Movies

2006 Kaedrin Movie Awards: Best Villain/Hero/Badass

The nominations for the 2006 Kaedrin Movie Awards were announced last week. This week, I’ll be announcing two winners every day, culminating in a post with my top 10 movies of the year and possibly a miscellaneous post where I blatantly steal categories from Alex’s Arbitrary Awards (featuring categories like Best Stretch of Historical Plausibility for the sake of a Good Story and Best Multilingual Non-Linear Ensemble Movie). Without further ado, the winners of Best Villain/Badass and Best Hero/Badass are:

Best Villain/Badass: Owen Davian, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman in Mission: Impossible III

This was a mildly difficult category, but I ultimately settled on Davian because of Philip Seymour Hoffman’s outstanding performance. He turns what is essentially a boring stock villain into so much more, raising the bar for action film villainy. The only issue is that he’s not featured enough in the film (probably because the writers knew the character, as written, was mildy lame. I guarantee that once Hoffman was on the set, chewing scenery, they tried to give him a little more to do). In response to the nominations, some expressed surprise at MI III’s showing and heck, I kinda surprised myself. I think Hoffman’s performance is the primary reason I enjoyed that movie so much. When I think about MI III, two things immediately pop into my head. First, the diabolically confident villain. And second, that scene where Tom Cruise throws a pistol at Felicity and she catches it in a fluid motion as she starts shooting (because, you know, that’s a badass scene). The competition in this category was mildly stiff, but in the end I decided against Jack Nicholson because, while I thought he was fine in the role, I don’t think he brought anything special or unexpected. Le Chiffre from the Bond movie is exactly the sort of forgettable villain that Davian would have been had the role been played by someone other than Hoffman. And I decided against Phoenix because X3 was lame.

Best Hero/Badass: James Bond, played by Daniel Craig in Casino Royale

Oh come on, do I really need to explain this? Especially considering this year’s weak competition, Bond is a lock. Craig puts his own imprint on the character and makes him interesting again (this is also due to the script and general reboot strategy of the series, but I’m willing to give Craig some of the credit). Casino Royale was quite possibly the most enjoyable movie going experience and pleasant surprise of the year for me. I’m someone who has never been that enamored with Bond, but this movie was a revelation. A short confession: I’d never seen a Connery Bond movie all the way through until about two weeks ago, and the reason for that viewing was because of Casino Royale. Expect a series of capsule reviews on Bond movies in a few weeks.

It’s interesting that this year featured two of the best spy genre films in years, both sequels, and both better than most of their previous installments. I’d intended “Badass” to be a category all its own, but when I went through this year’s movies, I realized that we had a pretty weak year here. Last year the choices were much more obvious, but this year, the choices were few and far between.

Up next: Best Comedic Performance and Breakthrough Performance. Check back Monday for the winners.

The Diamond Age Miniseries

It appears that Neal Stephenson’s neo-victorian nanotech novel The Diamond Age will be a miniseries on the Sci-Fi channel:

Based on Neal Stephenson’s best-selling novel The Diamond Age: Or a Young Lady’s Illustrated Primer, this six-hour miniseries is executive produced by George Clooney and Grant Heslov of Smokehouse Productions. A prominent member of a conservative futuristic society grows concerned that the culture stifles creativity, and commissions a controversial interactive book for his daughter, which serves as her guide through a surreal alternate world. When the primer’s provocative technology, which adapts to the reader’s responses, falls into the hands of a young innocent, the girl’s life is accidentally reprogrammed with dangerous results. Neal Stephenson will adapt his own novel for this project, the first time the Hugo and Nebula winning author has written for the small screen.

I have mixed feelings about this. Stephenson is probably my favorite author, so I’m thrilled that his work is being adapted. However, adaptations are tricky, and I think part of the reason Stephenson’s books haven’t been adapted is that they’re probably more difficult than most. The choice of The Diamond Age is a baffling one, given that it’s universally seen as having an awfully abrubt ending (and has given the author an unfair reputation of writing bad endings). That it’s a Sci-Fi Channel original series isn’t exactly comforting either. They did a decent enough job with the Dune miniseries I guess, but honestly, this is that channel that brought us masterpieces like Man-Thing and Basilisk: The Serpent King (I’m serious, those two movies were both playing tonight.)

Stephenson’s involvement is somewhat heartening, but also a mixed blessing. For one thing, nothing guarantees that a great novel-writer will turn out to be a great screenwriter. It’s a different medium and, as such, different conventions and language apply. Given that we’re talking about a Sci-Fi Channel original, I’m sure his involvement won’t be a negative, but that leaves one other consideration: If he’s busy working on the screenplay for this series, he’s probably not working on his next book. Gah! It’s been a few years, and I want me some new Stephenson.

