MindsBase

Okay, I normally review movies that are out on DVD, since a lot of other folks are reviewing the latest and greatest — and I’m not committed to seeing everything during its first run. But I happened to see several movies at the theater recently and thought I’d give you a rundown.

First, The Karate Kid. I enjoyed the first forty minutes of this movie, but it’s pace was so slow — not slow, exactly, but definitely geared for older teen/ adult audiences so that my boys (under 10yo) were not wholely engaged. Henceforth, they asked me if we could skip over to Toy Story 3 instead — which we did, leaving my husband and daughter to finish out Karate Kid. All reports are that it was good, but didn’t tread too much new ground once you get over the obvious improvement that it was set in China and led by very good actor Jaden Smith. I think I would have enjoyed it, but I don’t for one second regret heading over to Toy Story 3…. though I was reluctant at the time.

See, I am a huge fan of Toy Story. I think it is a master class of storytelling. It constantly dug for the truths about each of those toys, and didn’t treat them as mere children’s playthings (in spite of Woody’s assertion… or perhaps he was paying a high complement). Fun fact: did you know that Joss Wheden was a credited screenwriter on the first Toy Story movie? I enjoyed Toy Story 2, too. Maybe slightly less. But I didn’t know where they could go from there. I feared Toy Story 3 would be a rehash of the plot of either 1 or 2. I didn’t think they’d let Andy GROW UP, for crying out loud.

When the boys and I sat down in the nearly full theater, and the first scene ended with Andy heading off to college, I felt sad — even hopeless! — for both the toys’ prospects and for mine as a moviewatcher. Alas, I couldn’t have been more wrong. But lets get back to that later, since I like to end on a high note.

A week later, I saw Despicable Me with my sister’s family. They had watched it the previous night and wanted to go again. That’s how much they liked it. Well, sorry sista, but I don’t think I cracked a smile once. I didn’t get it at all. In thinking about it, I’ve decided that I couldn’t like a movie about a villian who has paper-thin motivations for being bad. He actually likes tormenting a child by making a balloon animal, giving it to the child, and then piercing said animal with a pin? Really? I couldn’t get on that train. Most villains have a reason for acting evil. They actually think they are heroic. It just strains credulity for someone to enjoy meanness… and if he truly enjoys meanness, I don’t want to watch a movie about him. Plus, I kept wishing I was over watching The Last Airbender, which I had originally thought was not playing at my theater.

Speaking of which, the NEXT night I was fishing for doubt trout… no, that’s another story. I took my daughter to see The Last Airbender, the movie I had been on tenterhooks waiting for. I heard it wasn’t very good, but I had to check it out, because we’re huge fans of the Nickelodeon animated series. What can I say about it? I’m at a loss. I want you all to go see it so that they make the next two movies (and, dare I hope, tread some new ground in a fourth??) but I can’t pretend I wasn’t disappointed.

First, I didn’t realize until halfway through that they were only attempting to portray the first season of Airbender, so that was a letdown. It makes no sense to make a movie out of one season, really. Television seasons are set to end on cliffhangers, so that you’ll tune in after the long summer hiatus to see what happens. A movie, even a trilogy, needs more tie-up than that. The second movie of a trilogy can get away with more unfinished plot lines, but the first? Think Pirates of the Carribean, or Star Wars: A New Hope or The Bourne Identity. The first in a trilogy must be a good standalone.

Second, they removed absolutely all of the humor. Whaa? That’s like taking Harry Potter and removing the magic. Airbender is awesomely funny. The kids are kids, not little adults. They like the funny. They are the funny. It is integral to their goodness.

So, you take out a satisfying ending, tread ground the series did with more depth, and do it with nary a smile. What then are we left with? Live actors who try in vain to simulate animated expressions and postures, and computer graphic effects that are dwarfed by bigger-budget movies. I’m getting despressed. Airbender deserved better. If you haven’t, NO MATTER what your age, go put the entire TV series of Airbender in your Netflix queue. Airbender has the best mythology of any epic show since Star Wars.

Don’t believe me? Check out this fan-made movie trailer:

But back to Toy Story 3. If you pick one summer family movie to see, this is it. I’m telling you. Grab a nephew if you’re embarrassed to see it without a kid… or better yet, grab me. I’m looking for any excuse to see it again. No matter your age, you’ll laugh, you’ll even cry, you’ll be wowed and you’ll care about the outcome. And, you haven’t lived until you see what Mr. Potato Head turns into in this movie. Barbie and Ken, oh my! And Buzz, oh, Buzz. Go. See it. And comment when you get back, dahling, I’ve enjoyed our chat.

