Deadpool 2 Teaser Thoughts

You likely remember Deadpool’s  “No Good Deed” spot but we now have our first official teaser.

Like the first teaser, this one doesn’t show us too much and I don’t mind that at all. The majority of the time is actually occupied by a Bob Ross parody. I didn’t know the name of the painter but I immediately recognized the reference from Deadpool’s tone of voice and the wig. Like the first film, I am glad that Deadpool 2 embraces cross generational pop culture references, ranging from Aliens 3 to Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine. I also want to thank Ryan Reynolds for introducing me to the term “holy f***knuckles”.

The actual film footage gives us brief glimpses of Domino, Vanessa and most importantly, Dopinder. Deadpool’s conversations with Dopinder are some of my favourite moments so I am eager to see more.

Negasonic is back and looks better than ever. The colours in the costume from the first movie hinted at a classic X-Men costume but now it looks like we’ll get the real thing.

I know a lot of people though that the classic X-Men costumes couldn’t work on screen. I was one of them at but X-Men First Class changed my mind and this costume just affirms my belief that there isn’t anything wrong with some more colour. It’s a great nod to the classics, that also doesn’t come across as cheesy on screen. Since this film has a bigger budget I am also wondering if there will be more X-Men cameos or if there will be any reference to recent X-Men films like Apocalypse or Logan.

We also get a superhero landing in the film clips. There is plenty more material ripe for parody in the superhero genre so I’m hoping Deadpool makes use of all its ammunition. Since David Leitch (co-director of John Wick) is in the chair, I am sure the action will deliver so that is actually the least of my worries. The pessimist in me worries that since this film is no longer just a passion project with a (relatively) small budget, it might not have the same magic as the first. However, I am hoping it delivers.

Stranger Things Season 2 Review

Warning: Spoilers Ahead

Following up on my YouTube review, it’s time to share a more in depth review of Stranger Things‘s second season.

Season 2 picks up almost a year after the first. The lab and the upside down are still active. The gang (almost called them the Losers Club) are moving on in the absence of Eleven, although Mike is still struggling with the concept. Will is still haunted by visions of the Upside Down and it soon becomes clear that his visions aren’t all in his head. Meanwhile, Eleven has returned but is confined to one of Hopper’s cabins, for her own safety.

As with season one, the performances are one of the show’s most consistent and powerful redeeming qualities. Winona Ryder and our new Hellboy, David Harbour, return stronger than ever but the kids (or teenagers) continue to shine here. Millie Bobby Brown deservedly gets a lot of attention for her role as Eleven in season 1. Although her lines were limited she was still able to convey great emotion.

In season 2, Hopper has been teaching Eleven more english so the character gets to be more verbally expressive. We still have the facial expressions and other cues from season 1 combined with a character arc that sees Eleven acting on her desire to be free. She has gone from a system with no freedom (the lab), to more freedom with friends, and now she must try to adjust to Hopper as a parental figure who is trying to protect her from men who still want to find her. The relationship between Hopper and Eleven is actually one of my favourite parts of this season and their fight in episode four is one of my favourite moments. It is a conflict where you can empathize with both characters. Eleven understands why she must be kept hidden but after almost a year she is wondering when she will finally be free, and vague declarations of “soon” start to wear thin. Meanwhile, Hopper realizes the danger she places them in by leaving the cabin. His attempts to discipline her are met with pushback that makes you realize how dangerous Eleven could be without a conscience.

 

Despite my love for Eleven, Noah Schapp steals the show here as Will. Although the first season revolved around Will’s disappearance, Will had few lines and relatively little screen time. Here, Will is truly part of the group. For lack of a better term, Will is possessed and his conflict with the monster inside him is a lynchpin of the plot but also allows him to shine. I don’t think people are exaggerating when they say he deserves an Emmy nomination.

Let’s move on to some of the show’s weaker points.

Episode seven, which focuses on Eight and her gang, gets a lot of hate and I can understand why. The episode comes after a cliffhanger in the previous episode, serving as a full 40 minute cutaway that takes us away from Hawkins and the approaching demo-dogs. Due to its timing, the episode can almost come across as filler. Filler is exactly what made me stop watching The Walking Dead. 

I don’t consider episode seven filler, but I must say that it would likely have been better received if Eight was mentioned or referenced a few more times before episodes six and seven. We see Eight in episode one and then she is pretty much MIA until episode seven. I liked the episode itself since it offered a great view of what Eleven could have become. Eight never found the same type of friends and family Eleven did. Eight found other outcasts who stay on the fringes of society, sticking to a limited circle either out of choice or necessity. Eight is guided purely by vengeance, while Eleven’s search was about finding family and getting closure.

