Justice League

Just got back from the Justice League movie.

It's still not as fun as the Marvel films, but it's an improvement over Batman v Superman.  Simply put, it's less depressing.  In some ways it felt like watching several mini-films focusing on different characters, until the end when they all fight together.  With that in mind, I'm going to break my thoughts down by character. 

Batman: I'm still not a fan of Batfleck, but I enjoyed his performance here more than I did in BvS. His personality seemed inconsistent to me - there were times when it felt like the writers were trying to make him into Tony Stark, and other times when he was still as dull as he was in BvS.  Technically I think this was the result of multiple script writers, but in-universe I'm going to chalk it up to this being late in his career.  This Batman has been fighting crime for 20 years, so he's learned to lighten up sometimes.

The Flash: He was the tipping point that makes the movie watchable.  Without his humor, the movie would have been another snoozefest.  He's not my favorite version of the Flash, and his costume hurts my eyes, but overall I like him.  I can't wait to see him in future films.

Wonder Woman:  As usual, Gal Gadot is the best thing in the movie.  She doesn't do much here that we didn't already see in the last two films, but she feels like the most solid character to me. 

Cyborg: He was pretty good.  I like what he brings to the team.  However, there isn't much to him yet.

Aquaman: While I generally like his character design, I didn't like the surfer dude aspect of his personality - he's supposed to be Atlantean royalty, and yet he sounds like a caveman.

Martian Manhunter: Made you look.

Steppenwolf: Ugh, this villain was terrible.  I don't know if they should have gone ahead and used Darkseid, but Steppenwolf was so dull.  He was two dimensional and badly rendered.  I did like the his outfit (he looked more like Ares than Ares did in Wonder Woman), but I wish they'd picked someone with more name recognition.  I guess with all the hero backstories going on, they didn't want to use up a villain who would need a lengthy origin story.

Bottom line:
It's not as good as Wonder Woman, but it's fun and gives me hope for the future.  Maybe DC will learn their lesson.  If the next Justice League movie uses a tone more like the animated series, this cast should work just fine.

Wonder Woman, GotG2, and Spider-Man Homecoming

So, in the past month I’ve seen three super hero movies - Spider-Man Homecoming, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, and Wonder Woman.  All three were incredible, and you can’t go wrong with any of them.

Possible minor spoilers ahead.

Wonder Woman

This was my least favorite of the three, but don’t take that as a negative when the competition’s so fierce.  It’s like saying pizza is your least favorite out of pizza, sex, and video games.  It’s just that a lot of my love for the Wonder Woman movie is actually relief.  Relief that the current DC movie continuity isn’t completely cursed, and relief that a female-led superhero movie can actually do well.  The movie’s biggest strength is that it fills me with hope for future movies.  Wonder Woman gets so much right, and was so necessary to the movie industry, that it feels like sacrilege to point out the flaws. 

But to be completely honest, I think the movie is sort of generic.  90% of what I loved about the movie only worked because it was Wonder Woman.  If they’d swapped her out for a male character (let’s say Hercules if we want to keep the general theme), it would have been just another forgettable action flick.  I love the movie, but it’s not going to be as rewatchable as the Marvel films.

Most movies try to save the best stuff for the end, but I found WW more entertaining at the beginning.  The first half of the movie is outstanding, but the it gets a little dull towards the end, and the final battle is just your standard boss fight.  The villains didn’t exactly sweep me off my feet, and the casting of the Big Bad seemed like an odd choice.  More than anything I see the movie as a foot in the door, proof that female superheroes can succeed in Hollywood after all.  In a future where female-led superhero films are more common, I’m not sure Wonder Woman will really stand out much.  But the success of Wonder Woman means that future might actually happen, and that’s very important.

Guardians of the Galaxy 2

This is my favorite of the three.  If you liked the first one, it’s more of the same, though there’s more character development this time.  While I love the first GotG, the characters were one-dimensional quip-generators, kind of like Suicide Squad in space.  The sequel gives them more depth, which slows down the movie but not enough to make it boring.

The opening battle is one of my favorite movie sequences of all time.  From the trailers, that particular fight looked underwhelming to me.  But in the film itself, they actually made the scene better by taking the focus off the fighting itself.  For spoilers sake I won’t to go into detail, but it had me dancing and singing in my seat.

People find me strange because I’m not very much into music.  (Well, that’s not the only reason they find me strange.)  In my life I’ve owned maybe 3 tapes and 6 CDs, and the ones I’ve owned haven’t seen a lot of use.   I don’t have to listen to music while I’m driving, I don’t go to concerts, and I never just sit and listen to music while doing nothing else.  I generally consider music as something to keep it from being too quiet, but I've never been into it.  And yet, roughly 50% of my love for the GotG movies has to do with the soundtrack.  The music ties into the action so well, that I simply can’t imagine the same films with a standard issue orchestral score.  I’m happy to report GotG2’s soundtrack is just as good as the first, if not better.

GotG2 is definitely the most rewatchable of the three movies I’m reviewing here, and I can’t wait to wear out the blu-ray when it’s released.  I will say that of the three, this movie is the least child-friendly (which is a weird thing to say about a movie with a talking raccoon).  I don’t know if I would bring a small child to this one, as some of the language is a little strong for young ears (including a scene where they talk about Ego's penis), and some of the death scenes are a bit graphic.  Not actually bloody, just… explicit.

Spider-Man: Homecoming

A lot of people complain about reboots, and the Spider-Man franchise is their go-to example.  Personally, I’m okay rebooting a series if you have a good reason for doing so.  But I do hold a reboot to higher standards – did you really have an idea worth throwing out the old continuity?   In this case, definitely yes.  Bringing Spidey into the MCU was the best thing that could have happened to the character.  It changes the character so much.  In the previous films he’s pretty much the only superhero in the world (as far as we know), but in the MCU he has people to look up to.  Instead of just “I can outdo myself and help more people,” now there’s the additional element of “I want to impress the Avengers.”

I think the smartest thing they did was skip his origin story almost entirely.  At this point everyone in the audience knows how Peter got his powers, and there was no reason to waste screen time on it.  There’s one short conversation about getting bitten by a radioactive spider, but there’s almost no mention of Uncle Ben or how power relates to responsibility.  Instead Peter’s moral code is just based around “it’s the right thing to do,” which is deep enough for a 15-year old boy, as far as I’m concerned.  I think the Civil War movie summed it up best when Peter said, “When you can do the things that I can, but you don't, and then the bad things happen? They happen because of you.”  Which is basically a different way of saying “with great power…” but sounds a lot more like how people actually talk.

Michael Keaton did a great job, and I found him a lot more believable than the ax-crazy moustache-twirling villains Spider-Man usually fights.  In some ways I found his motivations a little too understandable, and I have to wonder how many of my friends would turn to supervillainy if presented with the same circumstances.  Occasionally he'd lapse into his Beetlejuice voice for a second, which was distracting, but I didn't mind.

I loved the overall tone of the film.  When the Ant-Man movie came out I kept saying how glad I was to see them using different genres.  Instead of everything being just a “Superhero Action” film, some of them focus on comedy, sci-fi, drama, and so on.  Well, Homecoming is a high school comedy that also happens to be a super hero film.  I’ve seen several reviewers compare Homecoming to a modern John Hughes film, which might be giving Homecoming too much credit, but it’s easy to see what they mean.

So if you only get to see one of the above movies, which should you see?

Well, GotG2 is my favorite, but for other people I’m going to have to recommend Spider-Man.  I think it has more universal appeal.  But let’s face it, if you’re fanatic enough to be reading this, you’re probably going to see all three eventually.

DCTV

Gotham - We watched the first five or six episodes of Gotham, but it was just too dark for us.  I've never been able to get into criminal-focused shows.  Real life is depressing enough, and I'd rather focus on the good guys than the bad.