What? Please. Don’t tell me you don’t know who Roald Dahl is. Collective sigh from the rest of us. Yes. No, it’s okay. We’ll clue you in. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? James and the Giant Peach? The Witches? Yes, they were actually books before they were movies. Books written by a man who Americans seem determined to call Ronald.

Well, when you get your handy-dandy boxed set of Roald Dahl’s best-known books, you may notice a slim little dandy in the bunch called Fantastic Mr. Fox. Read it. Read it to your kids (or if you are a kid, read it to a younger kid.) It’s a quick night-time read. You can even spread it out over a couple days if you’re truly lazy (like me.)

Please, do it before you see the new(ish) film, and you’ll see why each is a genius compliment to the other. You’ll see that Wes Anderson and  Noah Baumbach (film writers) totally GOT the essence of the literary goodness that is Roald Dahl and one of his most whimsical stories. Dahl wrote about crazy, wild things, yes. But that is not why people love his books. You wanna know why people love his books? They’re about real, human characters. Human emotions anyway — even if the characters are animals. Take, for instance, the nuances in this passage from Dahl’s Mr. Fox:

Suddenly Badger said, “Doesn’t this worry you just a tiny bit, Foxy?”

“Worry me?” said Mr. Fox. “What?”

“All this . . . this stealing?”

Mr. Fox stopped digging and stared at Badger as though he had gone completely dotty. “My dear old furry frump,” he said, “do you know anyone in the whole world who wouldn’t swipe a few chickens if his children were starving to death?”

There was a short silence while Badger thought deeply about this.

“You’re far too respectable,” said Mr. Fox.

“There’s nothing wrong with being respectable,” Badger said.

“Look,” said Mr. Fox, “Boggis and Bunce and Bean are out to kill us. You realize that, I hope?”

“I do, Foxy, I do indeed,” said the gentle Badger.

“But we’re not going to stoop to their level. We don’t want to kill them.”

“I should hope not, indeed,” said Badger.

Granted, Mr. Fox is not a person; he’s a fox, but boy is he a foxy one. His rhetoric is cunning! He ennobles his trickery by placing it firmly beside feeding the hungry and in stern opposition to murder! How familiar this seems. We humans are always refining our self-story to make ourselves out to be better than we are. Especially for our shadiest deeds.

But Fantastic Mr. Fox, little book that it is, ends with Mr. Fox triumphant in his shady dealings. That would have limited any movie on the subject. Fortunately, this script and its execution landed in the laps of people who understood Dahl’s style well enough to carry the story onward to a much more satisfying emotional end. I don’t want to spoil it for you, but I will say that Foxy learns more than just to give lip service to a starving family. He learns about actual nobility, not just how to talk of it.

As such, this film ranks right up there (aaaalmost) with The Incredibles as a beautiful look at a family in crisis and how they pull together instead of shattering apart.

It’s out on video now, so better get reading — and then get viewing! I give the film four and a half nods.*

I feel I should mention, however, that Dahl’s whimsy paired with Anderson’s kooky may not strike everyone’s funny bone, but it did me and mine! Are you cussin’ me?

* Note that I give Roald Dahl and every word he ever wrote a vigorous five nods! Now go read his double autobiography: Boy and Going Solo. They’re sold together in one book now I believe. His life was even more enchanting than his stories!

Or Visitors — whichever meaning you espouse for ABC television series “V”. I had high hopes, but just haven’t felt the need to keep up with it. Yes, it makes for an interesting allegory of terrorism and guerrilla warfare, but the individual stories feel a little lackluster and the characters seem cardboard.

So I want to point you toward two other shows I’m just starting on DVD.

Jericho

This CBS show only made it through a partial second season, and I’m just a few episodes in on season one, but this is a show that is tugging at my emotions already.

But let’s back up. Here’s what CBS says Jericho is about:

Returning for a second season as a result of one of the most unprecedented and impassioned displays of fan support on behalf of a television program, JERICHO is a drama about what happens in the aftermath of a nuclear explosion in the once peaceful town of Jericho.

In other words, it is near-future post-apolcolypse sci-fi. This could have gone very grandiose and epic (kind of what V is doing) but instead, the episodes have featured small, immediate problems, like a little girl with a bruised windpipe and a stranded woman getting picked up by escaping ex-cons. How people deal with these immediate problems — rather than the obvious one of the apocolypse itself — is great storytelling!