Aside from the lesson of the episode I found the episode itself entertaining. I will say that Eight’s gang wasn’t as interesting as Eleven’s. Of course I could be biased since we don’t get as much time with them, but even for an episode the characterization seemed paper thin e.g. the big one, the crazy one etc.

I remember watching season 1’s sensory deprivation scene and thinking that Barb’s death was somewhat glossed over, “gone”. It was great to see the impact her death continues to have on Nancy and Barb’s parents. Barb’s death also provides the plot lynchpin for the group to attack the lab publicly, without having to mention the upside down or anything else that might make them look insane.

For the people who hated that Nancy and Steve stayed together at the end of season one, your prayers were answered this season. I was actually happy that Nancy and Steve were still together at the start of this season. It would have been far too cliched for Nancy to switch that quickly from the jock to the quiet, nerdy guy the jock picked on. Steve was a tool at times in season 1 but he proved himself to be a good person by the end of it. Season 2 gives Steve more heartbreak but also lets his character develop more. Like Will, he is one of the biggest benefactors of this season.

An even weaker point of this season?

Now, the Duffer Bros. said they wanted to introduce a new human villain who wasn’t connected to the lab. Okay, but I think this kind of conflict works best if it also drives the plot forward. For example, perhaps Eleven could have come across someone who begins to threaten her anonymity. Max and Billy’s actors are competent enough, but their impact on the plot is miniscule. The love triangle that started early on in the season between Max, Dustin and Lucas fizzled out pretty early. Billy’s conflict with Steve culminates in the fight at the house, and the ultimate outcome of that fight is that Steve is forced to escort the kids into the tunnels. Steve could have been forced into this some other way. Originally I thought that Max and Billy may be Soviet spies, since Cold War conflict was hinted at throughout the season. If season 3 offers no further revelations about their characters then it seems like their characters were truly random editions.

Their screen time also detracts from more screen time for other characters. Lucas was defined by his relationship with Max this season and it would have been nice to see more of the group together helping Will.

The climax wasn’t boring but I would actually argue that it wasn’t the season’s most exciting point. No main characters died throughout the show’s run so it was clear that Sean Astin’s Bob would likely be a red shirt. Sorry superhero.

Thankfully, Barb’s death was enough to get the lab shut down.

Although Joyce Byers has her boys back, looks like she still needs some luck with men.

Watching Hopper mow down demo-dogs was pretty awesome and Eleven’s brief moment of “flying” made me wonder if she’ll go full Neo in season 3.

We’ll see I guess.

While Max and Billy are proof that more is not always better, season 2 delivers for the most part. It builds on threads from the previous season, develops characters more, answers more questions, raises more questions, and offers more thrills.

Alive: Part II

For any new readers or those who haven’t trawled the archives, I have begun working on my fourth book again. It is a continuation of the werewolf story I told in the third, “Alive”.

Due to numerous things I am looking into at the moment, especially hunting for a new place, my time has become more limited and I’ve had some trouble writing one page a day as I originally intended. Now I aim to write an extra page a day for everyone missed (e.g. miss 5 days, write 5 pages the next day). I began working on “Alive: Part II” months ago, beginning with writing 500 words a day. I continued with this pace for a few weeks until I eventually stopped, due to a tighter schedule and excuses on my part. I realize that I can’t use a busy schedule as an excuse not to write. One week without writing can quickly morph into months. I originally intended to finish a draft of Part II  by the end of this year, but that will likely have to be moved to March 2018. I now realize that committing to a smaller amount and staying consistent can still pay bigger dividends than aiming higher and falling off earlier.

I began watching Hemlock Grove recently, mainly because I wanted to see more of Bill Skarsgard after his performance in It.  The plot involving a vampire (Skarsgard) and a werewolf teaming up to investigate a series of grisly murders was also appealing. Basically, it seemed like an awesome concept that Twilight could have been if it wasn’t bogged down by teen love and Mormon wish fulfillment.

I nearly gave up on the show, mainly due to the acting. Skarsgard has apparently developed a lot as an actor since the show’s first season at least. Famke Janssen’s performance is hampered by an English accent that either comes and goes, or is just overdone. Four episodes in, and one of the strongest actors is the actor who plays the werewolf, Landon Liboiron. Hearing about the mythos again actually motivated me to make sure that I stick to the task of completing Alive: Part II. The transformation scene is also a memorable and painful looking one that makes me wish I could have thought of it first.

