Hi all,
Happy birthday to me! Thanks for best wishes on Facebook etc.
OK now we have got that out of the way, onto the blog post. Last night we had the last episode of this season of Dr Who. I love this show, its essential quirkiness, great plots and clever dialogue make it one of the most watchable shows on television. That's not to say it's always great and I do have some issues with the series. With that in mind I thought I would go through episode by episode in this series and give a rating from 1-10.
To be clear I am using a rating system based on the show in question. So a 6 would be an average episode of Dr Who, 10 would be a rare rating that puts it up as one of the very best Dr Who episodes (Girl in the Fireplace, The Satan Pit), and conversely a 1 will put it down as one of the worst (Victory of the Daleks). This rating is solely a rating compared with other episodes of Dr Who not anything else.
So here are my ratings and a quick explanation why:
The Impossible Astronaut: 6.5
A good start to the series this. The Silence are good villains in the style of the Weeping Angels, Canton Everett Delaware III is an interesting character even if he does have a stupid name and the death of the Doctor is a shocking twist.
The problems with this episode stem from the weird bits that Moffat tends to put in his episodes. Why an Apollo program spacesuit? This is never explained, not even in the final episode (unless I missed it: feel free to correct me in the comments if that's the case). This is an irritating tendency that Moffat has, to add in images and ideas and then never explain why they are there.
Overall a pretty good episode though.
Day of the Moon: 7
A good conclusion to the two parter. Delaware is one of those characters in time travel stories who doesn't get overwhelmed by the oddities of advanced technology. I like that. Can we have more of him please Mr Moffat?
The ending of this one was good as well, with the Silence's own hypnotic abilities being turned against them and the rest of the season was set up well with Amy's pregnancy, the Doctor's death and the threat of the Silence.
This earns an extra .5 of a mark over the Impossible Astronaut because it was a tighter and more focussed episode. Sadly this focus would not be there in other episodes this season.
The Curse of the Black Spot: 3
I love pirates with all the arring and Jack Sparrowesque fun that they bring to any plot. As a wise man once said, everything's better with pirates.
So why the 3?
Well to be serious for a moment there are two reasons why this one merits a significantly below average mark. Firstly, this is a rehash of an old episode, namely "The Empty Child." Basically a piece of advanced medical technology threatens people in a historical setting. Unfortunately this won't be the last time this series that I call shenanigans because the episode is a rehash. Note to Moffat: new episodes with new ideas please!
Secondly the ending is ridiculous. I don't care how good a captain you are, you can't go from being a competent sailor to piloting an advanced medical starship with phasing technology. Total bollocks.
That said the episode is OK, it's just not very good.
The Doctor's Wife: 8
I'm a big fan of Neil Gaiman but sometimes his sense of the odd and the unusual can overtake the plot creating work which can be style over substance. Happily this is not the case here. Gaiman marries his considerable imagination and sense of the macabre to a tight and well written plot that has some genuinely unsettling moments.
Also the episode examines the Doctor's relationship with both the TARDIS and his people. The Corsair is an interesting character even if we never meet him/her and the Doctor's sense of loss for his friend is obvious and profound.
Having said that one of the few missteps in this episode comes with the Doctor's anger at the discovery of the death of his friend and the other Time Lords. Whilst I do like Matt Smith's Doctor, I can't help but feel that both David Tennant and Christopher Ecclestone were more menacing when that side of the Doctor was revealed. It's a minor thing but it is an important aspect of the Doctor's personality, he's never so alien as when he is angry and I remain to be convinced by Matt Smith's performance in this regard.
Still, that's only a minor quibble in an otherwise excellent episode.
The Rebel Flesh and The Almost People: 4
I'm reviewing these two episodes together because frankly it's one of those two parters for which the individual parts don't really have their own identity (unlike for example the Impossible Planet/Satan Pit or the Empty Child/Doctor Dances two parters).
This episode suffers from too many ideas and not enough exposition. The "Solar Tsunami" plot device was weird seeing as how this episode was set on Earth, I can't remember ever seeing a solar flare that massive, can you? Also the obvious goal here was an attempt to explore the concept of humanity and what constitutes a person. But that was somewhat undermined by the fact that one of the character goes all "The Thing" on everybody. "Yeah, we're all human really, apart from the fact that one of us is trying to eat your face..."
Another weird thing was the fact that the factory was a monastery. Why? Surely a purpose built facility would be better? The only reason I can think of was because they liked the visual imagery evoked by the setting. The problem with that is that it just makes no sense. Repurposing an old building (that was still crumbling in parts) for a highly dangerous industrial process is just bizarre, not to say incredibly impractical. The acid is a weird concept too. Why would you manufacture such a dangerous product offshore and pump it to the mainland? Isn't that overly expensive? And dangerous? Imagine the ecological disaster if you had an underwater leak. Also having the TARDIS get sucked into the earth has been done before in "The Impossible Planet." Yet another recycled plot device, shenanigans.
This episode is reasonable but it tries to combine a dash of Thing style paranoia into an exploration of the human condition. Plus Amy's distrust of Ganger Doctor seems out of place considering that she is perfectly happy with an alien friend. Sloppy writing and inconsistent characterisation bring this one down I'm afraid.
A Good Man Goes to War: 9
The only truly great episode of the series. The new characters are ice cool (I would pay good money to see the further adventures of a Victorian, dinosaur, lesbian swordswoman and her plucky assistant and Strax was utterly awesome.) The bad guys were menacing and Frances Barber as Madame Kovarian chews the scenery like a pro. Rory's ultimatum to the Cybermen is fantastic as well.
The only slight gripe I have is that for an episode called "A Good Man Goes to War" there is very little actual war going on. A more accurate title would be "A Good Man Turns Up and No One Shoots Him For Some Reason."
