THE NEW HOME FOR "PAETER'S BRAIN"!

Paeter is no longer posting to this blog. His new reviews and thoughts on geek entertainment (including all those previously posted here!) can now be found conveniently organized and archived at The Spirit Blade Underground!

Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Out For A Bit



Hey Everyone!


Just wanted to let you know that I won't be posting regularly for the next two weeks. I'm heading out of town tomorrow, and although I'll be back on Sunday, I will be working for two solid weeks doing High School substitute teaching.


This is a great news because the district has been cutting back on their use of subs for the second half of this semester, and I was expecting to have no subbing work. The down side, of course, is that it will keep me busy enough that keeping up with the regular routine of posting for the Underground and Paeter's Brain will just be too much for me during that time. The podcast will continue, but will be a little shorter for just two weeks, since "In Search Of Truth" will be on hold.


However, I will still be checking my e-mail faithfully and responding as quickly as possible. And after these two weeks of subbing, I will be able to give my full attention to Spirit Blade Productions until September!
So please bear with me during this little break and things will be back on track before you know it!


Thanks!


-Paeter Frandsen

Monday, March 16, 2009

Descent WEEK!!



This week I get to have an unusual amount of "Descent". My bro-in-law, Jon, is coming over from about 6pm-midnight tonight for some dungeon crawling mayhem and then I leave on Thursday afternoon to drive out to Cally and lay waste the pitiful forces of my friend, Mark. He'll be getting his butt handed to him until I drive back home on Sunday.

Bow, fools! Bow before your merciful Overlord!

Friday, March 13, 2009

Highlander: The Source... Still Not Bad!



About a year and a half ago I reviewed "Highlander: The Source" on this blog and got some pretty strong reactions. (I liked the film and fans almost universally hated it.) I finally picked up a used copy of the DVD yesterday and watched it again for the first time since my review.

I've gotta say that I still feel pretty much the same about it. I might lower the quality score from 8.5 to 8, or POSSIBLY 7.5 since the rest of the trilogy has been abandoned, but otherwise I feel the same about it. If I did lower the score it would be because the sword fights weren't that great, there was only one quickening in the whole movie, and the ending was weak. If the rest of this planned trilogy were being made, these issues wouldn't be quite as problematic, but since the trilogy has been abandoned in favor of a reboot of the franchise, The Source, with it's abrupt, anti-climactic ending, is a pretty weak way to end the original franchise.

But hey, if you don't like this flick, just pretend it never happened! After all, that's been the philosophy for the continuity of this franchise since Highlander 2, and it's only gotten more confusing since then!

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Watchmen Philosophy



Been re-reading the "Watchmen" graphic novel to get ready for a fun conversation I'll be having with another Philosophy/Theology nerd tomorrow. We'll be picking apart "Watchmen" and discussing the philosophy/theology presented in its worldview. I'll be recording our chat and playing it on the podcast this weekend!

www.spiritblade.net/podcast

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Babylon 3 out of 5



That's what I give the show so far. I've been told the show gets off to a rocky start and really improves in the second season. I'm getting over my distaste for the poor visual effects, but I just can't stand commander Sinclaire. My understanding is that after this season he is replaced by Bruce Boxleitner (I'm sure I spelled that wrong. But it's the guy that played Tron.). That will be such a welcome change as I don't believe a single word coming out of this man's mouth. His default expression seems to be "heroic half-smile" and I can't think of a single thing about his character that interests me.

I've only seen the pilot and first episode so far, but I think I'll probably be fast-forwarding through a few scenes throughout the first season. We'll see...