Hemlock Grove fortunately is focusing on its fantasy mythos early on in the series instead of the high school drama that the character’s ages lends itself to. I’ll stick with the series and see how it goes, and will probably revisit for inspiration as I try to craft a werewolf story that someone aside from myself will also read and enjoy one day.

What Horror Movie Scared You The Most?

I don’t think my costume will be as awesome as @prince.deguzman’s but I’ll try.

Halloween season is upon us, and I have already embraced it. I watched Sinister yesterday, a film with great performances and a lot of creepy scenes. Spoilers Below.

Interestingly, the creepiest scenes in this film don’t directly come from the supernatural villain, Bughuul or Mr. Boogie. What is terrifying is what he makes his child surrogates do to their families.

These tapes are by far the most terrifying thing about the film, although Bughuul’s mask is definitely creepy. The ending to the film is perfect and since the sequel wasn’t as well received, I’ll avoid it and leave the first film untainted in my mind.

I have never been a huge horror fan, mostly because I probably scare more easy than the true fanatics, but It may have rekindled my interest in them. It was my first time seeing a horror film in theaters and the atmosphere in the theatre added another dimension to the experience. With that in mind, I wanted to reflect on the film that scared me the most when I was a child: Darkness Falls (2003).

As one reviewer put it, “The movie’s cleverest notion is its demonization of a benign childhood phantom.” In this film, the Tooth Fairy is not a ghost who simply takes a child’s tooth when they lose it. She is a vengeful spirit who will kill any child who sees her when they visit her. The reason for her hate? She was hanged by the townspeople of the eponymous town when they believed she kidnapped two children. She was already known by the Tooth Fairy at this time since she would give gold coins to children who lost their teeth. After Matilda is hanged, the two children are found and the townspeople bury her body and wash their hands of their crime.

After a house fire, Matilda’s face was disfigured and she would wear a white porcelain mask to hide it. Hence her supernatural form also sports a creepy porcelain mask.

Having to go to Google Images to get these pictures brings up a heap of night-light accompanied bedtimes. Since I was afraid of the dark I probably shouldn’t have watched this movie, but I wanted to show my step-dad I could handle it. I could not. It also didn’t help that he ran out of the bathroom with a white rag over his head right after we see this movie…douche.

Anyways, The Tooth Fairy’s only weakness is light, meaning she is omnipotent when in darkness. Hence, why I shouldn’t have seen this film if I was afraid of the dark. Darkness Falls is pretty much universally panned by critics but it is the concept itself that still sticks with me. To think that you are sleeping in the dark and hear something in your room, and to think that if you look at it it will kill you. Also to know that it will stalk you for the rest of your life, hence our protagonist who rarely leaves his house and always travels with flashlights.

It took a while for me to outgrow my fear of the film and looking up these images also brings those fear-stricken days back in all their glory.

What film scared you the most?

Tomb Raider Trailer

I got my Xbox One earlier this year, and one of the free games I was able to download for it was Rise of the Tomb Raider. I remember the old video games, which I played with friends a lot as a child but this was the first Tomb Raider game I played in the post PS2 era. The story was somewhat generic but actually offered some interesting developments and the gameplay was great, making the game a lot of fun. Unfortunately, the gameplay experience was somewhat ruined by a known glitch trapping me in one stage of the game, leaving the options of quitting or starting over. I refused to start over. Although my memories of the game are somewhat tainted it still managed to make me more excited for this film.

If the general buzz proves anything, it is that Tomb Raider fans are just as attached to Angelina Jolie as Croft as horror fans are attached to Tim Curry as Pennywise. Yes, Vikander’s boobs are smaller and she has a slimmer figure. Why? Because this version of Croft is based on the recent video game, not the old games with plentiful polygon boobs.

Boobs do not define the character. I can’t believe I have to say that.

We know Croft’s father disappeared and that she has now found his clues that lead to an ancient city. Actually an ancient city is not specifically referenced in the trailer, but if the movie is following the game roughly then an ancient city might be the goal. An organization called Trinity seeks to beat Croft to her goal. Now, I definitely can’t say that any criticism of this trailer is unjustified.

A lot of the plot elements seem cliched so far, and I don’t remember them being AS generic in the video game. As I remember there was no location called the “Devil’s Sea”. Dialogue like “The fate of humanity is now in your hands” definitely doesn’t help. We have slo-mo shots and weak CGI in a lot of places. I always hope the CGI will look better by the time a film is released, but I have hoped in vain many times. Let’s not forget the slo-mo jump across a long gap, which no longer dazzles like it used to. Since this is just a trailer, I am hoping some of the more interesting plot elements from the game still make their way in, such as Croft’s allegiance with a Native community that Trinity invades.