A minor gripe though in a great episode.
Let's Kill Hitler: 3
OK seriously Moffat, what the hell was all this about? Let's get this straight, Rory and Amy have a hitherto unmentioned BFF who turns out to be River Song who takes them back in the TARDIS to kill Hitler (for some reason) who in turn is being pursued by a bunch of miniaturised humans in a ship that can make itself look like anyone.
Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot.
This is totally out of left field and is a complete missed opportunity. Moffat throws in so many bizarre plot twists that you don't know how to react. The Doctor's "death" has no resonance because we already know he's supposed to die at Lake Silencio, the Teselecta is such a weird concept that it harms the episode by taking time away from the battle of wits between Melody/River and the Doctor and the inclusion of Hitler in a comic romp felt a bit off.
The real problems with this episode was the character of "Mels." Look Moffat, this character could have been introduced in episode 1 of season 5 and appeared half a dozen times since then. That way it would have had far more impact when she turns out to have been River all along. By introducing her in the way that you did, you just made her annoying. I was having horrible visions that this character was going to join the TARDIS crew for the rest of the series, a bit of a Scrappy Who if you like. I have never been more relieved to see someone die in a TV show and once she regenerated to become River Song I will admit the episode got a lot better.
Also since when does the 11th Doctor's TARDIS go exactly where you want it to go by shooting it? A minor quibble but an important one I think.
Night Terrors: 2
Someone find Mark Gatiss and stop him making Doctor Who episodes will you? Gatiss' record of writing Doctor Who episodes reads mediocre, crap and diabolical (or The Idiot's Lantern, Night Terrors and Victory of the Daleks if you prefer). This is a truly dire episode.
The thing is it's a total rehash of "Fear Her" (shenanigans). Here's a tip Mark, if you are going to shamelessly rip off another Dr Who episode don't choose a rubbish one OK? Oh and don't tell me you also ripped off "The Empty Child" as some sort of defence because that doesn't fly mister.
This was so by the numbers it wasn't funny. The plot was dull, the characters were uninspired and it just felt like exactly what it was, a filler episode. Hell when you can't even do better than "Fear Her" you should just hang your head in shame.
It's also nice to see that Amy has got over the loss of her daughter so quickly. Yet more "Amy is a bitch" characterisation. Unintentional this time but still noticeable.
The Girl Who Waited: 6
Ho boy this is a tough one.
When I first watched this episode I thought it was awesome. A timey wimey episode with a great performance from Karen Gillan and a tearjerking conclusion. All the elements are here for a classic and taken on it's own it deserves an 8 or 9.
So why a 6?
As a standalone episode this would have been fine but in context with the rest of the series we encounter problems. So Amy waited 36 years? Big deal. Rory waited 2,000 years. The characterisation of Old Amy as a bitter resentful woman who has given up on her friends does not ring true. The love Rory and Amy display is supposed to transcend space and time. Well this episode dispenses with that and says that whilst Rory can wait, Amy can't. More "Amy is a bitch" characterisation brings this one down to average I'm afraid.
The God Complex: 7
A decent episode this one. A monster that consumes faith is creepy and Rita begging the Doctor not to watch her lose her faith was actually a quite effective and gut-wrenching moment for me. Faith is often the most important thing to a person and having a monster that consumes that is like having a monster that consumes your essence. That's a far more unpleasant fate than merely dying. Losing your deepest beliefs really is a fate worse than death.
It's been mentioned that this episode bears many similarities to the Seventh Doctor story "The Curse of Fenric." It's been a while since I saw "The Curse of Fenric" but the Doctor having to force his companion to abandon their faith in him happens in both stories. So a mild case of shenanigans here.
Where this episode falls down is that Amy losing her faith in the Doctor really doesn't ring true. She had that faith challenged in the last episode and yet now she loses it because the Doctor just tells her to? Really? Plus Amy's faith is in the Doctor, not her husband? Rory has no faith in anything? Sorry, I can't see anyone waiting 2,000 years without any faith in what they are doing.
David Walliams was good though.
Closing Time: 7.5
Dodgy aliens in a department store? Shenanigans (Rose). The Doctor going on a tour to visit places because he knows he's going to die? Shenanigans (The End of Time)
Right now that's out of the way. This was a good episode. I quite liked the quirky relationship between Corden and Smith and the comic timing was very good. I disliked the ending (power of love beating the Cybermen? Please) but the rest of it was good fun stuff. Plus Stormageddon was hilarious and earns this episode an extra .5.
The timing of this episode was odd, just before the finale. That doesn't take away from the quality of this episode though.
The Wedding of River Song:7
A good end to the series. Fixed points have been used before but as that's a major part of Dr Who lore I won't call shenanigans on that. The meshing of history was cleverly done and the Silence were a decent enemy yet again.
My criticisms lie with the fact that this episode felt almost identical to last season's finale and I will call shenanigans on that. Also "it's not really the Doctor" is a cop out but I suppose that is better than the rest buttons that we have had before.
A good episode though and the buildup for the next season was good.
Season overall: 5
This was a below average season for Dr Who. There were some bright moments but the series falls down on 3 basic issues.
Amy Pond turned into a bitch: Amy Pond became much less of a sympathetic character this season. She was nasty to the Gangers, blamed Rory for a load of stuff that wasn't his fault and basically acted like a spoiled brat at times. Cold blooded torture/murder in the last episode put her beyond the pale as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad she's gone, a shame because she started well. Taxi for Pond.
Style over substance: Scary dolls don't make an episode, if you are going to have a astronaut suit in the show have a reason for that, industrial complexes are usually not found in ruined monasteries. Narrative sense this season was often discarded in favour of making things look cool. Go back to plots that make sense please Moffat.