Also, it has a rather charming small-town-pulling-together-in-crisis thing going on. It’s a great exploration of how a town would have to transition from denial (people still trying to go to work) to survival (everyone pooling resources and sharing tasks).

Terminator: the Sarah Connor Chronicles

Another show that has already hit the skids — (when will the networks learn?) — is Fox’s Terminator series. This one is more small-cast and personal, dealing with Sarah and her teenaged future-leader-of-the-resistance son some years before the world is taken over by machines. An artificial intelligence called Skynet, to be precise.

Same brand of fun as the movies — hand-to-hand action, some explosions, some suspense. It does aim a little higher, though, with some thought-provoking tie-ins through Sarah Connor’s voice-over narration. Perhaps it must dig a little deeper to compensate for the TV budget, but I think this is a good thing. Sarah wrestles with whether she should kill one man to help save humanity, or how to protect a son who is destined to risk it all to save the world, and so forth. Keeps it interesting.

I also enjoy strong female leads, and Sarah is good, but Summer Glau as the girl terminator is perfect. They have fun playing off the idea that people would underestimate small-statured women. Not unlike Sydney of Alias, now I think on it. By the way, this is one complaint I have with Jericho, at least in the few episodes I’ve watched. There is a fair amount of “help the poor girl” going on. In the early episodes that featured young women, both heroines were ultimately saved by Jake, the hero. Ah well, can’t have it all. There may never be another Alias.

What, you haven’t watched Alias? Okay, before you try Jericho or Terminator, GO WATCH ALIAS. If you can get past the occasional fake blood and torturous screaming now and again, you’ll find a smart, exciting mystery/romance with one of the strongest lead women characters ever on TV. Sydney Bristow.*

* And I don’t mean strong as in physical, because that would probably be the terminator girl. Sydney can handle herself physically, but her real strength lies in her quick thinking and her caring and humanity that shine through even the toughest situations. She’s the kind of woman you want your daughter to be as she faces her own demons in life.

1977, the year of Star Wars, the year of my birth, is also the year a quaint book was published about a boy wizard (yes, you heard right) who doesn’t know about his powers.

It’s called Charmed Life, by Diana Wynne Jones, and it is the first book in a series called The Chronicles of Chrestomanci. There are eight books set in the Chrestomanci universe, though not focused on the same characters (and written over the course of 29 years!).

Charmed Life starts slowly, in a “dear reader” fashion — a way that would not fly in today’s grab-em-by-the-throat publishing environment, and it does a fair bit of distracting head-jumping*. Those are the cons. But let me tell you something — if you loved Harry Potter, you’ll enjoy Charmed Life (and, really, all other Diana Wynne Jones books, but let’s stay focused).

In the Chrestomanci world, those who work magic are of different classes, rated by power. Warlocks, Witches, Necromancers, Mediums are every day people, living alongside those with no magic. The more powerful Magicians and Enchanters are more rare, and a person who has no selves in the other, parallel worlds is the most powerful Enchanter of all.

In Charmed Life, a very talented young witch named Gwendolyn and her magic-less brother nicknamed Cat are sent to live with a powerful man called Chrestomanci. Hijinks ensue… I won’t spoil them for you!

But alongside the fantasical, as in the Harry Potter stories, the quirky humanity of the characters and the relationships between them seem real and human. Cat and his sister have a rocky relationship, but he loves her nonetheless. This loyalty endears him to the reader, even as you grow to hate the selfish, power-hungry sister. What’s amazing to me is how it is so clear to the reader that Cat’s sister is villianous while it mostly escapes Cat’s notice. Sure, he’s uncomfortable with her behavior, often, but he never grows angry or resentful of her.

Cat doesn’t change that much in this story, which is unusual for a main character, but what’s interesting is that you, the reader, change over the course of the book. Cat is someone you find yourself caring about. He’s young and imperfect, and joins in a good many wrong deeds (that he often has reservations about but is to weak to stand against). You begin to want to protect him, to help him, to somehow get him out of his mounting troubles, especially since it is clear he isn’t going to have a flash of brilliance or a wave of courage to help.

And in the end, when certain realities about his sister are revealed, you want to cry with him, and you cheer him when he finally is angry and stands up for himself.

It’s a gentle story, in the emotions. It’s a fantastical story, in the actions. And who doesn’t love a good battle of witches (or any crazy creature, for that matter!)

I give it four out of five nods!

* Head-jumping is when the thoughts of one character are explained right on the heels of the thoughts of another. This is a faux pas by today’s standards, though I daresay only writers really notice. What a grumpy bunch we are.