I almost forgot about the stigma of video game films, which is why I avoided listening to other people’s thoughts before writing my own. I didn’t want to let the “Academy Award Winner Alicia Vikander” title impress me, since plenty of great actors end up taking roles in horrible films or even television shows. Remember Forest Whitaker’s short lived stint with Criminal Minds: Suspect Behaviour? However, I have to say that the rest of the cast does interest me. Walton Goggins is a stand out in just about any movie or tv show he touches, with roles ranging from Sheriff Chris Mannix in Hateful Eight to Venus Van Dam in Sons of Anarchy. We have Daniel Wu, who is a BAMF in Into the Badlands, along with his fellow co-star Nick Frost.

Pictured above: Daniel Wu being a BAMF.

The cast itself actually excited me more than any of the intended eye candy. As fans, we always hope that the cast is a sign of something: material that was too great to be rejected. However, we’re not that naive anymore. Actors will take big roles in bad movies for the paycheque or the exposure. I’m not sure if I will see this film in theatres but I will definitely see it for the cast it offers. We have yet to get a great video game movie, but I hope that this can be a decent one.

What are your thoughts on the new Tomb Raider adaptation?

The Punisher

Daredevil’s second season was met with a more mixed reception than the first. There was criticism levied at the plot, which brought in more of the mystical elements from the comics, in contrast to a first season that was more realistic (realistic is relative with comic book adaptations). I personally detested the love story between Karen and Matt, which there was absolutely no indication of in the first season. One thing that many people loved, and probably wanted more of, was The Punisher.

The anti-hero featured heavily in the marketing and Jon Bernthal nailed his performance, before becoming more scarce in the latter half of the season. With the success (ratings wise) of DD season 2 and the reception for The Punisher it was obvious that he would likely get his own spinoff.

Today we got our first trailer for the show, a short but sweet teaser of what is to come. In short, I can’t wait for this show to come out and I am somewhat annoyed that Netflix has yet to reveal the exact release date. Fortunately, there isn’t that much time left in 2017 so it is coming out sooner, rather than later.

Firstly, this trailer doesn’t give away too much of the plot. DD season 2 introduced us to the conspiracy that Frank is a part of, a plan by government agencies to kill him so that certain secrets remain buried. As much as I am looking forward to Frank taking on the government, like some of the arcs in Punisher Max, I have to say this conspiracy is the one part of the Netflix punisher mythos I didn’t like. In the series, District Attorney Reyes admits that they were conducting a sting on a gang meeting in Central Park. Reyes chose not to clear the area in order to avoid tipping off criminals and this ultimately impacted Castle when the gangs caught on to the ruse.

The comics I’ve read so far that detail Frank’s origin, from Year One to the Max series (2004 and 2010), depict his family’s death as a simple issue of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. His family stumbles across a mob hit and the mob decides to eliminate witnesses. This sense of randomness and chaos is what made his family’s death so tragic. I think Frank’s vendetta against criminals as a whole makes more sense if he lost his family to something much more senseless than a sting gone wrong. However, Frank’s battles against other government agencies (from the looks of this trailer) could lead to some interesting overlap from the Punisher Max (2004) comics, which are gems for Punisher comics and comics as a whole.

With that said, the costume is actually my only other negative on display in this trailer. It doesn’t look terrible, and still gets the skull right, but I feel like the suit would look better with a different design for the vest itself. However, this is a relatively minor complaint since the show will hopefully have more to offer than a great wardrobe.

While Kevin Feige says the MCU films will never be dark, the Netflix shows have been a different story. The Punisher looks to continue that trend with the brutal headshots crammed into the two minutes of footage. I found some of the hand-to-hand fight scenes lacking in Iron Fist and Defenders, even for the characters who are supposed to be skilled martial artists. The choreography was weak and I’m hoping Frank’s style of combat will lend itself to some entertaining shootouts and some hand-to-hand fights as well. He is not as skilled a fighter as Daredevil but his fists are still deadly.

This trailer shows us a glimpse of Karen Page, who I feel has way more chemistry with Frank than she has with Daredevil.

Some of the most interesting subplots in the Punisher Max (2004) series was how the police reacted to Frank’s Killings. It is implied local police implicitly supported his actions, by never making serious moves to bring him in. Although they detested what he did on principle, they knew he was an unmatched deterrent against crime. The last scenes in the trailer, focusing on a group of detectives, makes me wonder if this series will also explore Frank’s actions from the other side.

Overall, this series is my most anticipated for the rest of the year and I have high hopes that it will deliver and possibly surpass Daredevil Season 1 as my favourite Marvel Netflix show.