Rehashed plots: Too many plots and events in this series were lifted or "inspired" by previous Dr Who episodes. At times I just felt that the series didn't have the courage to do something new. Next season would be infinitely improved if they stopped treading old ground and wrote some new plots.
Long one I know but I'm interested if you agree or disagree. Comment below as always.
Your resident Galifrayan
Fall of Camelot
Sunday, 2 October 2011
Tuesday, 27 September 2011
Bioware, MMO's and my hopes and fears for the Old Republic
Hi all,
I'm a total Bioware fanboy. As far as I am concerned they produce the best games I have ever played. I also enjoy MMO's, particularly Rift and World of Warcraft and I love Star Wars. So Bioware + Star Wars + MMO = Nerdgasm amarite?
Well yes and no.
The thing is you can put three awesome things together and get a lump of turd. At the moment if I am frank I don't know what to think. Whilst I am expecting awesomeness I am also bracing myself for a huge let down. To make it clear here are the main reasons why it will be awesome followed by the 3 reasons it will suck donkey.
Awesome the first: It's Bioware baby!
Screw Valve, forget Blizzard and goodbye Infinity Ward; there is only one game studio on the planet who have never made a misstep as far as I am concerned. That company is Bioware. This is the company that produced Baldur's Gate, Knights of the Old Republic and my personal favourite Mass Effect. Their games are like crack to me, I just can't get enough. They provide a style of game that is perfect as far as I am concerned, user friendly gameplay, fantastic plots, memorable villains and the best characters in any games that have ever been published. I can't think of any character that is quite as awesome as Minsc except possibly Mordin Solus. They can't possibly screw this up right?
From what I've seen no. The companion characters look awesome and I look forward to running around with a rocket launcher wielding Jawa.
Awesome the Second: A return to the Old Republic
Star Wars is great and all but there's a load of Lucas inspired bullshit in there as well. Ewoks, Jar Jar Binks, Lucas' continual tinkering with the original trilogy (seriously stop that shit) and of couse the immortal "I love you because you're not sand" speech from Episode 2.
The Old Republic setting has none of the Lucas bullshit, only the core stuff that people actually want to see. Jedi vs Sith, smugglers, scoundrels and galactic war on a massive scale. Seriously, that's the stuff of Star Wars and Bioware have proved before that they get this.
Awesome the Third: Fully voiced storyline.
Holy crap dudes! An entire MMO with cinematic cutscenes, distinctive characters and fully voiced quest givers? Sign me up right now! Oh there's more? Quests that change depending on your choices in dialogue? Alignment to the Dark or Light side that's not dependent on faction but rather actions? Companions that can go off and do stuff for you whilst you sleep or go to work furthering the storyline whilst you do other things?
If all this is true, wow, just wow...
But like the light side there is also a dark side: Reasons it will suck:
Suckfest the first: An MMO? Seriously?
Massive is fine, Online is fine. It's the Multiplayer bit I don't like. I have no idea how this game is going to work but I do not want to see something like this:
Luke: How did my father die?
Obi Wan: A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and mur...
WOKKIEBOI: LF2M for Caves of Ossus!
Yeah...
The problem with MMO's is there is not roleplaying involved, just numbers. The general idea from most people who play is to treat it as a game to beat. That's all well and good but Bioware win because of their immersive plotlines and intricate characters. I remain to be convinced that the Bioware style will survive 13 year old tossers shouting bollocks on chat.
Suckfest the Second: Old Republic now, Mass Effect later.
This may be paranoia on my end but it's noticeable that the launch of SWTOR has put back Mass Effect 3. This does not make me a pleased lapin.
It may be Bioware's usual "it's ready when it's ready" stance but that's not a good precedent to set.
Suckfest the Third... Seriously though, an MMO?
I can see it now. I finish installing the game, create my character and step out into the bright galaxy of a movie series that defined my formative years. I can feel the excitement rise as I examine the interface, looking around for my first quest giver. Boldly I stride forward ready to make my mark on a galaxy I have loved since I was a child.
What will I be asked to do? Duel Sith Lords? Rescue a princess? Break a planetary blockade? I click my mouse with a mixture of eagerness and reverence...
And they ask me to kill 8 wamp rats...
Seriously, none of that shit Bioware...
So will this turn out to be a spectacular realisation of greatness for Bioware or will it suck arse? Are you girding your loins for awesomeness or are you biting your lip in fear of what may come?
Your opinion is always welcome in the comments.
Your frustrated Jedi
Fall of Camelot
I'm a total Bioware fanboy. As far as I am concerned they produce the best games I have ever played. I also enjoy MMO's, particularly Rift and World of Warcraft and I love Star Wars. So Bioware + Star Wars + MMO = Nerdgasm amarite?
Well yes and no.
The thing is you can put three awesome things together and get a lump of turd. At the moment if I am frank I don't know what to think. Whilst I am expecting awesomeness I am also bracing myself for a huge let down. To make it clear here are the main reasons why it will be awesome followed by the 3 reasons it will suck donkey.
Awesome the first: It's Bioware baby!
Screw Valve, forget Blizzard and goodbye Infinity Ward; there is only one game studio on the planet who have never made a misstep as far as I am concerned. That company is Bioware. This is the company that produced Baldur's Gate, Knights of the Old Republic and my personal favourite Mass Effect. Their games are like crack to me, I just can't get enough. They provide a style of game that is perfect as far as I am concerned, user friendly gameplay, fantastic plots, memorable villains and the best characters in any games that have ever been published. I can't think of any character that is quite as awesome as Minsc except possibly Mordin Solus. They can't possibly screw this up right?
From what I've seen no. The companion characters look awesome and I look forward to running around with a rocket launcher wielding Jawa.