Friday, March 6, 2009

Watchmen (Movie Review)



Before my review of the Watchmen movie, I should give an idea of where I'm coming from regarding the original graphic novel. I discovered and read Watchmen during college (late 90's) soon after I started collecting comics seriously. As it did for many others, this book changed the way I saw superheroes and their potential in the medium of comics. Because of this work, I also soon devoured Alan Moore's "V For Vendetta", and "From Hell", which I also greatly enjoyed for their complex, intelligent stories and character analysis. Alan Moore is a force to be reckoned with in the world of comics and his properties have not been treated well by Hollywood. Despite being enjoyable films in their own right, "V For Vendetta", "From Hell" and "The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen" strayed considerably from the source material when Hollywood got their hands on them. "Watchmen" is regarded very highly by myself and many comic book fans, so I was very interested to see what "300" director Zack Snyder would do.


I am EXTREMELY pleased. This is easily the most faithful live-action adaptation of specific comic book source material ever made. That doesn't mean it is simply the comic book filmed on a set. Changes were made throughout, the most noticable being the end of the film. (More on that later) But all changes allowed the material to be more accessable in a format for which it was not designed, while retaining the substance of the graphic novel. The story is streamlined, but in no way butchered. Material removed was in most cases not missed, considering the short time limitations that even epic move lengths demand.


"Foul! Foul!", some fanboys may cry. But we DO have to take into consideration that this is a movie. Not live action fanboy wish fulfillment. It has to stand on its own merits. If we want people to experience "Watchmen" as we know and love it, follow Alan Moore's cue (just this once) and tell them to read it. My review does take into account the source material, but I'm not scoring it based on my own wish fulfillment. I wanted to see if it was a good movie.


Still, let's talk about the differences a little bit. Snyder brings a welcome dose of action-movie sensibility to the combat sequences of the film. This is not really an "action movie", but Snyder shoots each action sequence as though it is. Much of the cool visual's from "300" reappear to great effect in this movie. The heroes are also more physically capable in the movie than they are in the comics. I think this is important. First, it helps break up the pacing of the film. Second, it reminds moviegoers, who may not be comic fans, what it means to be a costumed hero.


The graphic novel was written for people already very familiar with superheroes. Showcasing their heroic abilities wasn't a priority because readers could easily fill in the gaps with stereotypes they had developed from years of reading comics. Adding enhanced action and combat sequences helped us remember that, while this IS a complex character study, it is set set FIRMLY in the world of superheroes. (Something "The Dark Knight" failed to do with its over-emphasis on the happenings of Gotham City and lack of emphasis on Batman. Too much "realism", not enough superhero.)


Another change, reflecting Snyder's admitted tastes, was a little too much sexiness. Granted, sexual elements become much more noticeable when translated from comic page to live action, but Snyder actually lengthened one particular scene handled with discretion in the comic book, turning it into a typical hollywood skin show. This scene doesn't last too long and the rest of the movie is more conservative(with one exception, hold that thought...), but it's still very "R-rated" and more naked than it needs to be. Hopefully the DVD will start a new chapter after this moment in the film, allowing a convenient "quick skip" option without missing worthwhile moments of the movie. Meanwhile, if you can't wait for DVD, here's a little trick: When Dan and Laurie start getting "frisky" on Archie (his "owl-ship"), a Johnny Cash-sounding song starts playing (called "Hallelujah", I think). Just admire your popcorn until this song is done playing and you'll be safe.


There is one exception to the conservative handling of nudity in the rest of the film, and that is Dr. Manhattan. Male frontal nudity is very common when he enters a scene. Not in a sexual context. He just likes being naked. It isn't "in your face" and it happens to be computer generated, but it's still there and fairly common throughout the movie.


Regarding more specific changes, Dr. Manhattan's perception of time was not communicated as effectively as it could have been. It felt more like Jon experienced constant flashbacks instead of existing in all moments of his life at once. I'm hoping some of this will be fixed in the director's cut, but the movie doesn't suffer much.
Without giving any major spoilers, I can say that the greatest changes of this movie are near the end. No squid, but a different idea that makes perfect sense and makes the movie more approachable to the average viewer. And to be completely honest... I like the new ending better than the original! Nite Owl sees something happen that he didn't in the comics that makes for great drama and an added action beat. And we aren't suddenly asked to introduce giant aliens and psychics into the world of Watchmen, which felt out of left field in the graphic novel. The new ending accomplishes the same thing, but in a way that fits inside the story so much better.


