talking about whether Vickers was supposed to be a robot, and we decided that though she is human and actually Weyland's daughter, her demeanor and attitude might in part have been carefully constructed because Weyland was so overtly fond of David, referring to the android as the son he never had. Weyland and Vickers are consumed by the need to survive and the ways in which they go about it are different from how Shaw goes about her survival; the survival of humanity has always been a theme of the Alien films, and I think Prometheus added its two cents admirably. Vickers and Yanek, the ship's captain, are at first allied in their desire to keep the ship and by extension Earth free of any alien contaminants, but in the end, it's Yanek and Shaw who understand what must be done to save Earth, while Vickers concentrates on saving herself. (As a person who adores Alien and is somewhat less of a fan of Aliens, I have to say I was kind of nastily pleased at that development, as I tend to view the themes of Alien and Aliens as being at odds. Basically I hold that Alien is about human survival on a core level which manages to be both personal [Ripley has survived! Yay!] and wide-scale [humanity is safe from the Aliens! Yay!], while Aliens is about the survival of a specific set of humanity, in that case, the white nuclear family capable of enforcing the Company's agenda). 

Michael Fassbender's performance of David, the android, was one of my favorite aspects of the film. I'd like to see Prometheus again simply to watch David and his various doings very closely. He was a difficult character to figure out and it was quite enjoyable to watch Fassbender toe the line between innocent, your-human-emotions-baffle-me robot and knowing, I'm-doing-this-to-be-an-asshole posthuman. There's a lot left open to interpretation in David and how he functions in the film as a whole, which I appreciate. I don't recall if it's canon in the Alien mythology that Weyland Corp were the first to develop androids, but if that's the case, it brings a whole 'nother level of business to how David interacts with humans generally and Weyland and Vickers specifically. If Weyland's end goal is to live indefinitely, creating a totally human-like android is the logical first step. Not only that but in doing so, he makes himself a god, yet still turns toward his own god for the power of eternal life. There is an ancient pattern at work in Prometheus, summed up by Vickers' line: "The king has his reign, and then he dies." The only problem is that the Engineers don't seem to quite agree--they, like Weyland, have the interminable need to remain on top, employing organic weapons against those they've created if necessary. In creating human life, the Engineers have created their own destruction; in creating androids, Weyland has created his. Another line from Vickers, who is apparently the Theme-Speaker of the film: "Every child wants to see their parents dead." Shaw seeing her father dead was the impetus for her life's work; the death of Vickers' father would mean the Weyland company was at last hers; and the humans' interactions with their makers (who are also coded masculine) end up being deadly and full of regret. Lots of daddy issues! It is a Ridley Scott film, after all.

These two themes are twins, sides of the destroyer-creator coin. We are never quite sure if David is truly under the control of his father-creator, and the Engineers clearly lost control of both their human creations and their Alien ones. Given that the original name of the film was Paradise, after Paradise Lost, it seems that the filmmakers intended an examination of the relationships between deities and creators, perhaps particularly calling to the sections of that text where Satan asserts that the angelic race created themselves, as well as the theme of Adam and Eve seeking forbidden knowledge, which set them on par with God.

Not minding (Prometheus spoilers)

Here are a few things that I love: Ridley Scott, Alien, movies with lots of themes, movies that are maybe too big for their britches. So let it be known I'm not really coming from a place of impartiality regarding Prometheus.

That said, apparently a very large number of people hated this movie. I am not one of those. Having seen several non-spoilery remarks of loathing beforehand, some from people whose taste I trust, I was prepared to be disappointed--and came out quite glad that I was not. Since it IS partially a horror film, most of the characters, despite being scientists, are too stupid to live (particularly the main male archaeologist, who was also a total asshole and deserved to get Alien'd), but that's how horror films function and I don't think it's a very significant complaint, especially given how many of the "too stupid to live" actions are rooted in the film's ever-quest to gain knowledge. People will do extremely idiotic things to get answers. That is the story of (cinema) history. Other complaints are that the film is too steeped in Greek and Christian mythology to be digestible to the average viewer, a complaint that I totally can't get behind because I enjoy films that make me consider what I already know, force me to bring my own interpretations and lens to the viewing, and aren't catering to the lowest common denominator. If Prometheus made someone go out and get a book of Greek myths (or better yet, a book of world mythology, since a lot of the patterns and tropes used in the film are cross-cultural), so much the better. The third and most prevalent complaint is that the film gives no answers and that this is a cop-out.