Awesome the Second: A return to the Old Republic
Star Wars is great and all but there's a load of Lucas inspired bullshit in there as well. Ewoks, Jar Jar Binks, Lucas' continual tinkering with the original trilogy (seriously stop that shit) and of couse the immortal "I love you because you're not sand" speech from Episode 2.
The Old Republic setting has none of the Lucas bullshit, only the core stuff that people actually want to see. Jedi vs Sith, smugglers, scoundrels and galactic war on a massive scale. Seriously, that's the stuff of Star Wars and Bioware have proved before that they get this.
Awesome the Third: Fully voiced storyline.
Holy crap dudes! An entire MMO with cinematic cutscenes, distinctive characters and fully voiced quest givers? Sign me up right now! Oh there's more? Quests that change depending on your choices in dialogue? Alignment to the Dark or Light side that's not dependent on faction but rather actions? Companions that can go off and do stuff for you whilst you sleep or go to work furthering the storyline whilst you do other things?
If all this is true, wow, just wow...
But like the light side there is also a dark side: Reasons it will suck:
Suckfest the first: An MMO? Seriously?
Massive is fine, Online is fine. It's the Multiplayer bit I don't like. I have no idea how this game is going to work but I do not want to see something like this:
Luke: How did my father die?
Obi Wan: A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and mur...
WOKKIEBOI: LF2M for Caves of Ossus!
Yeah...
The problem with MMO's is there is not roleplaying involved, just numbers. The general idea from most people who play is to treat it as a game to beat. That's all well and good but Bioware win because of their immersive plotlines and intricate characters. I remain to be convinced that the Bioware style will survive 13 year old tossers shouting bollocks on chat.
Suckfest the Second: Old Republic now, Mass Effect later.
This may be paranoia on my end but it's noticeable that the launch of SWTOR has put back Mass Effect 3. This does not make me a pleased lapin.
It may be Bioware's usual "it's ready when it's ready" stance but that's not a good precedent to set.
Suckfest the Third... Seriously though, an MMO?
I can see it now. I finish installing the game, create my character and step out into the bright galaxy of a movie series that defined my formative years. I can feel the excitement rise as I examine the interface, looking around for my first quest giver. Boldly I stride forward ready to make my mark on a galaxy I have loved since I was a child.
What will I be asked to do? Duel Sith Lords? Rescue a princess? Break a planetary blockade? I click my mouse with a mixture of eagerness and reverence...
And they ask me to kill 8 wamp rats...
Seriously, none of that shit Bioware...
So will this turn out to be a spectacular realisation of greatness for Bioware or will it suck arse? Are you girding your loins for awesomeness or are you biting your lip in fear of what may come?
Your opinion is always welcome in the comments.
Your frustrated Jedi
Fall of Camelot
Saturday, 24 September 2011
Why I hate Michael Bay's movies. (Swearing involved here folks)
Hi all,
It's been a while since my last blog post, in my defence I'm in America. (or I was when I started writing this originally, sue me.)
I hate Micheal Bay. I really, really hate him. For those of you who may not know who Michael Bay is let me explain.
Michael Bay is a Hollywood director of some of the most profitable movies of recent years. He is responsible for Armageddon, Bad Boys, The Rock, Pearl Harbor and the cinematic excrement that is the Transformers series. It is my concerted and firm belief that this man is responsible for some of the biggest pieces of turd ever put on celluloid. His films are sexist, racist, obsessed with fetishising the military and worst of all they are popular.
"Oh Mr Camelot" I hear you cry "they are just big summer blockbusters. Popcorn movies don't have to make you think, they just have to entertain you." to which I reply, shut up, sit down and let me tell you why you are wrong.
I accept that summer blockbusters don't need or want deep philosophical stuff in them. The latter two movies in the Matrix series for example suffered from an attempt to be too clever and ended up just looking pretentious (not to mention the end of the second movie was actually pointless making the whole movie a tremendous waste of time). However, Bay's movies actively denigrate the concept of being intelligent. Anyone who is supposed to be clever in a Bay movie is seen as weird and geeky and is often portrayed as the guy who loses it big time. Armageddon is the worst for this, lauding a bunch of ignorant rig pig pricks over NASA and when they get on crap CGI Asteroid who loses his shit? Yep Steve Buscemi, the guy who was pointedly mentioned as being the most intelligent of the lot. This leaves Bruce Willis to save the day in the most overblown way possible.
Actually this is a symptom of a much larger theme in Bay's movies. The rampant hate for authority, particularly civilian authority. Every Bay movie features the individual struggling against some kind of organisation. It's like the Ayn Rand inspired scribblings of a bad sixth form English student. It's ignorant and boring at this point. The only authority Bay has any time for is the US military but he treats this with an almost fetishistic appeal that borders on totalitarian. Also it is the individual military characters that he is interested in and there is always a point in a Bay movie that the military character(s) have to act on their own authority or disobey orders. Again the hate of authority coming into effect.
Then we have his treatment of women in his films or rather the treatment of the boob and arse carrying frames because that's all they are in a Bay movie. Compare this with James Cameron, for all his faults he always has strong female characters in his movies. Bay never has this, his female characters are there to look hot and pout, pine for their menfolk or provide comic relief in the case of older females (I'm still in fucking therapy about the doped brownies bullshit in Transformers 2). The lack of any realistic female characters is frankly laughable. Even Paul W. S. Anderson can do a kick ass female character for fuck's sake. It's not hard.
Then there's the over production of his movies. Bay is in love with slow motion, odd camera angles and jump cuts to the extent that the film becomes plastic and unreal. He also uses only two colours in his movies teal (orange) and blue because they are opposite on the colour spectrum and thereby provide a good contrast. His movies do not feel real because they exhibit an overproduced cinematic style; one that divorces itself from reality. It is as if Bay wants to make films that overwhelm your senses thinking that in some way this makes them memorable when in actual fact the relentless pace of his movies does the exact opposite.