Kingsman, Justice League and The Last Jedi

Now that I have seen It, these films are my most anticipated blockbusters for the rest of the year.  I thought I would take this post to discuss some of my hopes (and worries) for each film. The films are listed in the order of their release dates, not by anticipation. The Last Jedi is my most anticipated, with Kingsman second and Justice League third.

  1. Kingsman: The Secret Service

I thought the first Kingsman looked somewhat generic when I saw the first trailer, but I was pleasantly surprised to see a witty, well-paced, action-packed deconstruction and parody of the Bond films and spy films as a whole. Taron Egerton gave us an amazing performance as “Eggsy” and Colin Firth had a believable turn as an action hero with plenty of gravitas. Whenever I watch Liam Neeson’s jilted choreography in Taken 2 my mind comes back to this film as an example of how to execute an action scene with an older actor.

Between the action, the performances, the attacks on spy cliches etc., Kingsman was a film that felt like a rare treasure. That is why I was not excited to hear about a sequel. I was worried that the sequel would not be able to capture the magic of the first. The trailers have given me some hope but I can’t completely ignore the voice in my head that tells me this film might feel like a cheap cash grab.

It will be good to see Colin Firth on screen again but I can’t help but feel like his character’s reappearance cheapens his death in the first film. I am excited to see Pedro Pascal, who is probably best known as Prince Oberyn on Game of Thrones. While I don’t usually like Channing Tatum, I find that he does well in comedic or semi-comedic roles like the one he will likely have here as Agent Tequila. To his credit, Tatum also had a surprisingly good serious turn in Tarantino’s Hateful Eight.

The action we’ve seen so far looks like it is doing its best to top the first, but I hope that the action isn’t the only thing that is better.

2. Justice League

Now, to say that the DCEU has had mixed reviews would be an understatement. Man of Steel got so much hate that even the editor of Rotten Tomatoes wondered why its rating was so low.  BatmanvSuperman and Suicide Squad both followed that up with even worse reviews, and then Wonder Woman mercifully gave the DCEU its first fresh film. I don’t judge a film purely by what others think but it is a fact that bad word of mouth can negatively affect a film’s earnings.  A slate of films deemed weak by the general public would definitely hamper Justice League.

One thing that has bothered me since I saw the Comic-Con teaser for this film was the seemingly drastic shift in tone. One-liners abound from every character, including a Barry Allen whose personality seems transplanted from Wally West (his nephew-in-law who also becomes The Flash). I don’t agree that Man of Steel or BvS were “dark and gritty” like a lot of people say. Like I’ve previously discussed the films are dark in comparison to the stable of light fair Marvel has pumped out since 2008 (with the exception of their Netflix shows). A comic book film that doesn’t have one-liners every five minutes becomes “depressing”, it lacks “fun”. This is regardless of whether fun fits the character or storyline. People might say this Marvel v DC is a conspiracy but answer me why the darker Marvel Netflix shows don’t get swarmed by the same comments complaining about their lack of “fun”. The Defenders is the lightest one so far and even that is still miles darker than anything the MCU has put on the silver screen.

All of this to say that I was worried the Justice League was being made with a conscious effort to throw in as many one-liners as possible and make it fun. Let’s not forget, Suicide Squad is more “fun” than BatmanvSuperman and it has a slightly lower RT score at the moment (25% to Bvs’s 27%).  Throwing in more music in post-production and writing plenty of jokes didn’t help it overcome its other issues. “Fun” isn’t enough to make a film good and a “dark” tone isn’t enough to make it bad.

Moving on.

I have no problem with special effects themselves but there are a lot of weak looking shots in the marketing so far. There are scenes where it is far too obvious that everything but the actors are computer generated. The floor, the backgrounds, the sky all look fake. Cyborg in particular looks terrible when he is directly beside any of the other members of the league. I don’t mean that they are just stylized a la 300, I mean they are just poorly rendered. I am hoping that the film looks better by the time it’s in theatres.

My hopes were high hearing about the Justice League finally making it to the big screen. I have rewatched the animated series numerous times and have unashamedly daydreamed of finally seeing this film. I can’t help but think that it would have been better to see some more solo films prior to this team-up, but I have to admit that this approach could have some benefits. Characters that were either not well known or respected before, such as Aquaman can shine in a team setting first, which will help to boost sales of their solo film. However, Marvel has to get credit for being able to build a great brand on the backs of characters that were relatively unpopular. Some people probably never though Iron Man or Captain America would be on Spider-Man’s level in terms of box office receipts but Marvel pulled that off.

Additionally, while I have a man crush on Jason Momoa I am worried that his acting will be a painful weak link in this film. If some of his other performances are any indication, we could be in for a painful two hours, especially if his character gets a lot of lines.