Human / Visitor relations

Well, at the request of my loyal fans, I’ve got some thoughts about the “V” premiere from Tuesday. I shuffled my tail down to my mother’s house for a DVR session on her big screen Wednesday.

I have to agree that it was a little disappointing, but you saw my over-the-top expectations so… in a way, I expected to be disappointed. However, here are the good points of the premiere:

1. They understand sci-fi storytelling pretty well. They answered the important audience questions of believability when they arose, for the most part. For example, when Anna’s HEUGE image first appears on the underbelly of the starship, she speaks in English. I had barely formed the “oh yeah?” question about her speaking English when the scene cut to television images of other cities, where Anna was speaking the native language of each region. Good save, guys. And good implications. These aliens know more about us than we think. They know our languages, yet they’ve just arrived? Hmmmm, she says, with a sinister eyebrow raise.

2. Anna did beautifully in her role. Her interview with Chad Decker (I can’t stop thinking of “Party of Five” when I see him — and what’s with his teeth? Are they dentures?) was wonderfully tense, and made you wonder what Chad is made of. And Chad, in my opinion, is in the most interesting character position, rubbing up directly with the main villain. I’m interested to see what scuffles they put him in and what decisions he makes. I hope they build him into someone more than just a pawn. He’s positioned to be a rook, at least, against this queen. Maybe even a knight.

3. SPOILER ALERT! Alan Tudyk — okay, could they have blindsided us more with his — ahem — reptilian side? Wash is an alien! I was sort of sad, because I love Alan and wanted him with the good guys. Well, my big hope is that his character arc includes him becoming a traitorous visitor and fighting with the humans. Can they twist him back around over the course of a season? I think so, and it would be divine storytelling. But will they? Not sure. Think Alias, guys! Twist those characters! Shapeshift them! We love it!

4. And speaking of traitorous visitors, I am so glad they are setting up more than a good humans/bad visitors dynamic. They’ve hinted at all sorts of shades of gray. Ryan Nichols as the visitor that has gone native, who promises that there are other traitors that will help the humans. Now, just because we see reptilian underbody, we can’t assume they are bad. NICE. Then, we have Erica Evans son, Tyler, joining the young nazis ambassador program and getting entangled with the visitors. Will he be used unwittingly against his people, or even willingly choose to fight with the visitors?

Okay, so there are some great mystery boxes set in place during this pilot. (I’m calling it a pilot, though that may not be the correct term since the show is picked up already [for now].) Here are the problems:

1. Biggest problem, I think, is that it was an hour pilot rather than a ninety-minute pilot. Sci-fi needs those extra minutes to establish a) the world, b) the problem and c) the characters fully. So, we got the world, the problem, but we were a little thin on the characters. All the character threads had to be set in motion, and it’s a large cast to introduce. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Firefly pilot must have been ninety. It had to introduce nine crewmembers, all coming from very different backgrounds and with distinct motivations. “V” needed ninety. In sixty, we got a little about each of the main character’s backgrounds, but we didn’t get more than cliche motivations and value systems. Of course Erica goes running to find her only son at a time of crisis. Of course Ryan runs to his fiance. Ho, hum.

Here’s what I hope: that future episodes explore deeply ONE main character’s conundrum rather than trying to move all the characters forward equally in each episode. Use the story to tell us something deeper about someone. Don’t skim the surface with all of them at once. Trade off. Do I think this will happen? Not sure.

2. Other problem. I saw the story being butchered a couple times. Gives strength to my theory that there may be a lot of cooks in this kitchen. For example, the most important line of the hour, the climax — the thesis, if you will — was this (wording is not exact):

They [the visitors] are forging a terrible weapon here. Devotion.

Waaa? Devotion is not a weapon. You can’t hit someone with Devotion. Devotion is something they give you. The story required the use of the word at the other end of that stick — a much more important word. A word that tells what you (the visitor) are hitting people with. What you are giving them and then turning around and using against them. Do you know what that word is? It’s upstream from DEVOTION. It’s a four-letter word…

Got it? Leave your guess in the comments. Come on. We all know what makes a great story. We are consumers of story all our lives. What word did they need to use there?

And why didn’t they use it?

My theory is that someone thought it would be construed as some kind of political statement. So they sacrificed the storytelling. I found that pretty cowardly. Tell the bold story. People may read into your words things you didn’t intend, but at least they’ll feel something. DEVOTION was a cowardly choice. The story required a word that has been used and misused over the centuries! The same word used by Hitler and Jesus. By devils and gods –  just what the visitors are.

So what word is it?