This relentless pace does irreparable damage to characterisation in his movies. Bay mistakenly believes that dialogue and character building can be done in short snappy sentences and brief scenes. Everything is rushed in his films because he does not trust his audience to have an attention span. That leads to cliched characters and stilted dialogue because the characters have no time to develop a personality. A good director finds some time in his movies to slow the pace in order to frame the frantic pace of the action. Bay just barrels ahead like a juggernaut.
Bay's racism is evident in a lot of his movies. The horrendous "wigger" stereotypes in the second Transformers movie are the most obvious example of this, however he's been doing it for a while. The guy who betrays the honour bound Colonel in The Rock? Yup the black guy. John Tuturro in the Transformers movies? Jewish guy who lives with his overbearing mother. The Cosmonaut in Armageddon? Yup crazy and living in a crap space station, because it's, y'know, Russian and all their stuff is shit. Oh how we laughed. In the absence of time to develop an actual character Bay just uses lazy racial stereotypes because that's easy.
All of this brings me to the crux of the matter. Bay makes easy movies. No subtlety is involved, no craft, no skill. The point is he is appealing to the dumbest person in the audience. He just wants to overwhelm you with sound and image because I suspect he does not have the talent to employ subtlety. Either that or he knows that he doesn't have to. If you can just put a souless and relentless parade of banal action together and it still grosses a billion then why try?
This is the problem. People look at the money that Transformers and the like make and they realise that the more basic a movie is the better it plays overseas. There is a reason that Baywatch is the most viewed TV show in history because everyone understands tits. Similarly Bay's over produced, relentless and earsplitting drivel can be understood by anyone, be it a moron in a western multiplex or someone who speaks no English in a small movie theatre anywhere in the world.
I am resigned to his success by know so I have taken a vow never to endure any more of his orange and blue cinematic vomit. I urge you all to do the same. Not because I believe it will spell the end of Michael Bay (because it wont) rather I implore you to avoid it for your own sake. Watching a Bay movie is the equivalent of admitting that you don't care about cinema, that you would rather watch spectacle than nuance. Do yourself a favour and watch something else, something that involves you on an emotional level, something that deserves merit. Trust me, you are better than Bay's bullshit
Your resident hack praying that Michael Bay will crawl off into a fucking hole somewhere and stop inflicting his bullshit on us all.
Fall of Camelot
It's been a while since my last blog post, in my defence I'm in America. (or I was when I started writing this originally, sue me.)
I hate Micheal Bay. I really, really hate him. For those of you who may not know who Michael Bay is let me explain.
Michael Bay is a Hollywood director of some of the most profitable movies of recent years. He is responsible for Armageddon, Bad Boys, The Rock, Pearl Harbor and the cinematic excrement that is the Transformers series. It is my concerted and firm belief that this man is responsible for some of the biggest pieces of turd ever put on celluloid. His films are sexist, racist, obsessed with fetishising the military and worst of all they are popular.
"Oh Mr Camelot" I hear you cry "they are just big summer blockbusters. Popcorn movies don't have to make you think, they just have to entertain you." to which I reply, shut up, sit down and let me tell you why you are wrong.
I accept that summer blockbusters don't need or want deep philosophical stuff in them. The latter two movies in the Matrix series for example suffered from an attempt to be too clever and ended up just looking pretentious (not to mention the end of the second movie was actually pointless making the whole movie a tremendous waste of time). However, Bay's movies actively denigrate the concept of being intelligent. Anyone who is supposed to be clever in a Bay movie is seen as weird and geeky and is often portrayed as the guy who loses it big time. Armageddon is the worst for this, lauding a bunch of ignorant rig pig pricks over NASA and when they get on crap CGI Asteroid who loses his shit? Yep Steve Buscemi, the guy who was pointedly mentioned as being the most intelligent of the lot. This leaves Bruce Willis to save the day in the most overblown way possible.
Actually this is a symptom of a much larger theme in Bay's movies. The rampant hate for authority, particularly civilian authority. Every Bay movie features the individual struggling against some kind of organisation. It's like the Ayn Rand inspired scribblings of a bad sixth form English student. It's ignorant and boring at this point. The only authority Bay has any time for is the US military but he treats this with an almost fetishistic appeal that borders on totalitarian. Also it is the individual military characters that he is interested in and there is always a point in a Bay movie that the military character(s) have to act on their own authority or disobey orders. Again the hate of authority coming into effect.
Then we have his treatment of women in his films or rather the treatment of the boob and arse carrying frames because that's all they are in a Bay movie. Compare this with James Cameron, for all his faults he always has strong female characters in his movies. Bay never has this, his female characters are there to look hot and pout, pine for their menfolk or provide comic relief in the case of older females (I'm still in fucking therapy about the doped brownies bullshit in Transformers 2). The lack of any realistic female characters is frankly laughable. Even Paul W. S. Anderson can do a kick ass female character for fuck's sake. It's not hard.
Then there's the over production of his movies. Bay is in love with slow motion, odd camera angles and jump cuts to the extent that the film becomes plastic and unreal. He also uses only two colours in his movies teal (orange) and blue because they are opposite on the colour spectrum and thereby provide a good contrast. His movies do not feel real because they exhibit an overproduced cinematic style; one that divorces itself from reality. It is as if Bay wants to make films that overwhelm your senses thinking that in some way this makes them memorable when in actual fact the relentless pace of his movies does the exact opposite.