Arrow - I've tried to get into Arrow, but I just haven't.  It's not as dark as Gotham, but it's still a bit too dark for me.  Plus the cheesy parts are a little too cheesy, probably because they stand out more against all the dark.  When the whole Arrow team gets into costume, it just looks like cosplay to me, because the rest of the world is so gritty and real.

The Flash - This is the best super hero show on television.  Yes it's even cheesier than Arrow, but that's the theme of the show and it's just good fun.  It's like a live action cartoon.  The cast really works well together, and I really enjoy seeing their takes on DC villains.

Legends of Tomorrow - It's kind of fun.  I enjoy watching it.  But, I don't know, it just doesn't feel structured enough for me.  They threw all these characters into a blender and hoped something cohesive would come out, but really it's just kind of a chaotic mess.  But it's a fun mess.

I think my biggest problem with LOT so far, is that I feel like I've seen most of what it has to offer.  They spent the first season bouncing around from time period to time period, always with the same mission (track down Vandal Savage in that time).  I like some of the characters more than others, but I don't find myself in love with any of them.  The breakout character is Captain Cold, and even he got less interesting as time goes on.

But some of the things I've heard about season 2 have piqued my interest, so I'm still going to give it another go.

Supergirl - I'm trying so hard to like this.  Supergirl is one of my favorite comic book characters, and I really want more female superhero shows to gain popularity.  Producers are so leery of female superhero movies, because most of them have tanked hard.  Never mind that those movies were just bad on many levels that had nothing to do with the hero's gender.  If we can just get a few good ones out there to break the perceived curse, then maybe it will open the door for more to be made.

But honestly, the Supergirl TV series is lukewarm at best.  I really like the casting job on the title character, but the rest of the cast is kind of meh.  Hardly anybody has a lot of chemistry together, and I just don't like how some characters are portrayed.  The government agent characters are especially annoying, going back and forth from "all business" to "touchy feely" so much I get whiplash.

And I really don't like most of the villains.  There seems to be a tradition now where the first episode sets up where most of the show's villains will come from.  It makes the writing easier, and keeps you from wasting a lot of screen time on villain origin stories.  Smallville had the kryptonite give everybody different super powers.  The Flash's villains mostly got their powers the same way he got his.  Well, Supergirl has Fort Rozz, a Kryptonian prison from which powerful aliens keep escaping.  I'm just not digging that plotline.

There's an overarching plot about a group of evil Kryptonians, and frankly they're just boring.  I've never been fond of having too many Kryptonians in a Superman-family series; the Kryptonians bored me in Lois and Clark, they bored me in Smallville, and they bore me here.  I've always preferred the continuities where Kryptonian survivors were kept to a minimum.

Supergirl's not great, but it's got room for growth, and I really hope it gets better in the second season.  I know there's going to be a lot of changes with it changing networks, so hopefully it will be enough to save the show.

DCAU - Of course, none of these shows are anywhere near as awesome as the Justice League and Young Justice animated shows.   That entire era of the DCAU was some of the best stuff on television.  Unfortunately, as of the “Flashpoint” animated movie, that era is pretty much over.  The new series of movies is a lot more adult, and a lot less fun.  I still keep adding the new animated movies to my Netflix queue, and I don't hate them... but man, they used to be so much better.

DC Twofer: Suicide Squad and The Killing Joke

Much like Green Lantern and Catwoman, Suicide Squad was not quite as bad as everyone wants it to be.  Yeah, yeah, you can't take my word for it; I like a lot of bad movies.  But for me, Suicide Squad was bad in all the right ways.  Yes, the story doesn't make any sense.  Yes, it was re-edited at the last minute, leaving it a bit incoherent.  Yes, there are plot holes galore.

But all that works for it.  The movie is intentionally chaotic, and the schizophrenic editing fits perfectly with the tone of the film.  Why would anyone want this movie to make sense?  I don't want to see a serious movie about a bunch of crazy comic book villains forced to save the world.  Batman v Superman was coherent and serious, and it sucked.  Suicide Squad is the exact opposite of BvS.  It's a series of barely-connected flashes of violence and comedy, and while it's not for everyone, I thought it was quite fun.

Bottom line:  It's not good, and it's not for everyone, but it's crazy fun if you're in that kind of mood.

I also had the the chance to see the animated "The Killing Joke" on the big screen.  I first read the comic back in the 80s, and I've always had mixed feelings about it. Depending on how you look at it, it's either the best Joker story ever told, or the worst Batgirl story ever told.  Since I'm more of a Batgirl fan than a Joker fan, you can guess which way I lean.

For those not in the know (spoilers ahead), The Killing Joke tells the Joker's origin story.  There have been several versions of his origin, but this one has always been my favorite.  It tells how a struggling comedian has one very bad day, causing him to lose his mind.  It flashes back and forth from the Joker's memory to present day, where the Joker is trying to give Commissioner Gordon a similar bad day.

And part of that bad day includes crippling Gordon's daughter, who happens to be Batgirl. Fans will argue all day long whether this was a good or bad for the character.  After all, it did lead to her becoming Oracle, one of the greatest characters in DC history.  But it also uses Batgirl - one of my favorite heroes of all time - as an object. Barbara is not a character in the comic so much as a plot device, who is crippled just to move the story forward.

The animated version attempts to rectify this by adding a Batgirl story to the beginning (and a small scene at the end that wraps things up).  Unfortunately, the Batgirl story isn't very good.  Worse yet, it's too obvious where the new story ends and comic adaptation begins.  The writing is so different once it turns into The Killing Joke.  They barely wrote any script at all, and mostly just read straight from the comic.  Which brings us to the next problem - some lines that read well in print sound silly when said out loud.

They also made one tiny addition that really bugged me.  Fans have debated for years whether the Joker raped Barbara.  Personally, I never felt he did.  Perfectly Blunt Disclaimer:  I'm not trying to argue whether or not stripping her and taking photos constitutes rape.  He definitely did do that, and if that fits your definition of rape, I won't disagree. But for the purposes of this blog, I'm defining rape as actual sexual penetration. 

The Joker is single-minded, and he took the photos hoping to drive Jim Gordon mad. Now, I could possibly see Joker raping her if he intended to include that in the photos, but when we see the photos, the Joker isn't in any of them.  Granted, the reader isn't shown all the photos.  But I think the artist would have shown at least part of the Joker in at least one of the shown photos, if he was trying to imply physical assault.

Plus, there's the scene where Batman visits Barbara in the hospital.  I strongly feel that if she had been raped, it would have been mentioned there.  Harvey Bullock tells Batman that they found her in a state of undress, and Batman replies, "Undress?"  Bullock answers by telling him they found a lens cap nearby, and he thinks the Joker may have taken some pictures.  If she'd been raped, Bullock would have mentioned it here. 

But that's the comic.  In the animated version, they added one short scene where Batman questions some prostitutes about the Joker's whereabouts.  Their answers seem to indicate that Barbara really was raped, at least in this version.  I don't like that at all.  I know it's a weird double standard.  I can accept the Joker as a psycho clown who murders on a whim, but making him a rapist just makes it too real. 

I'd generally prefer if they'd keep rape out of comics entirely, but I'm also against censorship so it's kind of a catch-22.  But then, I'm not really asking them to censor stories.  It's more accurate to say I'm want them to write stories that I find entertaining, and rape is too volatile a subject to use lightly.  I read comics because they make me smile, and I stop smiling when a character is raped.

The internet is full of people who believe Babs was raped.  It just goes to show that people interpret ambiguous scenes differently, and that's fine.  If a feminist tells me BG was raped, and why it's a sign that women are treated terribly in comics, I listen.  But what bugs me is all the dudebros who seem to want her to have been raped.   The guys who argue passionately that it happened, because they just don't like the Joker character as much if he's not a rapist.  Those guys scare me, and it sickens me that comics are written to please them.

Anyway, Mark Hamill did an excellent job as usual, and most of the rest of the voice cast was great.  However, I was not fond of Commissioner Gordon (Ray Wise).  His lines were very flat, like he wasn't getting into it at all.  The animation was done well, and they did a great job making it look like the comic.