3. The Last Jedi

Last, but not least.

The Force Awakens was a rehash of A New Hope, but it did bring some new things to the table. Namely a continuation of our beloved characters from the original trilogy, along with Rey and Finn.

One of the things that bothered me most about TFA was the almost cruel bait and switch for Finn’s progression. He was marketed as another Jedi, and then ends up being comic relief that is incapacitated by the end of the film. John Boyega has said that Finn’s character will shine more in the sequel and I hope that’s true.

In true nerd fashion, Daisy Ridley quickly became my biggest celebrity crush. Fanboying aside, her performance was great and I was also able to ignore most of the Mary Sue complaints since her character progression almost mirrored Luke’s. However, her progression did draw more attention to the paltry one Finn received.

Rogue One actually helped to increase my anticipation for this film, giving us an exciting and different Star Wars story that could have become a cheap cash-in or a rehash.

With a different director on board for this film, and the successful box office run of TFA, I hope The Last Jedi will give us something new as well.

Luke Skywalker is back and although I found Mark Hamill’s acting somewhat weak in the original trilogy, he has developed greatly as a voice actor and film actor since his last outing in the Star Wars universe. Coincidentally, his most recent performance I can recall is in Kingsman.

It will be bittersweet to see Carrie Fisher on screen for the last time, presumably with Princess Leia being killed off out of respect for the actor. I remember that one of my aunts passed away around the same time, and that I couldn’t help but think that it was a powerful testament to how death links us all. Let’s allow entertainment to link us as well.

IT and Stranger Things

For anyone who follows me on Instagram, you will know that IT is one of my most anticipated films of 2017. The book is one of my favourite Stephen King novels, I am currently debating between “IT” and “The Shining”, and I was excited to see another adaptation that would hopefully be closer to the book. Any long-time readers (the few) will also know that I do not hesitate to write about the level of stupidity that can be found online, whether it is the rising scourge of the “I’m not racist but” brand of bigotry or simple issues of reading comprehension.

IT brings up another realm of stupidity. When the first trailer was released, people began comparing the film to Stranger Things. I didn’t mind this comparison originally since I thought most people were still capable of reading the “From Stephen King’s Terrifying Novel” banner that accompanied the trailers, but apparently I was wrong. There are YouTube reactions and plenty of online comments that make it clear people don’t understand the film is based on an older book (1986) or that IT is another adaptation of the book, like the 1990 miniseries.

I have already discussed the people who are comparing this version of Pennywise (or what we have seen so far) to the 1990 version, and criticize the 2017 version because it is too different. These people make it clear they never read the book, and so do the hordes who keep comparing 2017’s IT to Stranger Things. Let me rephrase. What bothers me most are the people who insist that IT takes visual cues and inspiration, in terms of filmmaking, from Stranger Things. 

It (1986) inspired works that came after it. That is how time works. I saw influences from IT” and “Firestarter” in Stranger Things. People may say the filmmaking techniques or the visuals for 2017’s IT could be drawn from Stranger Things. Fair enough. Let’s take a look at the most common similarities people point out:

A group of kids fighting a monster. That can be traced to “IT”.

The older time period, especially the 1980s.  That can be traced to “IT”, which cuts between 1957/1958 (when the main characters are kids) and 1985 (when they are adults) . The film is updated to cut between 1989 and the present day. I can easily argue that the decision to put the kids in the 1980s is a decision meant to modernize the second film, where the kids will be adults. Either way, the characters were going to live in the 1980s for some part of their lives.  How can the 2017 adaptation of IT, then be inspired or influenced by Stranger Things?

Yes, the productions share an actor, Finn Wolfhard. Does that invalidate all the other influences that I just pointed out? One common actor invalidates the flow of time? If you think so, comprehension is your issue, not mine.

Unless you have actually seen the film already via an advanced screening or a country where it was released earlier, you can only go off the trailers that I have seen too. I have avoided watching any clips or tv spots, so if there are some other similarities I am missing feel free to point them out.

Zazie Beetz – Deadpool and “Blackwashing”

I posted this video a few weeks ago discussing the reaction people have to Zazie Beetz’s casting as Domino in Deadpool 2. Like many other videos, I emphasized the double standard present in people’s reactions to whitewashing versus “blackwashing” e.g. when a character is whitewashed, people argue that talent or marketability should trump race. If a character is blackwashed, people complain it is wrong to change the race of beloved characters and that the actor was selected only due to their race. If a white actor plays a character of colour it is because they were the most talented person to try out for the role. Vice versa, and the actor of colour was picked only due to their race. Whitewashing becomes a common sense business move, while blackwashing is just “pandering” to minorities. People tend to ignore how whitewashing also “panders” to white people, since one of the most common arguments used to defend whitewashing is that more whiteness in a film makes it more appealing to white people. Some people will even go so far as to say the film will be an economic failure if the film wasn’t whitewashed. Of course, the success of films like Straight Outta Compton disprove this theory.