Regarding the performances in this film, I couldn't be much happier. Patrick Wilson brought the everyman quality that Nite-owl needs in order to work. Billy Crudup brought a unique take to Dr. Manhattan's voice that I was completely taken with after hearing him speak for just a couple scenes. Haunting and detached throughout, when Manhattan talks, it's as if he's always retelling a faded dream he can barely remember. Jeffrey Dean Morgan delivers a Comedian who is unlikeable, yet relatable. He's the prophet of the story, sizing up his environment and telling it like it is. A poor decision is made to have Carla Gugino play both the young and the old Sally Jupiter. She works wonderfully as the young, but between the unconvincing make-up and her young-sounding voice, she doesn't successfully sell herself as a 67 year old woman. To her credit, I think this is near impossible and should have been achieved by having two women play the role. We've learned to suspend disbelief in this territory.


The standout performance in this movie is Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach. Alan Moore has created a wonderful character concept, but I found myself safely removed from him (as I do with all of Moore's characters) as he exists on the page. Moore's characters are fascinating and make us think. They do not tend to make us feel. I was taken out of my sterile psychiatrist's chair and gripped, in two different scenes, by Haley's performance. Even brought to tears in one of them. He is the heartbeat of this movie.


Visually, this film is a treat. Nearly every shot is artfully thought out, much like Dave Gibbon's original art panels. The costumes are updated and reflect modern superhero movies (the 90's in particular) the same way Gibbon's original designs reflected comics of the 40's through the 70's. They step away from practicality and realism to stand in greater contrast to the all too real nature of these flawed characters.


Visual effects are also exciting and spectacular. Though clearly not an action film, Snyder often adds excitement through some dazzling eye-candy.


The movie works great as a period piece, taking place in the 1980's and earlier. The varied and highly ironic soundtrack keeps us sitting in the appropriate decades and in the right moods for the movie's themes.


Which brings us to Veracity. There is a ton in this film worth discussing. Human nature and its natural state of corruption is the major theme. The worth of human life is another. Too often we confuse the two. If our worth is based only on our goodness, we have to face the idea of being worthless. This is likely why so many people prefer to live in denial of our evil nature and choose to believe that we are "basically" or "naturally" good. But Biblically speaking, our worth in the economy of the universe is not based on our moral performance, but on the fact that God created and loves us. We are both naturally evil and of tremendous worth. (Yeah, wrap your head around that one.) This movie touches on both topics and lends itself to their discussion.


Truth is also a key point. Is it better to live with a lie if it means peace between people or nations? Or should truth be valued and sought after even if it means dealing with pain otherwise avoided? Regarding truth, I've gotta side with Rorschach on this one. No Compromise.


From top to bottom, this is a fantastic film. It is driven by very human characters with very real emotions, without sacrificing the wonder and expansiveness of the superhero genre. (Take good notes, Chris Nolan.) The themes are rich and the visuals are beautiful. Though it misses some opportunites for adapting great elements of the original work, in several ways it is superior to the graphic novel. Plan to have coffee or dessert after this one. There will be plenty to talk about!



Quality: 9.5/10

Veracity: 9.0/10

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Wonder Woman Animated Movie (Review)



In the last few years, DC has produced 3 direct to DVD animated movies: Superman/Doomsday, Justice League:New Frontier, and Gotham Knight.


While “New Frontier” was a fun ride through an alternate DCU, the other two were mostly disappointing. After reading a positive review and hearing about the Green Lantern “sneak peek” on this DVD, I didn’t hesitate to make the purchase.