Bottom line: It was nice to see one of my favorite old comics brought to life, but I can't say I really enjoyed it.  I probably won't watch it again. 

Unfriended

A teenager kills herself after an embarrassing video of her is posted online.  Then her ghost comes back to torment her former friends.  Unfriended is a pretty basic story, nothing that's going to make you say wow.  The difference is in how the film is presented.  All the viewer sees is the main character's computer screen.  The movie is shown as if we're seeing live feed from her laptop.  We watch her move the arrow around and see everything she clicks in real time.  In one window she's talking to her friends over Skype.  In another, she has a private chat going on with her boyfriend.  She has her music playlist in another window.  In her web browser, she has Facebook and YouTube open, and she does other web searches over the course of the movie as the plot demands.

And we don't just see what she does, but we see what she almost does.  We see every sentence she almost types, then erases and rewords before hitting enter.  Because of this, we're privy to her thought process, giving us more insight than movies usually offer.  While the characters know a lot more than the audience initially sees, over the course of the movie you find out more of the details that led up to their friend's suicide.  Again, none of the revelations are going to blow you away, but the style is so original that it's hard to look away.  Despite the relatively simple plot, this is one of those movies where you need to pay attention every minute (sometimes to two things at once) or you might miss something significant.

It's tempting to compare this to "found footage" movies like Blair Witch or Cloverfield.  However, found footage movies are inherently less scary to me because, by definition, everything in the movie has already happened.  Unfriended, however, is presented in such a way that it feels like it's happening right now... to you.  If you let yourself get drawn in, then your TV screen becomes your laptop.  The limited view increases your fear, because you feel like something's in the room with you, but you can't make main character turn her head to see.

As much as I liked the concept, I hope this doesn't become a genre like found footage movies did.  The uniqueness of this film is what makes it cool, and it's definitely worth seeing once.  But in some ways it's more like reading a movie than watching one, and once you're over the novelty of the format, it's not the kind of experience you're likely to sit through twice. 

So give this movie a try.   And for extra fun, watch it on your laptop.

Zootopia: Hollywood, Quit Stealing My Ideas!

Zootopia was a lot of fun.  It's well-written, full of easter eggs and casting jokes, and has a great message about racism.  They put so much work into the little details, with all the billboards and magazine covers and so on.  The only thing I didn't enjoy was all the screaming kids in the audience, but that's unavoidable when seeing a matinee of an animated movie.  I can't wait to see Zootopia again on home video, so I can hear all the dialogue.  I'm probably going to wear out my pause button trying to read all the signs in the background.

One thing that bugs me as I get older, is that a lot of my unrealized ideas keep getting made by other people.  No, I'm not accusing anyone of plagiarism, it's just that there's 7 billion people in the world, sooner or later we're going to come up with similar thoughts.  I keep sitting on my ideas for decades, while other people are more motivated to publish their work.  On the bright side, a lot of these works end up being better than mine would have been.  So I'm glad the idea made it out there for the world to see.  On the downside, if I were to finally publish my old ideas, it would look like I was the plagiarist. 

My "Bounty Hunters" story, about a small team of bounty hunters that live on a spaceship?  There's a popular anime that uses the same concept.  The two stories are nothing alike beyond the initial theme, but still it's kind of annoying.  One member of my bounty hunting team is Raven, a woman with short hair who wears a trench coat.  Not long after I created her, the Highlander TV series created a spin-off called "Highlander: The Raven", featuring a protagonist who looked similar to my Raven.  The characters were nothing alike beyond appearance, but it was still a weird coincidence.  I mean, if they'd called it "Highlander: The Mockingbird" I wouldn't have even noticed the similarities, but they had to pick a Raven.

And there's more, and I'm not saying I was always first.  I once wrote a short story about a woman who gains skills by remembering past lives, only to find out there was already popular comic book with a similar plot.  When it happens in that order, I'm never quite sure if I actually came up with the idea, or read about the other comic first and forgot about it.  Another example is The Cat Club.  When I was a kid in the early 80s, I drew comics by that name.  Later I found a series of children's books in the library, called "Jenny and the Cat Club." 

My Cat Club was basically GI Joe, but all the good guys were cats and the bad guys were dogs.  In later years, I put a couple of evil cats on the dog team... but not vice-versa.  I didn't go into too much detail about the civilians of this universe, but usually they were shown to be cats.  There were a couple of examples of dogs betraying their kind to help the cats, but for the most part it seemed like all the dogs in the world were evil.

After I graduated high school, I started thinking about modernizing the idea.  But when I really looked at the subject matter, I thought, "Man, that's racist."  So I started writing out ways to make it non-racist.  Or better yet, make racism the central theme of the universe.  In my modern, unwritten version of the Cat Club, only dogs and cats evolved into more humanoid forms (there is an in-universe reason for this).  Dogs and cats live together in shaky harmony.  There are some racial supremacists on both sides, but most citizens believe in equality.  Still, a lot of dogs and cats are nervous around each other, and tend to hang around their own species. 

A lot of racism issues would be touched upon.  There would be some inter-species dating, but some groups would be against it.  Some retailers would refuse to sell to the opposite species.  Some sports would only allow one species or the other.  Legal or not, some employers would more readily hire one or the other.  I'd try to avoid any direct correlation between dogs/cats and real-life races.  In some ways life is better for the cats, in some ways it favors the dogs.  Neither would be inherently evil or good.  They have a lot of biological differences that make them more suited to certain jobs, but society tries (and often fails) to treat them as equals.

My main character was Midnight, an ex-military cat who is constantly at odds with his own racism.  He had a dog-related tragedy in his past, and has distrusted them ever since.  On an academic level he believes dogs and cats should have equal rights, but on a personal level he doesn't want anything to do with dogs.  That's as much detail as I'll go into for now, but you see where I'm going with this.  Zootopia has a lot of the same themes.  Instead of cats vs dogs, it's carnivores vs herbivores, but the racism theme is very similar.  Mine's different enough that I could easily release it without being sued, but a lot of people would still read it and say, "He got that idea from Zootopia."

I suppose that's not the worst thing in the world.  There's a lot of popular media right now where it's obvious where the authors got their inspiration.  It just bugs me that I could be accused of copying when I had my idea more than 20 years before Zootopia.  All that proves is that I'm lazy.  Still, if someone was going to read my mind and run with it, I'm glad it was Disney.  Zootopia is awesome.

Batman v Superman: How Do You Screw That Up?

I really wanted to like this one.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is dull.  It's not terrible, it's not unwatchable, it's just incredibly dull.  Too many shots are filmed in slow motion, there's too many pointless dream sequences, and there's just too much exposition.  I think it could possibly have been saved through editing, but even some of the "good" parts were a letdown.  Let's break it down:

Superman - As in Man of Steel, this is a more realistic, less idealistic take on the character.  This is a guy who doesn't always know the right thing to do, and isn't the World's Oldest Boy Scout we've seen in other incarnations.  His motivations are real and human, and he does his best to be a good person. Unfortunately he's also just plain boring most of the time.  I still love his costume, and it looks even better now because this time it's in color. 

Batman - Ben Affleck is a perfectly acceptable Batman.  Unfortunately he's written as a big thug with lots of good tech.  There's a couple of scenes that show off his ninja skills, but his detective skills are blatantly absent.  His reasons for wanting to stop Superman are absolutely nuts, not the conclusions of a professional thinker.  The movie has an Idiot Plot where at least an hour could have been shaved off just by having people talk to each other, or even think a little bit harder.  "World's Greatest Detective" my ass.

Personal nitpick:  There's way too much imagery of Batman using guns, which is a big no no for the Batman mythos.   Okay, arguably he doesn't technically fire an actual gun at any point, but between dream sequences, tracking devices fired from normal-looking guns, Batmobile weapons, etc... it's like the writers really wanted to use the Punisher instead.  All the theatrical Batman costumes have had fake muscles, but this one takes the cake.  Batman's look is obviously taken from The Dark Knight Returns, and that's fine, but this suit is so bulky it takes out the "lithe" aspect out of his character.  