Now, as someone who utterly loathed the LOST finale, I can kind of understand where these people are coming from. Damon Lindelof co-wrote the Prometheus script and it does show. But for me, two hours of film in an established universe is a completely and significantly different medium and vehicle of storytelling than six seasons of character development on a network television show. And for me, the major overarching theme of the film was that sometimes the answer is infinitely less interesting than the question. Would all the people who disliked this film as it stands be satisfied with it if the answers to The Big Questions asked throughout had been provided? I would have found that an entirely unsatisfying film, because the Alien franchise is not and has never been a monster-of-the-week affair. There are many kinds of science fiction, and Prometheus and the other Alien films reside in a universe which wants you to think it's ours, and not in the same way that Firefly or Stargate SG1 does.  Here's where I go my usual route and turn to heavy metal lyrics. In the Kamelot song "The Edge of Paradise," the chorus states: "Undermining life itself/my will to wonder why"; in the Conception song "Cardinal Sin," there's the line "tell me that it's worthwhile/to get behind the why/where all is true." Both of these encapsulate the fundamental human search for understanding, and more than that, they really hammer in the idea that the search is what makes us human, is what's most important, far more important than concrete answers. The end of Prometheus affirms this, when Shaw makes the choice once again to go in search of knowledge, despite everything she's seen and been through. The point is that Shaw doesn't give up, kill herself or allow herself to be killed, or flee home in defeat. She keeps looking and ultimately it doesn't matter whether or not she finds that final answer (hint: it's 42). Though Prometheus leaves open the possibility of a sequel, I don't think it's necessarily inevitable. I think Scott is a good enough filmmaker to understand his own themes and aims, one of which is--you know--never quite answering the question.

There's a lot to this movie, some of which I will ramble about in other entries. It's possible to see it as a metaphysical, sideways-religious allegory, or as a more prosaic battle for life between opposing species. Any way you look at it, it's interesting and worth the time.

Freak out with your geek out

It's here once more, folks: Geek Pride Day! If you're a lover of any and/or all things nerdy, today's the day to fly the banner proudly, regardless of stodgy bosses and disapproving parents/significant others. Here are a few things from various corners of my nerd world that I'm currently excited about: 

Book Nerding: Bitterblue. This is the sequel to Graceling and companion to Fire, Kristin Cashore's two previous fantasy novels, and a more gloriously charmed third offering I cannot imagine. Bitterblue is coming into her own as Queen of Monsea, a country ravaged by thirty-five years of mind control due to her father Leck (one of my personal most terrifying villains in literature); all our favorite characters are back (I have been yelling PO!!!!  KATSA!!!! every other page or so); and some awesome new characters have arisen as well (for librarians, it doesn't get much better than Death. Yes, there is a librarian named Death in this book. WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR). 

Comics Nerding: Dudes, Batman Incorporated started up again this week! I haven't gotten my issue yet, but I hear it's delectable. Say what you will about Grant Morrison--most of it will be accurate, good and bad--but his Batverse is one of my favorites. Leviathan, the winter offering which tided over Inc. fans, was pretty great, but I can't wait for the ongoing to begin again in earnest. Another great newish DC offering (from Vertigo, specifically) is Saucer Country, written by Paul Cornell and drawn by Ryan Kelly. This is one of my absolute favorites of the year, a fantastic blend of political maneuverings with alien abduction and featuring a Mexican-American lady governor running for president. Basically everything I love at once. It's only three issues in, so catch up!

image from Talking Comic Books  

Comics Movies Nerding: Hey, they get separate categories. Obviously The Dark Knight Rises and The Amazing Spider-Man are going to have to step pretty to top what The Avengers pulled out, but I look forward to their attempts. We're kinda living in the golden age of comic book movies and I'm enjoying every attempt that's being thrown at us--even the wretched ones, like X-Men Origins: Wolverine. Here's to the rest of the summer superhero offerings, and I hope we'll see lots more in the future (pssst, Hollywood: more ladies. More characters of color). 
 
 Music Nerding: I am pleased to announce that I have spent my concert fund on tickets to see Nightwish and Kamelot in September. Both are amazing live bands, both are favorites of mine, and...well, let's just say that I hope by the time September rolls around, Kamelot will have found a new lead singer. They're being awfully closemouthed about the whole business considering their tour kicks off very soon and they have plans for a new album. In other music news, Regina Spektor's newest, What We Saw from the Cheap Seats, is coming out next week, and if you haven't already contributed a buck or two to another red-headed pianist's Kickstarter, no time like the present!






What's going on in your fandoms, fellow geeks? Whether you travel to Westeros, Apokolips, or Hogwarts and whether you get there by Floo Powder, a TARDIS, or the Millennium Falcon, travel safely, be cool to your nerdy compatriots, and always know where your towel's at.