This movie was great! While I’m a fan of the DCU, and read Gail Simone’s(who helped write this script!) run on wonder Woman for about a year, I wouldn’t call myself a true fan of Wonder Woman. The problem with the character, for me, has always been too much emphasis on Greek mythology. Sandals and togas have never been synonymous with “action” for me. It all seemed like such an unapproachable genre. Before “300” came to theatres, that is. And the Wonder Woman animated movie owes a lot to Zack Snyder’s sword and sandal flick.

The film more than earns its PG-13 rating with brutal violence from beginning to end. The movie emphasizes the warrior nature of the Amazons in every action sequence and fans of violent fantasy will not be disappointed. (I counted at least 3 decapitations!)

The movie is top-notch across the board. Casting, directing, sound effects, music, animation and the strongest point of the film: the script. Somehow, while being a “tough as nails” serious action experience, this movie also has wit and charm that made me laugh out loud more times than I can count!

Keri Russel (Felicity) seems an odd casting choice for Diana. But the huskiness in her voice (not showcased in “Felicity”) gave her feminine voice the right balance of beauty and strength.

Nathan Fillion, known best from the cult series “Firefly”, was incredibly likeable and funny as Steve Trevor. Steve Trevor’s presence keeps the outrageous fantasy moments in the film grounded, much the way John Crichton did so beautifully in Farscape. This movie wouldn’t be what it is without Fillion and Steve Trevor.

In another unusual turn, Alfred Molina (Spiderman 2) lends his voice to the part of Ares. And though his voice plays against the visual look of Ares, the unique contrast creates a really interesting blend that makes Ares stand out, rather than fade into forgettable stereotype.

To sum up, any fan of fantasy action or comic books should see this movie, and fans of DC and Wonder Woman should buy it without hesitating! Lauren Montgomery (Director) is also helming this summer’s Green Lantern animated movie, so I’m even MORE excited for that now as well!

The film also touches on some interesting issues that might spark worthwhile conversation. Early in the film, Diana’s mother, Hyppolita, says that man (specifically the male half) is wicked, disloyal and above all untrustworthy. Later, two different characters say, “The heart wants what the heart wants. Even that which is worst for it.”
And finally, in an exchange between Diana and Steve-

Diana: Must you flirt?

Steve: It’s only natural.

Diana: Supress it.

There seems to be a rare acknowledgment somewhere in the writing of this script that our natural desires as humans are often terrible and need to be controlled. In other words, (surprise!) we are not “naturally morally good”. We are naturally self-serving. This isn’t a central theme, but one that can be heard in the script and brought up after viewing.

Another line that caught my attention was Steve Trevor, when he said sarcastically of Amazonian isolationism, “Like less communication between men and women is what the world needed.” I couldn’t agree more with his frustration!

Final Score-


Quality: 9.5

Veracity: 8.0

Monday, March 2, 2009

Is Babylon 5 Any Good?


I can feel it coming. There are only 3 more episodes of Battlestar Galactica left. It's not as heart-wrenching as when the last episodes of Farscape were airing, but the end is nigh and I feel unprepared yet again. The trailer for "Caprica" looks interesting, but very earth-bound. I'm already collecting the Highlander Series on DVD (just two more seasons to go!), but I don't see many options for space opera. Which brings me to Babylon 5.
I have no idea what this show is about. When it aired on television I took one look at the CGI being used in place of models and dismissed it without question. (I prefer models any day.) CGI has improved enough that I've developed a tolerance for it, and after Farscape and Battlestar, what I'm interested in more than anything is sci-fi with characters and a story worth investing in.
From what little I've read on wikipedia (I'm trying to avoid as much information as possible while still getting a sense of the thing), Babylon 5 used long story arcs instead of the isolated episode structure of Star Trek. Looks like it also received praise for character development. Could it be that this show served as an early stepping stone for Farscape and Battlestar? Could this show, while certainly falling short of Farscape and Battlestar greatness, be my next television love? Is this show any good?
Really, I want to know. Just try not to give me the "details".