Lex Luthor - I love the concept.  Lex as a young genius is great, it reminds me of the older comics when he was a mad scientist instead of a millionaire.  But his performance comes out more like the Joker than Lex Luthor.  His motivations make no sense, except that he really is just insane.  Okay, there are reasons for the things he does, if you're invested enough to pay that much attention, but still... surely there are simpler ways to entertain himself.  And his voice grated on my nerves.

Wonder Woman - Truly the high point of the movie, every scene with WW was spectacular.  I can't think of a single complaint about this take on the character.  I'm looking forward to the Wonder Woman movie, partly because Zack Snyder isn't directing it. 

The Plot - Most of the movie builds up to the fight.  There's lots of misunderstandings, with Supes and Bats each thinking the other responsible for things they didn't do.  It tries its hardest to show why these characters feel they need to hurt each other, but we've already seen these characters fight in other media, for much more believable reasons. 

When the actual fight finally happens, it's a bit of a letdown.  It's just not a very well-done fight, I'm sorry. But - once B&S stop fighting and become friends (if that's a spoiler, you're an idiot), the movie actually gets pretty good.  I would not mind watching the final 20 minutes a few more times, but the rest of the movie is too plodding to ever slog through again.

There's several scenes that foreshadow future movies, and some of those look pretty interesting.  I'm not going to give up on the DC cinematic universe.  If they'll just get some different directors, give up on that "humor embargo", do more editing, and maybe take some inspiration from the Justice League animated series... who knows?  All the ingredients are there, they just need some better cooks.

NES Remix vs What I Really Want In A Retro Game

NES Remix is a series of games for the Wii U and the 3DS, which allow you to play snippets of 8-bit Nintendo games.  So far there have been three games in the series: NES Remix 1 & 2 for the Wii U (available for download separately or as a compilation disc), and Ultimate NES Remix for the 3DS (which is basically a "best of" compilation of the Wii U games).  The bulk of each game is a bunch of minigame challenges, where you try to get the best time while performing a task in a classic game.  For example, you might have to collect 10 coins in level 4-1 of Super Mario Bros, or you might have to counter Bald Bull's charge in Punch-Out!, or you might have to find a secret cave in The Legend of Zelda.

Completing these tasks earns you stars, which unlock the Remix levels, which is where the game really shines.  The Remix levels mix up elements from classic games.  You might play a level of Donkey Kong using Link (who can't jump), or try to collect coins in Super Mario Bros while controlling Samus Aran, or control Toad in a Zelda II level.  But it's not all about crossovers, some of the Remix levels just take normal levels and play around with the formula.  You might play a level of Super Mario Bros in reverse, or at a super high speed, or with the screen constantly going dark.  The game forces you to remember muscle memory you haven't used in 30 years, then it mixes it up so you can't even rely on that muscle memory.  It's very creative and always keeps you wondering what the next level is going to be.

But is it fun?
Well, I love nostalgia.  Playing these games brings me back to the 80s, and the Remixed levels are especially neat.  But I can't tell you how many times I've gotten 3 stars on a challenge, and thought "Thank goodness I never have to do that again."  When a video game has you thinking things like that, something is wrong.  I love the concept, and it's something I really wanted when I was a kid.  But the challenges I really like are few and far between, and there's very little replay value in the others.

Here's what I would have liked to have seen:
Something along the lines of the browser-based game "Super Mario Bros Crossover".  Instead of microgames, I'd like to see a full platform game, where different levels are based on different side scroller games.  You'd have a few Mario levels, a few Metroid levels, a few Zelda II levels, and so on.  At the start of each level you'd pick a character, so you could have any Nintendo character/level combination.  The different characters would control differently and have their own skills and abilities.

But I run risk of judging Remix based on what I want instead of what it is.  As it is, the NES Remix games are nostalgia-filled fun, but more remix challenges could have made it a lot better.

Samus Aran: Chozo?

On my personal blog I recently made a post about whether or not Samus Aran was transgender.  But while writing it, one little thing bothered me and I thought I'd expand it into a full blog.  Plus I just really like babbling about Metroid.

I first played Metroid in 1986.  I immediately fell in love with the universe, even though not many details were actually given.  The instruction booklet had some info about space pirates, the Galactic Federation Police, and other events leading up to the game, but that's about it.  I scanned all other media for more information, and I accepted whatever I found as canon.  One Nintendo magazine said that Samus used to be an acrobat.  Boom, canon.  Kid Icarus had an alternate version of Metroids called Komaytos.  Boom, shared universe canon.

I was convinced there were further secrets in the game if only I explored hard enough.  There were so many secret areas (actually glitches) you could reach by letting doors close on you and climbing up through the walls.  I just knew if I found the right one, I'd get to see more of the story.  One of the secret codes was "Justin Bailey" - I was sure that was the name of another character in the Metroid universe.

While there were elements of Metroid in other media (such as the silly "Captain N" cartoon), real canon information would not be forthcoming until the release of Metroid 2 in 1991.  Until then, I had to make up my own story.  So, I drew my own comics.  First I drew pictures of every enemy in the game.  I drew and defined several different types of metroids, basing them off the instruction booklet, their appearance in the game, and even other fan art.  Then I started drawing my own original enemies and allies.

In 1989 I drew a really bad comic book adaptation of the Metroid game.  I followed this with two additional issues, the second of which was a collection of short stories.  At one point it crossed over with another sci-fi comic I was drawing, The Bounty Hunters (which starred Boba Fett).  Finally I combined both universes into one, with a series called "Space Stories". I continued drawing Space Stories all throughout high school, college, and a bit beyond.

In my universe, the Space Pirates were humans, who dressed like ancient Earth pirates despite their futuristic technology.  If I'd known how they'd eventually look in Super Metroid, I would gladly have gone with that instead, because my designs were ridiculously silly.  My version of Samus Aran had green hair, because that's what she looked like when I played her in the game.  When I later realized that her hair's only green because of the Varia suit, I threw in a line about her dying it green.

So yeah, the lack of real canon, combined with my own dumb ideas, made me write a lot of crazy things.  Now, I loved the next two sequels - Metroid 2 (Gameboy, 1991) and Super Metroid (SNES, 1994), but they didn't really expand the universe much.  Goofy as it was, my comics were still the best canon I had.  So, when Nintendo finally got around to fleshing out Samus Aran's universe, in some ways it was already too late.  I'm glad they made the effort, but the results didn't always make me happy.

For one thing, they finally gave Samus an official look for when she's out of uniform.  There had been several shots of her unarmored form before, in strategy guides and issues of Nintendo Power, and of course at the end of the various games.  But none of these were consistent; they all just looked like someone told the artist, "Draw a woman."  It wasn't until her "Zero Suit" that they all started drawing her the same way, and I can't say I love the result.  I was hoping for someone sort of butch, attractive but still tough looking.  Instead we got a blonde centerfold with bosoms that defy gravity.  I've grown to accept it (I even main ZSS in Smash Bros), but it's definitely not what I would have chosen.

And then there's her personality in "Other M"... Okay, I'm not going to go into too much detail here, because the internet's already full of bad Other M reviews.  The gist is that Samus acted way too subservient in that game.  To be fair, it's possible they were doomed from the start.  Samus Aran had been around for 24 years by that point, and the earlier games didn't really show much of her personality.  During that time different players had built up different ideas of what her personality was like, and when Other M didn't line up with their headcanon, it felt like betrayal.  But that's just a possible explanation, not an excuse.  It really isn't a very good game so don't look to me to defend it.


But the thing the bothered me the most was...  the manga.  I'm sorry, I know that's sacrilege for some people.  But the "raised by Chozo" thing really ruined my headcanon.  Okay, some background for those who don't know what I'm talking about.  In the original Metroid, you occasionally find powerups held by statues of strange bird people, called Chozo.  In the manga, it is explained that Samus was orphaned as a child, and raised by Chozo.  They trained her to be a good fighter, and infused her with technology.  This explains why their weapons are compatible with her suit.