Assembled (Avengers spoilers)

 Five things I liked about The Avengers:

1. Black Widow's expanded, one-hundred-percent-unfiltered-badass role. I liked Natasha  well enough in Iron Man 2, chiefly because I enjoyed watching her and Pepper Potts get shit done while Tony broke things and made an ass of himself, but Whedon and Johansson magnified her greatness by a thousand for The Avengers. Her opening fight scene was my favorite fight of the movie. It's still wonderful for me as a woman viewer to watch a movie where no comments about characters' sex are made. Not one person says anything to Natasha or Maria about them being women, and when Loki trades on what he perceives as Natasha's weakness, he learns part of why she's an effective spy. Also, it's a nice change to see a woman rescuing a man, and rescuing him for reasons other than "I love him!"--Clint and Natasha's relationship may have a romantic component (it would be canonically accurate), but there's more to it and Natasha places a premium on atoning for her sins (a favorite Whedon theme).

2. The team dynamic. Whedon's chief strength is making ensemble pieces coalesce, and that is the sticking point of this film--if the team's interactions hadn't worked, the film wouldn't have worked. The Avengers is a team of opposites and clashing personalities who manage to work together despite themselves. It was fantastic to see that brought to the screen. There are no weak links or bad performances here.

3. Mark Ruffalo's performance. Yes, you may recall how I feel about Ruffalo as an actor, but he did a bang-up--as it were--job as Bruce Banner and the Incredible Hulk. I'm not real interested in the Hulk as a character (I'd rather see either or both the She-Hulks on screen), but he is an integral part of the Avengers team and had much more depth here than I'm used to reading for him in the comics. I venture that many people loved the "let's do science!" bromance of Tony and Bruce.

4. Whedonisms. Despite his shows' flaws (and they aren't perfect), I'm a Whedonite--I try not to be the super-annoying brand. This film is a treat for Whedon fans: the snappy dialogue, which I found particularly suitable for Tony, especially in how it came out in his nicknames for everyone; the WHEDON'D death (?) scene of a beloved character; and creating Maria and Natasha as important, well-rounded characters are great hallmarks of Whedon. There's also the matter of a bunch of people fleeing as a city caves in behind them...

5. Equal-opportunity asskicking. Related to points #1 and #4, the heroes in this team all get to kick about equal amounts of ass. I don't understand how a viewer could come out of the film wondering about the usefulness/efficacy of Black Widow and Hawkeye (yet these viewers exist), because every Avenger gets to pound evil dudes into the ground (literally in the case of the Hulk, in a scene which had the audience in my theater roaring). It's more obvious when Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, and the Hulk kick ass, because they have giant muscles and serious weapons, but the Widow and Hawkeye are no less capable and get their fair share, which is as it should be.

Two things I didn't like about The Avengers:

1. Sort-of-whitewashing Maria Hill. Cobie Smulders is a great actress and she did a wonderful job as S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent Maria Hill (AND I really liked the film's development of her character, especially when compared with her on Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes), and I would be totally in favor of an Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. film wherein she, Coulson, and Fury supervise Clint Barton and Natasha Romanoff as they kick All The Asses (in Budapest, perhaps?), but Maria Hill's ethnicity is unaddressed in some media and Hispanic in others, and I would have loved to see a Latina actress in that role. More broadly, of course, I would have wished for more heroes of color on the team, but that's a wish that's about eight years past being able to come true for this particular franchise. I do hope that perhaps a future Captain America film will feature Falcon (and I nominate Isaiah Mustapha for the role), and that maybe with the incredible success of The Avengers, Marvel might look into other team properties such as Heroes for Hire or The Defenders.

2. What are you doing, Loki? I found Loki's parts of the film somewhat weak. This is a minor nitpick, but I sense that if a viewer hadn't seen Thor, there might have been some doubt as to what exactly Loki's point was. It's definitely not Tom Hiddleston's fault, as he was as slinky-evil in The Avengers as in Thor, but the Chitauri were run-of-the-mill cannon fodder and Loki's relationship to the Other somewhat underdeveloped. for my money his most threatening scene was the one discussed in my final point below--he was never more frightening to me than that, maybe because his power in this film was tied to that Staff of Destiny watchamajigger, and he can apparently be effectively thrashed into the ground by a Hulk like a cat playing with a toy.