This relentless pace does irreparable damage to characterisation in his movies. Bay mistakenly believes that dialogue and character building can be done in short snappy sentences and brief scenes. Everything is rushed in his films because he does not trust his audience to have an attention span. That leads to cliched characters and stilted dialogue because the characters have no time to develop a personality. A good director finds some time in his movies to slow the pace in order to frame the frantic pace of the action. Bay just barrels ahead like a juggernaut.
Bay's racism is evident in a lot of his movies. The horrendous "wigger" stereotypes in the second Transformers movie are the most obvious example of this, however he's been doing it for a while. The guy who betrays the honour bound Colonel in The Rock? Yup the black guy. John Tuturro in the Transformers movies? Jewish guy who lives with his overbearing mother. The Cosmonaut in Armageddon? Yup crazy and living in a crap space station, because it's, y'know, Russian and all their stuff is shit. Oh how we laughed. In the absence of time to develop an actual character Bay just uses lazy racial stereotypes because that's easy.
All of this brings me to the crux of the matter. Bay makes easy movies. No subtlety is involved, no craft, no skill. The point is he is appealing to the dumbest person in the audience. He just wants to overwhelm you with sound and image because I suspect he does not have the talent to employ subtlety. Either that or he knows that he doesn't have to. If you can just put a souless and relentless parade of banal action together and it still grosses a billion then why try?
This is the problem. People look at the money that Transformers and the like make and they realise that the more basic a movie is the better it plays overseas. There is a reason that Baywatch is the most viewed TV show in history because everyone understands tits. Similarly Bay's over produced, relentless and earsplitting drivel can be understood by anyone, be it a moron in a western multiplex or someone who speaks no English in a small movie theatre anywhere in the world.
I am resigned to his success by know so I have taken a vow never to endure any more of his orange and blue cinematic vomit. I urge you all to do the same. Not because I believe it will spell the end of Michael Bay (because it wont) rather I implore you to avoid it for your own sake. Watching a Bay movie is the equivalent of admitting that you don't care about cinema, that you would rather watch spectacle than nuance. Do yourself a favour and watch something else, something that involves you on an emotional level, something that deserves merit. Trust me, you are better than Bay's bullshit
Your resident hack praying that Michael Bay will crawl off into a fucking hole somewhere and stop inflicting his bullshit on us all.
Fall of Camelot
The five best tips for running pre written adventures
Hi all,
Nowadays I only run prewritten adventures. I have found that I don't have time in my day to come up with a coherant plot and stat up opponents for my players to face. A good prewritten adventure takes all the hassle away.
That said you can easily fall into the trap of thinking that you need not do any work. Thinking like that can get you into trouble fast. So here are my five top tips for running prewritten scenarios.
1) Manage player expectations. A prewritten adventure will have it's own style, so make sure you let your players know what characters will work and what characters will fall flat. For example, an adventure may start at sea but 90% of it may take place in a dungeon where sea based skills and abilities will be useless. It's therefore important that you let the players know this.
Tied in with this is making sure concepts fit the campaign. If the campaign calls for eco warriors try to steer the players away from corporate stooges. Likewise if a player has her heart set on playing a total coward in a game where you become superheroes, it may be an idea to steer her to a different concept (or at least a modified concept). Communication is the main thing, without it the players may feel railroaded and by extension resentful.
2) Preparation is still key
So the plot is written for you, the NPC's statblocks are generated, everything is there for you so no work is needed right?
Wrong. I'm not saying that running a pre written adventure doesn't take out some of the grunt work of creating a game but nor does it mean that you have nothing that you need to do. The trick is not to memorise the whole thing but to get the flow of the plot as written. That way you can make the game flow to your style. Be confident in how the plot works. Ask yourself how the players get to a certain point and then make sure you give them the opportunity to get there. However...
3) Find the break points
A wise man once said that no battle plan survives contact with the enemy. Well the same can be said for RPG's. Of course it's feasible to allow your players to go completely off the rails and do something random. If the players want to spend their time running a bar rather than follow the plot then sure, knock yourself out if that's what you want to do.
That said by buying a prewritten adventure you have a perfectly acceptable plot that you have paid good money for. My contention is that you should try to run according to that plot wherever possible. Does that mean you should follow a plot religiously? No, and I will cover that in point 5. However if Bob the Lich is the enemy of the campaign it's a bit disappointing if the players don't end up fighting him.
To that end you have to find the break points. These are the points in an adventure where the writer will make an assumption about what the players will do and if they don't do it then the campaign can't continue. The trick is to identify these points before they come up and have a contingency plan in place in case the players don't do that.
A good example is in Paizo's Legacy of Fire Adventure Path *obvious spoilers here folks*. The first adventure has one of the players become semi possessed by a friendly spirit. This is contingent on a particular monster hitting a PC and said PC failing a saving throw. If they don't become possessed then as written the plot comes to a shuddering halt in the second book because they wont find a secret passage without said spirit's help.
As a GM you have a few options here. Fudge things so someone automatically gets hit and fails the save (that's what I did btw) or have the secret door automatically found by the players. What you do is not important what is important is that you identify these problems before they occur.
4) Messageboards are your friend
Messageboards are an odd little thing. I love posting on them but I often find the vitriol and ignorance expressed on them to be a pain in the arse to wade through. The fact that I often am responsible for some of the vitriol doesn't exactly help.
However messageboards are a great resource for identifying issues with prewritten scenarios. Reading about what people are saying about an adventure gives you a great insight into the issues you can encounter when running it. It can help you identify problem encounters, plot issues and break points and the responses can help you mitigate problems before they occur. Use other's pain to your advantage.
5) Personalise and alter
The last point and the most important. You know your players better than anyone else, what they like, what they hate and what helps you to all have a fun game.