It's not a terrible explanation, but here's my problem.  When I played through the original Metroid, I always felt like the space pirates had built their base in the ruins of some unknown ancient civilization.  As Samus explored it, I thought it was cool that it was as mysterious to her as it was to the player.  Who were these weird bird people?  What killed them off?  Why does their ancient technology work so well with her suit?  I hoped these questions would be answered in future games, but not as backstory.

The developers admit some of their inspiration came from Alien, so I'll use that as an example.  Remember when the landing party in Alien entered the bizarre ship, and came across the long-dead "Space Jockey" sitting at the control panel?  Remember the sense of awe?  This creature was obviously technologically advanced, and yet it also looks so old.  And despite its power, something killed it from the inside.  Now what if Kane had suddenly said, "Oh, these guys.  Yeah, I grew up living next door to some of these dudes.  And that means this must be an egg transport ship.  Make sure we avoid the cargo hold, there's facehuggers there."  Doesn't that kill the mood a bit?

So, no, the Chozo story is not for me.  I can accept Samus being transgender, but raised by bird guys is too much. 

(Book) Star Wars: Lost Stars

I love sci-fi, but I'm often annoyed that it's considered a genre rather than a setting.  Whether a sci-fi movie is action, horror or drama, it gets put on the same "Sci Fi" shelf at the video store.  Or it would if there were still video stores.  Genres have been getting more specific in recent years, though.  I've seen bookstores with a section for "teenage paranormal romance", which is pretty specific (if troubling). 

Most Star Wars books I've read were pretty much the same genre, though; a sort of action/adventure/drama blend.  There were a couple of short stories that leaned toward horror, but for the most part Star Wars fiction seems to stick to a formula.  Lost Stars is a first for me, though, as it is primarily a Star Wars romance.  It takes you through the events of the original Star Wars trilogy, but from the perspective of two students at the Imperial Academy. 

The Empire may be evil, but many of the actual Imperials are good people who have been misled about what is best for the universe.  These two students are some of the most noble-hearted characters one can imagine, but they are indoctrinated by the Empire's lies.  Eventually one of them realizes the truth about the Empire, putting them on opposite sides of the war, but still very much in love.  And for the sake of spoilers that's as far as I'll go into the plot.

The characters are fleshed out and believable.  Their rationalizations for following the Empire actually make sense.  If you've ever wondered how evil organizations (both fictional and real) can gain so many followers when they're "clearly" monsters, this book does a good job of showing their point of view.  The Empire tightly controls information, distorts the Rebels' motives, and promises a future where everyone prospers and lives in harmony.  Even when the Empire commits atrocities too big to hide, those actions are explained as being for the greater good.  It's true that the high ranking Imperials are greedy and power mad, but the underlings generally believe that the Empire is a force of good, and that the Rebels are terrorists.  It's so well presented that it makes me worry about my own government.

Being a love story, it's not for everybody.  But don't worry, it's not some shallow Twilight angst-fest, or steamy Harlequin romance.  It's just a decent sci-fi drama that centers on a forbidden relationship.  And it's easily the best Star Wars book I've read.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens

I'll try to make this spoiler-free, but it really depends on what you consider a spoiler.

Okay, let's get this out of the way right now:  This movie is fantastic.  It's everything we were hoping to get out of the prequels.  It's well-paced, action packed, creative, and visually stunning.  I can't remember being happier watching a movie.  At certain points I was actually stressed because I was afraid the movie would end soon.  If the movie had been four hours long, I'd still have come out saying, "Just five more minutes."  It's not perfect, but it's easily better than any of the prequels, and at least as good as the worst of the original trilogy.

That said, a lot of the scenes were rehashes of scenes from earlier movies.  There were many times when I found myself thinking, "This is just like that scene in A New Hope."  But that's okay, because everything that was redone, was redone much better.  The writing was better, the acting was better, and the visuals were much more crisp.  When I talk about visuals, I'm not just saying the special effects were better.  I mean the scenes were shot so much more dramatically, really pulling you into the movie.

I will say, a couple of the CGI characters were too cartoony.  One evil character in particular looked very much like a silly caricature of Gollum... and he was supposed to be scary.  We saw it in 3D, and it was excellent.  I bought 3D tickets by accident, and I was afraid I would regret it, but I'm very glad I did.  I do still plan to see it in 2D, but if you're on the fence, see it in 3D.

I like the new characters, though I was surprised there weren't more of them.  I was expecting to have to learn half a dozen new names, but I found I'd already subliminally memorized them from the toys and other media.

Anyway, there's not much else I can say without spoilers, and there's little point in this review anyway.  I can't imagine anyone reading this blog who isn't already a Star Wars fan, and I can't imagine any Star Wars fan skipping this movie.  But if you're worried about how Disney is going to handle the franchise, you can put your mind at rest.  I was skeptical, but I now have high hopes for the future of Star Wars.  It's in better hands than ever.

This is probably the vaguest blog I've ever written, but I wanted to get all that down before the negative nerf herders of the internet swoop down and pick the movie apart like a pack of womp rats.  I am officially declaring it right now, before they have a chance to go too far:   

If you don't like this movie, you aren't a true Star Wars fan.

(I don't really mean that... like what you want, and call yourself a fan if you want.  But I don't want to hear a lot of stupid complaints from people who consider themselves Star Wars fans.)

Super Mario Maker

Christmas of 1985, I got my Nintendo Entertainment System, along with Duck Hunt, Gyromite, and of course Super Mario Bros.  Within the next few months I expanded my collection.  Two of the games - Excitebike and Wrecking Crew - allowed you to create your own levels.  I loved designing my own levels, and wished more games had the feature.  Specifically, I always wished Super Mario Bros had a level edit mode.

So to put it simply, Super Mario Maker is the game I've been wanting since 1985.  I do wish it had come out closer to 1985 than to 2015, but better late than never, I suppose.  Let's face it, if it had come out earlier, it wouldn't have had nearly as many options.  SMM allows you to choose from four graphical modes, and you can share your levels online, neither of which would have been possible in 1985.

So, how does it measure up to my 30 years of expectations?  I love it!  It gives you a great selection of tools, lots of options, and some neat little Easter eggs.  It's like two games in one - it's fun to create your own levels, but it's also fun to play the levels others have made.

Just For Fun

Of course, Sturgeon's Law is in full effect here; you don't come across many truly great levels.  But that's all right.  It's easy to recognize bad levels right away and skip them.  I do wish it had more options for finding specific types of levels; maybe future updates will help on that front.

But the bottom line is that it's the near-perfect Mario game.  It's got the best elements of the four best Super Mario games, it's got an unlimited number of levels, and you can make your own stages.  I can't imagine any Mario fan not wanting to own this one.

On a personal note: My preordered copy arrived the same weekend my my wife went into the hospital.  (See my personal blog for more details on that.)  I considered trying to get a refund right away, because we needed to watch every cent.  But it was also my birthday present, and I had bought it online using reward points, so I kept it.

Yo Dawg I Heard You Like Goombas

It turned out to be the perfect game to have around while my wife recovered.  I took nearly a month off work, most of which I spent sitting near my wife, ready to cater to her needs.  The great thing about Super Mario Maker is that you can play it in short bursts.  As a maker, you can save your progress at any time if you need to do something.  As a player, you only play one level at a time, and most of the levels are relatively short.

There's no deep plot to hold your attention, and there's no drought between save points.  I could make involved levels while my wife napped, or play a few short levels when she was awake and might need something.  I'm glad it came out when it did.

If you have Super Mario Maker and want to follow me, my Miiverse ID is: Fury1958
My Super Mario Maker Bookmark page is here: Fury1958

Here's some YouTube videos of someone playing my levels:

My Reviewing Style

Now that I've sorted all my entertainment blogs here, I thought I'd babble a bit about my reviewing style. I'm hoping to get in the habit of posting more often, even if it's just a few sentences about the most recent movie I've seen.