I presented numerous different examples and clearly laid out how this double standard serves to reinforce the idea that white is inherently better, and the video was met with a wave of dislikes and comments where people repeatedly go back to the same double standards that I laid out in my video. One comment after another said it was wrong to change the race of characters, that the actress doesn’t look like the character etc. The video was sitting at less than two hundred views for a while but got a new influx of new viewers over the past week, leading me to believe it might have been shared on a website, or possibly got more traffic after the first picture of Beetz as Domino was released.

Keep in mind, my video came out before we got our first pic of Beetz as Domino. While some people complain about how she looks in terms of her hairstyle, clothing etc., my video was made for people criticizing the fact that a black actress got the part. This detail, along with just about all relevant details, were ignored by the people who swarmed to my video. Some even admitted they didn’t even watch the full video before commenting.

I previously discussed how the right-wing often uses the word “triggered” to criticize anyone who doesn’t endorse bigotry. Here we see triggered people who likely saw the title of my video or watched a minute of it before rushing to the comments. I have often disagreed with the views expressed in other videos, but I have never commented on a video that I didn’t bother to finish watching. If I disagreed I did not ignore every point made. I made sure I fully understood what the uploader was trying to say, because I wanted to respond with counter-arguments that actually disprove their points. My video was only five minutes long so I don’t think the issue is that my video is too long either. People simply came across something they didn’t want to hear and refused to engage with the facts I laid out, hence the repeated defferal to all of the same arguments and double standards that my video criticizes.

I pointed out the tendency for people to criticize hypothetical examples of whitewashing that they said they would criticize e.g. White Luke Cage, to take attention away from all of the real examples of whitewashing they supported.

“Ok I guess we’ll have white Blade….right? or Chinese wolverine… right?….hindu superman?….right…….. yeah… Fuck out of here!! Stick to the true origin !! fucking social justice warriors jerk offs!!”

I pointed out the tendency for people to appeal to the “colour-blind” mantra or the simplistic notion that a character should look the way they are supposed to (which also ignores all the times whitewashing was supported)

“I don’t have a single problem seeing minorities on the screen.I just wanted Domino, the character I love to be portrayed as the character I love. Very, very simple.”

I avoided appealing to emotion, and thought that a clearly laid out set of arguments and counter-arguments could break through to some people on the other side of the aisle. The only positive comments I received are ones from people who likely already shared my views.

There were some people who probably fancied themselves as enlightened and expressed less vitriol, while also displaying a stunning level of ignorance.

“And for the record, when is the last time you’ve seen anyone in this modern era “Defend whitewashing”?”

This poster could have found examples of whitewashing being defended on THE SAME VIDEO they commented on. Yet again, there is an unwillingness to engage with facts that conflict with their world view. Yes, you can find numerous articles and videos online from major publications that criticize whitewashing. The whole point of the video is that audiences react differently, e.g. the people who swarm the comment sections of those articles with comments like “political correctness”, “reverse racism” and “social justice warriors” to criticize the people who are bothered by whitewashing. This is in contrast to the comments they give in support of whitewasing such as “It’s just a movie”, “Best actor for the part, race doesn’t matter”. Now if “blackwashing” happens the comments will be swarmed with comments saying it is wrong to change the race of characters.

My mom once said you can’t have a debate with people if the ground isn’t fertile for it. This ground isn’t just infertile, it’s scorched.

Norwegian news site NKR is currently using their beta site to test a tool that makes readers take a 15 second quiz before commenting, to ensure that they actually understand the point of the article. Readers don’t have to agree, but the developers hope the quiz will give people time to calm down and ensure that they are less likely to resort to the slew of straw man arguments I see on my video. Ironically, people commenting on the NRK article also added comments that made it clear they misunderstood the purpose of the tool:

“Here we go..thought crime..three questions to make sure you agree with our angle on the story.”

Maybe it’s time to let the terrorists win.

 

Elliot Rodger

Today I was reading an article by Mark Manson, one of my favourite bloggers. The central point of the article is that the common factor in all these shootings is the lack of empathy displayed by people who should have seen it coming.