Everybody's game is different even when it's a prewritten adventure. Running as written never works unless you adapt it for your players and their PC's. Find ways to include your PC's more closely in a plot, give them ties to important NPC's, implement their backgrounds into the plot. They will have much more fun if you do this. After all the story is about the players, they should feel intrinsically linked to the plot.
Also if there is an encounter that you don't like or you feel would work better in a different way then just alter it. The players will react better to interesting encounters than cookie cutter opponents. In addition no one likes annoying pointless obstacles. If an adventure has encounters that are not a threat but take up time (such as a Guards and Wards spell that isn't being monitored by an NPC) just handwave it. No one wants to sit rolling dice for no reason when they could be getting on with the plot.
I hope you find these tips useful. Let me know if you feel that this list could use an extra entry.
Your resident Games Monkey
Fall of Camelot
Nowadays I only run prewritten adventures. I have found that I don't have time in my day to come up with a coherant plot and stat up opponents for my players to face. A good prewritten adventure takes all the hassle away.
That said you can easily fall into the trap of thinking that you need not do any work. Thinking like that can get you into trouble fast. So here are my five top tips for running prewritten scenarios.
1) Manage player expectations. A prewritten adventure will have it's own style, so make sure you let your players know what characters will work and what characters will fall flat. For example, an adventure may start at sea but 90% of it may take place in a dungeon where sea based skills and abilities will be useless. It's therefore important that you let the players know this.
Tied in with this is making sure concepts fit the campaign. If the campaign calls for eco warriors try to steer the players away from corporate stooges. Likewise if a player has her heart set on playing a total coward in a game where you become superheroes, it may be an idea to steer her to a different concept (or at least a modified concept). Communication is the main thing, without it the players may feel railroaded and by extension resentful.
2) Preparation is still key
So the plot is written for you, the NPC's statblocks are generated, everything is there for you so no work is needed right?
Wrong. I'm not saying that running a pre written adventure doesn't take out some of the grunt work of creating a game but nor does it mean that you have nothing that you need to do. The trick is not to memorise the whole thing but to get the flow of the plot as written. That way you can make the game flow to your style. Be confident in how the plot works. Ask yourself how the players get to a certain point and then make sure you give them the opportunity to get there. However...
3) Find the break points
A wise man once said that no battle plan survives contact with the enemy. Well the same can be said for RPG's. Of course it's feasible to allow your players to go completely off the rails and do something random. If the players want to spend their time running a bar rather than follow the plot then sure, knock yourself out if that's what you want to do.
That said by buying a prewritten adventure you have a perfectly acceptable plot that you have paid good money for. My contention is that you should try to run according to that plot wherever possible. Does that mean you should follow a plot religiously? No, and I will cover that in point 5. However if Bob the Lich is the enemy of the campaign it's a bit disappointing if the players don't end up fighting him.
To that end you have to find the break points. These are the points in an adventure where the writer will make an assumption about what the players will do and if they don't do it then the campaign can't continue. The trick is to identify these points before they come up and have a contingency plan in place in case the players don't do that.
A good example is in Paizo's Legacy of Fire Adventure Path *obvious spoilers here folks*. The first adventure has one of the players become semi possessed by a friendly spirit. This is contingent on a particular monster hitting a PC and said PC failing a saving throw. If they don't become possessed then as written the plot comes to a shuddering halt in the second book because they wont find a secret passage without said spirit's help.
As a GM you have a few options here. Fudge things so someone automatically gets hit and fails the save (that's what I did btw) or have the secret door automatically found by the players. What you do is not important what is important is that you identify these problems before they occur.
4) Messageboards are your friend
Messageboards are an odd little thing. I love posting on them but I often find the vitriol and ignorance expressed on them to be a pain in the arse to wade through. The fact that I often am responsible for some of the vitriol doesn't exactly help.
However messageboards are a great resource for identifying issues with prewritten scenarios. Reading about what people are saying about an adventure gives you a great insight into the issues you can encounter when running it. It can help you identify problem encounters, plot issues and break points and the responses can help you mitigate problems before they occur. Use other's pain to your advantage.
5) Personalise and alter
The last point and the most important. You know your players better than anyone else, what they like, what they hate and what helps you to all have a fun game.
Everybody's game is different even when it's a prewritten adventure. Running as written never works unless you adapt it for your players and their PC's. Find ways to include your PC's more closely in a plot, give them ties to important NPC's, implement their backgrounds into the plot. They will have much more fun if you do this. After all the story is about the players, they should feel intrinsically linked to the plot.
Also if there is an encounter that you don't like or you feel would work better in a different way then just alter it. The players will react better to interesting encounters than cookie cutter opponents. In addition no one likes annoying pointless obstacles. If an adventure has encounters that are not a threat but take up time (such as a Guards and Wards spell that isn't being monitored by an NPC) just handwave it. No one wants to sit rolling dice for no reason when they could be getting on with the plot.
I hope you find these tips useful. Let me know if you feel that this list could use an extra entry.
Your resident Games Monkey
Fall of Camelot
I'm back baby!
Yeah I suck
I know my rants haven't been on here for a while. If you are wondering why I haven't posted a new post recently then you need to get out more.
I will endeavour to add some new posts over the next couple of days. Thanks for being patient.
Your resident fat lazy useless bastard
Fall of Camelot
I know my rants haven't been on here for a while. If you are wondering why I haven't posted a new post recently then you need to get out more.
I will endeavour to add some new posts over the next couple of days. Thanks for being patient.
Your resident fat lazy useless bastard
Fall of Camelot
Thursday, 21 July 2011
I believe it means a whale's vagina
Hi all FOC here,
Greetings from comic con! Myself and Mrs Camelot have been in San Diego for acouple of days now and I have been struck by how much this con has entered the public conciousness over here. We have been stopped by random passers by in the street to ask us about comic con. They all seem to be proud of it here.