I think I'm a generally optimistic reviewer, at least compared to the rest of the internet. People these days are overly critical, IMO, or maybe only the most jaded opinions are loud enough to be heard. For me, the worst thing a movie can be is boring. Beyond that, I don't get overly judgmental about hard-to-swallow plots, bad dialogue, or unrealistic science.

Also, some people demand every movie to be a blockbuster. TV shows can have filler episodes, but theatrical movies are expected to knock your socks off with every installment. I don't feel that way. Some movies are just meant to be enjoyable popcorn munchers. I'm fine with some movies being smart and subdued, while others are mindless and energetic. I like bad movies as much as good movies, as long as they're entertaining. And I've explained in previous blogs why I don't share society‘s disdain for remakes, reboots, and sequels.

Now... all that said, that doesn't mean all my posts are going to be glowing reviews. I might like ten movies for every one I hate, but sometimes only the bad one inspires me to write a blog about it. But only sometimes. Overall, I think my reviews have been pretty positive.

Reviled movies I Like

Just for fun, here's some movies other people hated that I liked.

Jurassic Park 3: Like I said above, not everything needs to be a blockbuster. JP3 is a perfectly fun action movie that takes place in the JP universe. It has an Excuse Plot that probably took ten minutes to write; all they had to do was think of a reason to drop these characters onto the island so they could try to escape. It doesn't move the series forward, and overall it feels less like a movie and more like an episode of "Jurassic Park The Series". And that's fine with me. It's never boring, it has good special effects (though maybe dated now), and let's face it, I'm just a sucker for dinosaurs.

Green Lantern: This wasn't a great movie, but it was good campy fun. An enjoyable outing that didn't deserve all the hate it got.

Fantastic Four (2005): Same as above. Fun and cheesy, and really captures the family dynamic the group is supposed to have. I don't WANT them to make a serious movie about characters with these goofy powers. That would miss the point entirely, and I think 2015's terrible reboot just might be proof of that.

Catwoman: Okay, this really wasn't very good, and I have no desire to see it again. But I did like it more than I thought I would. This is one of those movies that had more bad reviews than it actually had viewers, and that's just unfair. People already reviewed it in their minds before it even came out, when they first released photos of Halle Berry in her costume. And while it was not a great film by any means, it was not even remotely as bad as people wanted it to be.

Star Wars prequels and Special Editions: It feels a little odd to defend a franchise that made so much money, but Star Wars has been such a big part of my life that I hate to see it endure unfair criticism. Episode I was a bit boring in spots, Episodes 2 & 3 have Hayden's wooden acting and a bland love story, but all movies have flaws. I still think people are holding these movies up to impossible standards, and they would have been better received if not for the expectations that (used to) come with STAR WARS. Regarding the Special Editions, the updated scenes in the theatrical versions were a bit jarring, but once they remastered them for DVD they got much better.

Beloved movies I Hate

But just to show I have unpopular opinions in both directions, here's some movies a lot of people seem to love, but that I dislike:

Most Quentin Tarantino films: I'm not against violent films. But Tarantino's films (at least those that I've seen) are violent in a way that just doesn't hold my interest. It's all bad people doing bad things to other bad people, and it's just not the reason I watch movies.

Most Westerns: I'm really not much into historical fiction in the first place, as I prefer settings with futuristic technology or magical fantasy lands. But Westerns in particular annoy me more than most other time periods. They're the essence of male fantasy, where all the men are macho, and the women are mostly MacGuffins. There have been a few Westerns I liked, but they're usually deconstructions of the genre.

The Bourne Identity series: I find this series so bland and repetitive, I just don't know how it got made into multiple movies.

Hated movies I Hate

And just to show that I don't always pick the opposite of whatever everybody else is doing, here's some movies most people hate that I also dislike:

Cool World: This one is significant to me, because it was one of the few times I've seen a movie in the theater by myself, and therefore formed an opinion with no chance of being influenced by those around me. Although there was one point late in the film when a young girl stood up and yelled, "This movie sucks!" (which was more entertaining than anything on the screen), but I can't call her influential because I'd already formed my opinion by then. I spent most of the movie thinking, ”They've got Street Fighter II in the lobby...”

Wayne's World 2: We walked out halfway through. 'nuff said.

Batman & Robin: Of course everyone blames this one for killing that series, but in some circles it's starting to make a comeback as a "so bad it's good" movie. I'll still watch it if it's on TV, and it's great fodder for Rifftrax. But good? No.

Alien 3: Alien is one of my favorite horror movies of all time. Aliens is one of my favorite action movies of all time. Alien 3 is one of my least favorite movies of all time.  I could rant for hours on the reasons I hate Alien 3. Some other time maybe.

Polarizing movies

And for the heck of it, here's some movies that people love or hate:

Twister: I love this movie. It's terrible, but it's awesome. In my house it is quoted constantly.

Independence Day: Honestly I'm not even sure if this movie is popular. I know it made an impact on Hollywood, but I also hear a lot of people thought it was dumb.  Depending on who you ask, it's either a great homage to classic sci-fi, or it rips off a lot of classic sci-fi.  Actually, I've found that for most people, the difference between an homage and a rip-off is whether they enjoyed it. Like, Airplane! is a parody/homage to lots of classic disaster movies, but Disaster Movie is just a rip-off.  Anyway, I like ID4. 

Titanic: It made gazillions of dollars and got stellar reviews, and yet every time anyone speaks of it, it's to say how much they hated it. Though to be fair, it's mostly the hype they hated.  I try to avoid judging a movie on its hype.

Obscure movies

And last but not least, a bad movie I like that you've never heard of.

Undercover Blues: Sometimes people latch on to movies without even knowing why. Undercover Blues is a harmless, forgettable comedy about a married couple of semi-retired secret agents. For some reason my wife and I love this movie, we've watched it dozens of times, and we quote it every bit as much as the Princess Bride. We've yet to meet anyone else who has even heard of it. Note that this is not a recommendation; I'm serious when I say you'll probably find it forgettable. I try not to show this one to people because, well, it's kind of fun having a movie that's just ours.

Like, Ant-Man and Stuff

Ant-man was exactly as good as I thought it would be. Not a blockbuster, but more of a low-key entry into the MCU. It might have been better suited for an arc on Agents of SHIELD than for a theatrical movie. But that's okay. I think it's too much to expect that every marvel movie is going to just explode from the screen and knock our socks off. As long as they're not outright boring, I'll probably still enjoy them.

I liked that it was something of a "Superhero comedy", even if I didn't really connect with a lot of the film's humor. Too many super hero movies feel like the same movie with a different skin, so I like that they're playing with the formula. I hope they play with it even more. I don't like "Super Hero" being a genre in itself, and I think there's plenty of room for super hero movies that are also comedy, horror, romance, or whatever. Overall, the movie didn't do a lot for me. We'll still buy the blu-ray for our collection, but I doubt we'll watch it over and over like we did with some of the other Avengers movies.

There's been a few disappointments lately. I didn't bother seeing Fantastic Four or Pixels after all their reviews, which is too bad because both of them could have been really interesting with the right direction. we started to watch Jupiter Ascending on Netflix, but only made it through the first 45 minutes or so. The special effects were nice,'but it just wasn't giving us enough exposition fast enough, and we got bored. But I didn't have high hopes for that one anyway.

Speaking of Netflix, we finally got around to binge-watching Daredevil. That was totally worth it. It's a bit on the bloody side, so you'll be covering your eyes a lot if you're as squeamish as KJ. But it's well written and does a good job of making you want to see what happens next.

I'm anxiously awaiting all the new super hero movies and TV shows, but I am worried that they're overdoing it. Eventually people will get sick of them, or there will be enough bad ones that it makes the whole genre look bad, and the market for super heros will crash. But I'm going to enjoy it as long as it lasts.