One thing I'm still undecided on about The Avengers:


1. Quim. In case you didn't hear Loki/aren't well-versed in outdated British slang terms/have never seen Elizabeth or read Chaucer, "quim" is basically an older version of "cunt." Loki refers to Natasha as a "mewling quim" in his showdown with her when he's inside the Hulk cage. At the time, I thought vaguely that I'd heard the word before (read it in Chaucer at some point) and couldn't remember exactly what it meant, but even still, it's pretty clear that it's a gendered insult. Which...it is. So the question becomes, why is this word here? It's Whedon, so the Cynical Fan part of me says that he was playing his old game of "slip naughty words past censors" which he did in Buffy and Firefly/Serenity. But it's not a naughty word like "fuck" is--it's a specific, gendered insult for which there is no male equivalent. The Let's Examine The Character part of me thinks that Loki would indeed say something like this; he makes a veiled sexual threat toward Jane Foster in Thor, so it's not completely out of character for him to speak to or about women this way, AND he's a villain whose power flows from his words, so he wouldn't be above saying whatever he thought was necessary to grind a person down. The scene itself is also one in which he loses control without even realizing it, since Black Widow is playing him like a harp, and "cunt" is definitely a word that people--usually men--use when they feel out of control. 


The Tired Of Gendered Insults part of me thinks that the scene would have been pivotal enough without use of a word like this, and that having the line be "mewling mortal" or something would have jibed perfectly fine (especially since Loki prefaces his final insult with a lengthy diatribe about how he's going to force Clint to kill Natasha, with threat of sexual assault implied). The Let's Talk About Sociolinguistics part of me thinks that if Loki had called Hawkeye  or another male character a "mewling quim" the meaning would have been changed entirely (to "pussy" rather than "cunt"), which adds another level to the dynamic of the scene. The Take That, Misogyny! part of me sees Natasha hear him, presumably understand his meaning if not the word itself (although who knows, her brain is a magical place), and still go in for the kill, because that is just how little she gives a shit, it isn't the first time she's been called a cunt and it won't be the last. The Whedonite in me thinks that, all else being equal, Loki's conversation with the Widow is the most compelling and frightening segment of the film, the best indicator of Loki's evilness, and signifies that his threats against her (all sexualized ones) are the worst that a villain can bring to bear.

So...I'm not sure how I feel about this word, being in this film.  I am not real bothered by "cunt" itself, but when a person calls me that, it isn't the word that is trying to hurt me, it's the feeling behind it. Having only previously encountered "quim" as a quaint, har har, term for female junk, I'm not sure I WAS aware that it could be connotatively similar to "cunt," but of course that's Loki's (or Whedon's) goal. Erring on the side of optimism, if what this scene gives us IS solely Loki's misogyny and not Whedon's flippancy, I would think the creator might still be aware that the US is not quite ready for that conversation. Context as ever is key, since in some erotic scenarios we have "cunt" being used as an endearment (Lady Chatterley's Lover comes to mind as the classic example) and the same is true of "quim," which is largely cutesy in Chaucer, as I recall. For me as a consumer of culture "quim" was on level with "minge" prior to this movie. I can believe both that Whedon wrote the line intending for it to tell us something about Loki's character AND that Whedon should know that it isn't as cut-and-dried as all that. Ultimately, the line was written and signed off on; ironically I think it would be much more clear-cut if "cunt" had actually been used--and yes, I am one of those who think MPAA ratings for language are absolutely fucking idiotic. Regardless, there's a discussion to be had, and as always, Cleolinda has a thoughtful analysis and a lot of great comments.

Movie things

Yes, I saw The Avengers. Yes, I have many Thoughts and Feelings, but I am going to put off writing about them until a) more people in the US have seen it and b) I've seen it again. It's a pretty vast film deserving of at least one repeat viewing on the big screen.

Until then, a partial list of how movies are going to break my wallet this summer: Prometheus, Brave, Snow White and the Huntsman, Magic Mike, The Dark Knight Rises, The Amazing Spider-Man, Rock of Ages, The Expendables 2.

Always

Hey dudes! It's May 4th--let's talk about Star Wars! Now, surely all of you are aware that yes, in terms of intergalacticy shit I err on the side of Wars rather than Trek, but I'm not sure I've ever really gabbed about my SW feels in depth here before. No day but today, right? /mixing genres