That's new to me. My interests are fringe really. Fun, but fringe and that's ok with me. It's just that every time I mention comics or games to a muggle there's this kind of polite smile that comes across their face of total incomprehension. They don't really understand it. To most people comics are for kids, tv shows are disposable and the closest they have got to a tabletop rpg is a game of monopoly.
Comic con is different. For one thing it's massive, 150,000 attendees of massive to be precise. The reason for that is that it trancends fandom boundaries. We have comic fans, tabletop gamers, video gamers, anime and manga fans, genre tv fans, movie geeks, action figure collectors, Twilight fans, Harry Potter fans, cosplayers, you name it there's something for every fandom here.
If anyone were to think the popular geek stereotype is true then all they have to do is come here to have that notion disproved. This convention attracts normal people who just so happen to be fans of something. It's not just a bunch of fat thirty something guys (like me) who go, there are kids and teenagers, retirees and just as many women as men it seems. What strikes me is how normal everyone is and that may show how the fandom is invading the mainstream.
That said, someone has just passed me in a camo pattern kilt so normal is relative...
Your resident fanboy
Fall Of Camelot
Greetings from comic con! Myself and Mrs Camelot have been in San Diego for acouple of days now and I have been struck by how much this con has entered the public conciousness over here. We have been stopped by random passers by in the street to ask us about comic con. They all seem to be proud of it here.
That's new to me. My interests are fringe really. Fun, but fringe and that's ok with me. It's just that every time I mention comics or games to a muggle there's this kind of polite smile that comes across their face of total incomprehension. They don't really understand it. To most people comics are for kids, tv shows are disposable and the closest they have got to a tabletop rpg is a game of monopoly.
Comic con is different. For one thing it's massive, 150,000 attendees of massive to be precise. The reason for that is that it trancends fandom boundaries. We have comic fans, tabletop gamers, video gamers, anime and manga fans, genre tv fans, movie geeks, action figure collectors, Twilight fans, Harry Potter fans, cosplayers, you name it there's something for every fandom here.
If anyone were to think the popular geek stereotype is true then all they have to do is come here to have that notion disproved. This convention attracts normal people who just so happen to be fans of something. It's not just a bunch of fat thirty something guys (like me) who go, there are kids and teenagers, retirees and just as many women as men it seems. What strikes me is how normal everyone is and that may show how the fandom is invading the mainstream.
That said, someone has just passed me in a camo pattern kilt so normal is relative...
Your resident fanboy
Fall Of Camelot
Monday, 11 July 2011
Sport, legacy, money and Christian Lopez
Hey all FOC here,
On Saturday afternoon a 23 year old mobile phone salesman called Christian Lopez went to a baseball game with his father and his girlfriend. It was a special game, Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees was going for 3000 career hits and his total stood at 2998 hits going into the game. For those of you that don't know, 3000 hits is one of baseball's great achievements representing a career of great longevity and fortitude. Only 27 other players had hit 3000 hits in history and none had ever done it as a New York Yankee.
Jeter proceeded to get a hit in the first inning past the third baseman. His next at bat came in the third inning. The pitcher for Tampa Bay, David Price, challenged Jeter with a variety of pitches until Jeter connected with a curveball.
And he hit it straight to Christian Lopez.
Immediately Lopez was ushered out of his seat and taken into the backrooms of Yankee Stadium. Under baseball tradition that baseball now belonged to Christian Lopez. The Yankees staff asked what Lopez wanted for the ball. Lopez said that he wanted nothing for it and Derek Jeter could have it.
Now to put this in perspective. The home run ball that Mark Magwire hit for his 70th home run in 1998 was sold for 3 million dollars. Lopez could have easily held out for a million. Instead he got a few gifts and Yankee stadium box seats for the rest of the season.
Some people might say that he should have held out, that he was irresponsible for not looking after his family. But in my opinion Christian Lopez did the right thing. He recognised the significance of this ball in baseball history and made sure that the ball went back to who it truly belonged to. Baseball is a game about history and tradition and in making this gesture Christain Lopez has proved that he understands that. A class act and a true baseball fan.
Your resident Yankee
Fall of Camelot
On Saturday afternoon a 23 year old mobile phone salesman called Christian Lopez went to a baseball game with his father and his girlfriend. It was a special game, Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees was going for 3000 career hits and his total stood at 2998 hits going into the game. For those of you that don't know, 3000 hits is one of baseball's great achievements representing a career of great longevity and fortitude. Only 27 other players had hit 3000 hits in history and none had ever done it as a New York Yankee.
Jeter proceeded to get a hit in the first inning past the third baseman. His next at bat came in the third inning. The pitcher for Tampa Bay, David Price, challenged Jeter with a variety of pitches until Jeter connected with a curveball.
And he hit it straight to Christian Lopez.
Immediately Lopez was ushered out of his seat and taken into the backrooms of Yankee Stadium. Under baseball tradition that baseball now belonged to Christian Lopez. The Yankees staff asked what Lopez wanted for the ball. Lopez said that he wanted nothing for it and Derek Jeter could have it.
Now to put this in perspective. The home run ball that Mark Magwire hit for his 70th home run in 1998 was sold for 3 million dollars. Lopez could have easily held out for a million. Instead he got a few gifts and Yankee stadium box seats for the rest of the season.
Some people might say that he should have held out, that he was irresponsible for not looking after his family. But in my opinion Christian Lopez did the right thing. He recognised the significance of this ball in baseball history and made sure that the ball went back to who it truly belonged to. Baseball is a game about history and tradition and in making this gesture Christain Lopez has proved that he understands that. A class act and a true baseball fan.
Your resident Yankee
Fall of Camelot
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)