Reorganization

I'm reorganizing my blog a little bit.  From now on, blogs about movies, books, video games, and other entertainment will go here:
http://1958fury.blogspot.com/

Blogs about GLBT issues, politics, and other serious matters will go here:
http://1958-fury.blogspot.com/

Some older blog entries may appear on both pages for a while, but going forward I'm keeping the fluffy stuff away from the serious stuff.

My blog about Dungeons & Dragons and other RPGs remains here:
http://1958fury-campaignjournal.blogspot.com/

Jurassic World

I saw Jurassic World twice yesterday.  Once regular, and once in IMAX 3D.

I'd have to say it's the best movie I've seen in a long time.  No, it's not a Shakespearean masterpiece, but as a fun action movie / SFX showcase, it's top-notch.  There's no point where you're going to say, "wow, I didn't see that plot twist coming."  You'll guess pretty early which characters are going to die (hint: it's not the two kids).  And the bad guy's motivations are a bit floopy here and there, to the point where it felt like he was just the "designated evil dude".

So no, it's not going to win awards for the script.  The plot is forwarded by egotistical people making obviously bad decisions over and over again.  The occasional dramatic interludes felt like they were added as an obligation, so the writers didn't have to admit the whole movie was a tech demo.  And you know what?  I don't care.  It's okay if some movies are more like rides than serious stories.  And Jurassic World is definitely a ride.

The special effects have come a long way since the first one (or even the third one).  Watching the original Jurassic Park (which has been playing on TV non-stop) and JW in the same weekend has shown me just how much better CGI is now.  Back in 1993 JP had mind-blowing effects, and some of those shots make me cringe now. 

If you're wondering whether to see it in 2D or 3D, I would suggest 3D.  Trust me, I don't always like 3D.  I'm not an anti-3D snob like some people (*cough* Marty *cough*), but there are definitely some movies where it works better than others.  We saw Avengers: Age of Ultron in both 2D and 3D, and the 3D version frankly sucked.  But Jurassic World's 3D is crisp and well done.  Jurassic World begs for 3D.  It demands 3D.  It slaps its behind while moaning THREEEE DEEEE ME BABY!  ...or something.

It's funny, both the original Jurassic Park and Jurassic World both have a strong theme of "Don't play God."  In the first movie that meant, "Don't make dinosaurs."  But in the years between JP and JW, people have gotten used to dinos, and accepted them as just animals.  So now  "playing God" means designing brand new dinosaurs.  I guess in the next one, "playing God" will mean "don't give raptors jet packs and laser turrets."

(POTENTIAL SPOILERS)
Which makes me wonder where the next film will go.    Not to go into detail on the ending, but I doubt the next film will take place in the theme park.  Which is too bad.  I know they can't make the same movie over and over, but I love the Jurassic World setting.  Honestly, I would have been perfectly happy watching a movie where people visit the JW park and everything goes right.  I'd love it if the JW park was simply used as a background setting for movies in another genre.  A romantic comedy that happens to be set in Jurassic World?  I'm there.  I mean, 50 First Dates would have been 20% better if Adam Sandler had worked at Jurassic World instead of a marine park.

But given the military aspect of JW's plot, I have a theory that the next movie will be called something like "Jurassic War", and involve using dinos as weapons.  I'm not sure I want it to go in that direction, and if that happens I'll protest by only seeing it twice on opening weekend.

Anyway, to sum up:  I really liked Jurassic World, and I want a pet velociraptor.

Wii U - First Impressions

I got a bonus at work for having been there 15 years (yay me).  Don't worry, we're doing responsible stuff with the majority of it.  But I also wanted to splurge a little and get something just for myself.  So I, uh, got a Wii U.

I know, I know.  By most accounts, the Wii U is the least powerful (and least successful) of the three current generation systems, and I worry that I might be buying a failing product.

But as I get older, I find that I'm just not connecting with modern gamers. I have no interest in the first person shooters that dominate the XBox and Playstation systems. And when I do see an Xbox/Playstation game I actually want (like Alien: Isolation), it's usually also available on the PC.  But these days I'm more into playing retro-style games, and remakes/sequels of the games I played on my NES back in the 80s.

The Wii U is a really nifty system.  The tablet-like controller works very well, and seems like something all systems should do in the future.  They don't necessarily need to come with their own proprietary tablet controller like the Wii U, but I definitely think all future PS and Xbox systems ought to release apps that link the system to your iPad/Android/etc tablet (or even phone). Given how many things we do on video game systems now that don't even involve joysticks (Netflix, etc), controlling them with a tablet is a no-brainer.

A few minor complaints.  Setting up the system took forever, what with downloading and installing updates, and transferring everything from the old Wii to the new system.  And it is surprising that a new system in this day and age doesn't play DVDs or Blu-Rays.  And of course the game selection isn't very good yet, but I can live with that.  I only buy about one console game every six months anyway.

I got the bundle that comes with Mario Kart 8 and Nintendo Land.  Mario Kart has never looked better, and the tracks are extremely creative this time around.  I love the antigravity areas and the pretty underwater effects.  Even the retro tracks have lots of new features to keep things fresh.  The controls are spot-on perfect, and you can still use the wheel controllers from Mario Kart Wii.  It has a robust selection of characters and vehicles, and the DLC makes the selection even better.  I especially love the Legend of Zelda DLC.

Honestly, Mario Kart 8 has quickly become one of my top ten favorite games of all time.  No, better than that; I believe MK8 is one of mankind's top ten greatest achievements.  I'm not sure where it falls on the list, probably somewhere above the telephone but just below the Cheesy Gordita Crunch.

Nintendo Land, on the other hand, isn't exactly knocking my socks off.  Like the Wii's "Wii Sports" disc, Nintendo Land is pretty much a tech demo - a collection of shallow mini games designed to show off what you can do on the Wii U Gamepad.  I've only tried three or four of the games so far, and none of them made me want to play them again.  However, some of the reviews rave about how fun it is as a multiplayer game, so I'll hold off judgement until I've had a chance to play it with others.  I will say that all the tutorials are driving me nuts.  Nintendo Land could very well be called "Tutorial: The Game". 

So far I'm incredibly happy with the system.  If you want to friend me on the Wii U or any other system, here's all my friend codes:

MiiVerse: Fury1958 
3DS: 1306-5310-8353
Steam: 1958Fury
XBox 360: MattAndKJ

Super Smash Bros 3DS (...and Almost Good Games)

I've noticed a pattern when I review video games; I tend to give more backstory than actual review.   In my blog about Injustice: Gods Among Us, I spent as much time talking about the history of Mortal Kombat as I did about Injustice itself.  In my Alien: Isolation blog, I wrote more about the Commodore 64 Alien game than I did about Isolation.  I think this may just be my style.  If a game reminds me of other games, I like to make comparisons.  And don't get me started on ramblings where I talk about how I blog, such as this paragraph.  So if you want to skip to where I talk about Super Smash Bros, just scroll down to the bolded part.

Anyway... Before I write about Super Smash Bros for the 3DS, I want to talk for a minute about games that are awesome... except for the "game" part.  Games where the programmers went all-out in making the game as complete as possible, but still failed in the basic aspects of making it fun.

A lot of my examples are going to be from the Commodore 64.  The C64 was a peculiar machine - it was a computer that wanted to be a game system, or possibly vice-versa.  It had graphics that were a fair bit better than the Atari 2600, but not quite as good as the 8-bit Nintendo... except when they were.  Some programmers managed to get more out of the graphics than others.  Well, that's true of any system, but it was particularly glaring on the C64.  But the C64 controls were even more erratic.  It had ports for Atari 2600 joysticks, which aren't the most precise controllers in video game history anyway, but used on the C64 they were particularly mushy.