So. Being born in 1987, I arrived on the mortal coil too late for the original Trilogy releases, and when they were re-released, my mother would never have dreamed of taking me to see them (she hates science fiction), but thankfully I had a friend whose dad was an SW nut, and she lent me their videotapes. Yes, videotapes. That was a good choice, since the tapes were ORIGINAL VERSIONS OF THE FILMS (gasp!). None of that Greedo-shooting-first nonsense. I became an SW nut straightaway, spending my days hunting down every EU book I could find at the library and drawing pictures of Han and Leia for my bedroom walls. My mother was somewhat dismayed. Then--oh, then!--Episode I came out, and I saw my first SW film in theaters. Now the older folks among you may be shedding a tear for this blasphemy, but we take what we can get.  Accidents of birth and all that. Of course, being all of twelve or so at the time, I loved it and my adoration of all things Star Wars grew. My first real entrance to participating in online fandom was through the starwars.com Message Boards. For my best friend's birthday a few years later, we checked out of school in the middle of the day to go see Episode II. And of course, senior year of high school, we were standing in line at midnight for Episode III. All the while we had read legions of EU stories good and not-so-good; we'd written a gigantic, awful science fiction novel largely inspired by SW elements; we'd gone to STAR WARS WEEKENDS at Disney World and had our picture taken with Figrin D'an and the Modal Nodes; and we'd watched the Trilogy more times than either of us can count. 

Star Wars chess set

For good or ill, depending on how you view the franchise and its creator, Star Wars will never die. It is truly an heirloom, as kids born five years ago to people who enjoy cosplaying as Chewbacca are cutting their teeth on the Clone Wars cartoon (which is great). It was my gateway into science fiction and what it means to be a fan. And for that, dear Mr. Lucas, I am indebted. Being an SW fan can be a fraught experience, but it is a rewarding one.

If you're for some reason flummoxed as to how to celebrate this wonderful day, geek with curves has some ideas! I'll be popping a Han-Solo-in-carbonite ice cube into my whiskey sour later on as I take in Empire for the nathanfillionth time. Go forth and make merry like unto the Ewoks on Endor, and may the Force be with you...always.

The Hunger Games (spoilers)

So, The Hunger Games! I was looking forward to seeing it, because I am a big fan of the books, and I saw it, and I liked it, and now I will need Catching Fire to be released as soon as possible.

Things I liked:

• how the film was able to expand the POV of the story. In the books, we have Katniss' point of view at all times, which makes for tense reading but doesn't give as much scope as maybe some readers would like. So it was very cool to see sweeping crowd shots, the faces of the people back home in District 12, and especially how the Gamemakers went about controlling things. That was maybe my favorite part, actually--seeing a slew of people creating forest fires to drive Katniss toward the Career Tributes and setting the mutts on the battlefield.
• Seneca Crane's enlarged role. Similarly, I think choosing to give Seneca a reasonably large part was a good move. Watching Wes Bentley and his magical circus beard stride around the control room and smarm on television were good ways of showing just how soulless the Capitol and Games are.
• The acting. I had some issues with the casting process of this film, as many people did, but there's no denying that Lawrence did an ace job with Katniss. Lenny Kravitz was also very good as Cinna (restrained but clearly caring about Katniss), Stanley Tucci was wonderful as zany talk show host Caesar Flickerman, Amandla Stenberg was perfect as Rue, and I can't wait to see Donald Sutherland really bust it out as President Snow in the next two films.
• Capitol fashion, yo! The Capitol crowd scenes were really great in terms of nutty hair, clothes, and makeup. For the next film I kinda want to dress up as some Capitol fashionista (though I did wear some Cinna eyeliner for this one). I would have liked to see more of Venia, Octavia, and Flavius in their brilliant glory though.

Things I didn't like:

• the mutts. Without the utter creep factor of what the muttations really are, they came off as simply giant wolfy things. However, I venture that explaining about the mutts would have taken too much time (especially with the film already clocking in at nearly 3 hours). When I told my manfriend what mutts are in the book, his face was exquisite.
• the end battle. Similarly to the first point here, I found the final scene at the Cornucopia not quite what it might have been. Though I suppose having Cato be eaten alive for hours would have both taken too long and been a bit much for a PG13 film.
• the mockingjay pin. Cutting out Madge didn't bother me TOO much, but would it have been that hard to have Katniss' mother give her the pin? As it played out in the film, it just didn't seem significant enough.
• the marketing of Team Peeta/Team Gale. OH MY GOD YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT.
• the casting of Katniss. This isn't an issue with the film itself--since Lawrence was very good in the role--so much as a prior-to-the-film problem, but it bears repeating. Katniss' ethnicity is never stated in the books and based on her physical appearance (black hair, olive skin, grey eyes), it is entirely possible that she is of color. I think it would have been pretty great to see an actress of color in that role.

So yes! A good time was had by all. Very much looking forward to the second two movies (please please PLEASE cast Finnick soon. Hell, I'll save you the trouble: Armie Hammer).