Before the vitriol pours in to my site or Mark’s, he is not saying victims are at fault. His article looks at different people who were close to the shooters, who ignored obvious signs that the shooters were mentally disturbed and seriously planned to commit violence. In the case of the Columbine shooters, some of their “friends” found the bombs they built, but thought nothing of it. Mark argues that this can ultimately be traced to a lack of empathy or outright apathy for what is going on in someone else’s life. Of course, what I am offering is a very simple thesis of the article. Do yourself a favour and read the whole thing.

Manson breaks down the different arguments brought forward after mass shootings, either as a whole or by referencing arguments used for certain killers. He does not say none of the arguments matter. In fact, he says they are part of a bigger whole. I would be missing the entire point of his article if I said that my grievances made the article invalid. However, I have to mention these arguments because they bring up common misconceptions about some mass shootings.

His first point is that the gun control argument is somewhat flawed since killers like Adam Lanza and Elliot Rodger got their guns legally. A gun control advocate wouldn’t end the argument there. A key part of gun control is arguing for the regulation of the types of funs and types of ammunition that can be sold legally,; as well as arguing for more thorough background checks. They would ask why people were able to obtain such guns so easily. Especially in Rodger’s case since he had a well documented history of mental illness.

The next point is truly the crux of my article.

Manson also argues that the attempts to label Rodger’s killings as a result of misogyny are flawed since Rodger killed mostly men. Now, Manson does later say Rodger “became a misogynist because he was a killer.” Clearly he is not rejecting the misogynist label completely. However, a quick Google search will show you many people who reject the claim of misogyny using the same logic Manson laid out originally. These thoughts are directed to those people.

You might ask why I am bothering to write about a deranged killer from 2014. I tried to understand why I felt compelled to write this too, and I think a part of it comes down to the fact that I actually read Rodger’s “manifesto”. As Manson points out, I only gave into Rodger’s delusions by doing this. I fed his ego and desire for immortality. Unfortunately, curiosity got the best of me.

It is that reading of Rodger’s “My Twisted World” that makes it clear he was a misogynist. Above all else, Rodger was sexually frustrated. At age 22, he was still a virgin and blamed his lack of success mainly on women. According to him, their brains were less developed than men’s. Hence their poor decision making abilities. If that is not misogynist, I don’t know what is.

Yes, Rodger killed men. Let’s not forget his motive though. He was angry at men as well, for having more luck with women than he did. Each man mowed down represented another man in Rodger’s life who was more successful with girls than he was.

After that, I will start luring people into my apartment, knock them out with a hammer, and slit their throats. I will torture some of the good looking people before I kill them, assuming that the good looking ones had the best sex lives. All of that pleasure they had in life, I will punish by bringing them pain and suffering. I have lived a life of pain and suffering, and it was time to bring that pain to people who actually deserve it.”

Let’s not forget that one of Rodger’s first targets was a sorority house, an embodiment of the beautiful women he resented. Due to the gated entry, he could only kill two women outside of it. He then had to find other victims.

With that point out of the way, let’s move on to the idea that Rodger was not racist since he was half-Asian, and some of his victims were Asian.

Shoes won’t help you get white girls. White girls are disgusted by you, silly little Asian.”

Rodger also says:

“Full Asian men are disgustingly ugly and white girls would never go for you. You’re just butthurt that you were born as an asian piece of shit, so you lash out by linking these fake pictures. You even admit that you wish you were half white. You’ll never be half-white and you’ll never fulfill your dream of marrying a white woman. I suggest you jump off a bridge.”

Rodger, half-Asian, posted those comments in a forum on PuaHate.com. Rodger wanted white girls only, and specifically indicates a preference for blondes numerous times in “My Twisted World”.

If you are bothered, you can find plenty of research on mixed people who express racism towards one half of their identity.

Rodger also saves some hate for black guys and Indian guys in his “My Twisted World”, expressing disgust that they can get white girls when he can’t. If you don’t want to read that, just read more forum excerpts from this article.

“Today I drove through the area near my college and saw some things that were extremely rage-inducing.

I passed by this restaurant and I saw this black guy chilling with 4 hot white girls. He didn’t even look good.

Then later on in the day I was shopping at Trader Joe’s and saw an Indian guy with 2 above average White Girls!!!

What rage-inducing sights did you guys see today? Don’t you just hate seeing these things when you go out? It just makes you want to quit life.”

Racist? I think so.

My larger point. Bigotry isn’t always simple or logical and we need to stop using elementary levels of logic to shut down discussions. Manson only used the example of Elliot Rodger as a springboard for his larger argument, but his intentionally hyperbolic statements represent the mindset of millions of people: The millions of people who think they have the world, and all of the ugliness in it, figured out.