So anyway, the games:

Project Firestart (C64, 1989)

As far as I'm concerned, Project Firestart was the first "Survival Horror" computer game.  If ever a game came out that could be called "Resident Evil in space", this is it, and it was released years before the first Resident Evil.  You're sent to investigate a deep space research station, which sent out a distress call before going silent.  You dock with the station, and the first few halls are completely empty.  You hear nothing but your own echoing footsteps. Then you enter one room and see the mutilated body of a scientist, who used his last bit of energy to write a warning on the wall in his own blood.  The game shows you a quick closeup of the body as the music plays a scare chord.  As you continue to explore the station, you find many more bodies.  You access computers to find clues.  One one computer you find some journals that explain what's going on - the scientists had created some creatures for labor purposes, and those creatures got loose.

That's when you finally see the creatures themselves.  These tall, green tentacled monsters show up and you have to run or fight.  You encounter them several more times during your explorations, and several plot twists keep you from just running back to your ship and hightailing it out of there.  All told it's not as long as Resident Evil, and it does resort to backtracking to prolong the length of the game.  But for the time, it was revolutionary.  The graphics may look ancient now, but at the time it was some of the best I'd seen.  All in all, it was a brilliant game...

 
...except for the gameplay.  While I loved exploring the space station, fending off the creatures was annoying because the weapons were terrible.  There were a couple of different types of guns you could pick up, but they were really more like cattle prods.  Instead of firing any sort of projectiles or beams, just the tip of the gun lit up and became lethal.  Safety-wise, this actually makes sense not having weapons that could breach the hull.  But gameplay-wise, it was way too difficult killing monsters this way.  If you were close enough for your weapon to hurt them, they could hurt you as well.  Now if the game were more of a run-and-hide style game like Alien Isolation, this would still be fun.  But Project Firestart often put you in situations where you had to fight to survive, by putting monsters on both sides of you with no other ways out.  This issue is the only black mark on a game that was otherwise years ahead of its time.

Mail-Order Monsters (C64, 1985)

Buy a monster.  Customize him with bio-upgrades and weapons.  Take him to the arena to fight other monsters.  Use your winnings to upgrade your monster, or to buy more monsters.  There's been a few modern attempts at similar games, but none of them have had the charm of MOM.  It was so fun playing this game with my friends, each of us loading up our own monsters and making them fight.  I spent hours cheating by playing the two player mode by myself, winning battle after battle so I could earn enough money to build an entire menagerie of fully-powered beasts.  It was a wonderful experience...

...except for the gameplay.  While the build process was well-done and had decent graphics, the actual battle part was pretty dull.  Each player controlled a tiny solid-colored sprite, trying to get close enough to the enemy to hit the button for a melee attack, or trying to line them up for an easily-dodged ranged attack.  I know I shouldn't expect much from the C64, but there were plenty of other games that managed to make this kind of combat exciting.  I just wish the programmers had worked as hard on the fighting as they did the construction mode.

Autoduel (C64, 1985)

Based on the tabeltop RPG "Car Wars", Autoduel was an open-world vehicular combat game set in a Mad Max style future.  The freedom was incredible - you're just a guy with a car, what you do next is up to you.  Enter a demolition derby to earn more money.  Or take a courier job, braving the lawless streets to deliver packages to other cities.  Or go bounty hunting, living off rewards for the outlaws you defeat.  Use the money to improve your car, buy better cars, and equip them with the best weapons.  The game came with an instruction booklet as thick as the RPG itself, designed to look like a vehicle owner's manual.  I'm not sure I've ever seen so much stuff you can do in a C64 game.  It was an incredible sandbox game...

...except for the gameplay.  The cars moved too sluggishly, making it very difficult.  It was hard to practice enough to get better, because of the extraordinarily long loading times.  The rules were as harsh as an RPG - if you died, you had to make a new character.  So a typical game session might go like this:  Wait 10 minutes for the game to load.  Start a new character, spend several minutes making your first car.  Several more minutes getting your first courier job.  Leave town so you can drive to your courier destination.  Wait 5 more minutes for it to load the area between the towns.  Get attacked by outlaws.  Try to flee, because the starting cash isn't enough to buy weapons that don't suck.  Get killed because your car is slow and hard to control.  Realize you have to start the entire game over because of the harsh death rules.  Play a different game because this one is so frustrating.

WWE All-Stars (3DS, 2011)

But games that are almost perfect aren't limited to the C64.  More recently I owned "WWE Wrestling All-Stars" for the 3DS, and it was nearly incredible.  It had an impressive roster split between classic and modern wrestlers.  The classic wrestlers included all my favorites from my teen years, with multiple outfits to represent different years of their career.  We have Andre in his classic black on-strap leotard, but we also have him in his early years, with the long hair and the more traditional briefs.  There were multiple rings, a create-a-wrestler mode, and all the match types I've come to expect from wrestling games (singles, tag team, steel cage, etc).  In short, it is the perfect WWE game...

...except for the gameplay.  The matches just feel slow and tedious.  To be fair, I haven't had a lot of luck with wrestling games, even the ones that received great reviews.  So this is probably just me.  I haven't played a wrestling game I liked since the days of 2D sprites.  Something happened when they converted to polygons - they stopped being fun arcade button mashers and started becoming wrestling simulators.  Which is fine for a certain type of gamer, but I don't think I'm the target audience.

Super Smash Bros for the 3DS

Still reading this far?  Cool.  So anyway, the new Smash Bros 3DS game.  I'm really enjoying this game.  It has a lot going for it.  For one thing, it has a huge roster of fighters (51 once all are unlocked), with several alternate looks for each.  Some of those alternate looks are practically new characters.  For instance, instead of alternate colors, Bowser Jr's alts are the other 7 Koopalings.  A couple of the characters have male and female versions, Little Mac has both his NES look and his green wireframe arcade look, one of Peach's alts is Daisy, one of Fox's alts is Wolf, and so on.

The game has a ton of modes, and hundreds of unlockable things, so you never run out of things to do.  If all you feel like doing is random fights, you can just go to the highly-customizable Smash Mode.  But there's also Classic Mode where you fight a lot of different types of matches until you get to the boss.  Not to mention Smash Run, where you run around a level fighting enemies like a traditional platformer, collecting powerup icons, until it ends with a traditional Smash battle using the powerups you collected.  It even has a mode where you fight every fighter in the game, in the order their games were released.  With characters like Pac-Man and Mr Game & Watch, it's practically the history of video games in the palm of my hand.

The addition of Miis is particularly nice.  I always like Create-A-Fighter modes, so the ability to put myself into SSB is wonderful.  You start with any Mii in your collection, then choose three basic fighting styles - fists, sword, or gun.  Then you can choose from a few special moves, pick some stat-boosting icons to help you specialize your character, and pick an outfit and head accessories (more of which are unlockable).  It's not perfect but it's a really great feature.

All in all, I'd have to say it's the perfect Nintendo fighting game...

...except for - you guessed it - the gameplay.  Now to be fair, I enjoy this game's controls more than any other game mentioned in this blog.  It is highly polished, and everything I dislike about it is just personal taste.  I still think it deserves all the 9 star reviews it's getting.  Unlike the C64 examples, this game's controls were not a casualty of limited technology; this is exactly the game the programmers were intending to make.  However, I personally hate being forced to play 2D games with the circle pad.  I have a firm belief that 3D games work better with analog pads, and 2D games work better with d-pads.  Fighting games in particular should be mapped to d-pads because they require a lot of precise button-tapping, and often involve a lot of pounding that's harsh on the more delicate analog sticks.  And before you think I'm being paranoid, there have already been a lot of reports of people breaking their circle pads playing SSB.  I really hope these breakages cause Nintendo to release a patch that lets you use the d-pad.

I also have trouble keeping track of my character in the chaotic battles.  The game does attempt to make this easier for you: it has a couple of options for putting an outline around characters, and it puts "P1" above your head at all times... but it's still easy to lose track of where you are.  And while the game has a lot of different play modes, most of them aren't very good.  I'm glad they're there, but after trying each once, I generally found myself going back to the plain old Smash mode over and over.  Some of the minigames in particular are tedious - I've hated home run stadium since the last game.

But despite these shortcomings - most of which are really my shortcomings - it's a fantastic game.