If it turns out good, I’ll be elated, but I’m wary. Think of this post as tempering my expecatations so that it can’t possibly be that much of a dissapointment. Incidentally, I just ran across Ben Thompson’s beautiful rant about Sci-Fi Channel Original Movies:

Nothing makes me happier when I’m flipping through the channels on a rainy Saturday afternoon than stumbling upon whatever god-awful original home-grown suckfest-and-craptasm movie is playing on the Sci-Fi Channel. Nowhere else can you find such a clusterfuck of horrible plot contrivances and ill-conceived premises careening face-first into a brick wall of one-dimensional cardboard characters and banal, inane, poorly-delivered dialogue. While most television stations and movie production houses out there are attempting to retain some shred of dignity or at least a modicum of credibility, it’s nice to know that the Sci-Fi Channel has no qualms whatsoever about brazenly showing twenty minute-long fight scenes involving computer-generated dinosaurs, dragons, insects, aliens, sea monsters and Gary Bussey all shooting laser beams at each other and battling for control of a planet-destroying starship as the self-destruct mechanism slowly ticks down and the fate of a thousand parallel universes hangs in the balance. You really have to give the execs at Sci-Fi credit for basically just throwing their hands up in the air and saying, “well let’s just take all this crazy shit and mash it together into one giant ridiculous mess”. Nothing is off-limits for those folks; if you want to see American troops in Iraq battle a giant man-eating Chimaera, you’ve got it. A genetically-altered Orca Whale the eats seamen and icebergs? Check. A plane full of mutated pissed-off killer bees carrying the Hanta Virus? Check.

Brilliant. Ironically, I’m more excited for The Diamond Age miniseries now that I read that. Something’s wrong with me.

2006 Kaedrin Movie Awards

I watched a lot of movies in 2006, both in the theater and at home. I’ve always watched a lot of movies, but I usually find myself catching up with present-year movies. I haven’t seen many of the Oscar hunting movies that come out in limited release towards the end of the year. This is because, well, they’re in limited release and not playing near me. Even still, I think I can come up with something interesting. To start, I’m going to announce some award nominations with slightly different categories than the traditional award shows (i.e. fun awards, more like MTV than the Oscars). I figure that I’ll comment on the traditional awards (best actor/actress, screenplays, etc…) when the Oscar liveblogging comes around. I may actually get a top 10 movies of 2006 list out there relatively soon as well.

To start things off, I’m going to list out some categories and nominees. The rules for this are that it has to be a 2006 movie and I have to have seen the movie (and while I have seen a lot of movies, I don’t pretend to have seen a comprehensive selection – don’t let that stop you from suggesting something though). Also, I suppose I should mention the requisite disclaimer that these sorts of lists are inherently subjective and personal. Part of the reason I’m doing this is just to give some love to films that I like, but which aren’t necessarily great or are otherwise flawed (as such, the categories may seem a bit eclectic). Some of these movies will end up on my top 10, but the grand majority of them will not.

Best Villain/Badass

For this category, I’m choosing individuals and not a group of people (or creatures, so no Snakes on a Plane).

Winner Announced!

Best Hero/Badass

On the flip side, again limited to individuals and not groups. This actually turns out to be a pretty tough category this year. I feel like I have to be missing something (feel free to suggest alternatives in the comments), but here goes:

Winner Announced!

Best Comedic Performance

Comedies aren’t given a lot of respect, even when they make us laugh really hard. In terms of comedic performance, I didn’t love all of the below movies, but I liked these performances:

Winner Announced!

Breakthrough Performance

This is more of a personal breakthrough than a mainstream breakthrough (indeed, some of these people may have already had their mainstream breakthrough). My main criteria here is when I watch a movie, then immediately look up one of the actors/actresses to find out who they are and what else they’ve done. Sometimes, they’re someone I recognized but never thought much of, sometimes not.

Winner Announced!

Most Visually Stunning

Sometimes even bad movies can be absolutely gorgeous.

Winner Announced!

Best Sci-Fi or Horror Film

Genre films get no love, but there really weren’t all that many good options that I had seen, so I had to combine these two categories.

Winner Announced!

Best Sequel

Everyone likes to revisit characters from movies they love. In theory, at least. Most sequels are terrible, but these stood out this year.

Winner Announced!

Biggest Disappointment

I wasn’t sure if I should include a “negative” category, but I think this one works (for this year, at least). There are two components to consider here. First, the overall quality of the movie. Second, my expecations for the movie. In some cases my expectations were low and the film was bad. In others my expectations were high and the film was mediocre. And so on.

Winner Announced!

Best Action Sequences

Since no single action sequence really, really stoodout from the crowd for me, I’m taking into account all the action sequences in the movies listed.

Winner Announced!

Best Plot Twist/Surprise

Because of the spoiler potential, you’ll need to swipe this category to see the nominees. I’m limiting the info displayed to simply the movie name, which should keep the spoilers to a minimum, but sometimes even knowing that there’s a twist can affect your enjoyment, so read on at your own risk.

  • The Departed
  • The Illusionist
  • Inside Man
  • Lucky Number Slevin
  • The Prestige
  • X-Men: The Last Stand

Winner Announced!

Anyone have any suggestions (for either category or nominations)? Comments, complaints and suggestions are welcome, as always.

It looks like Casino Royale, Mission Impossible III, and Clerks II are leading the nominations, with 4 each. The Descent racks up an impressive 3 nominations, while a whole slew of others pick up a respectible 2 (this is not counting the disappointment category). I’m going to give these nominations a week or so to stew in my head. I’ll probably also add some nominations as the week goes on and I remember something that I stupidly forgot (or something I just saw, like perhaps Children of Men – again, feel free to help me out in the comments). I figure I’ll announce the winners next week, perhaps with only one or two categories a day.

Japanese Cootie Shots

One of the things that interests me about foreign films is the way various aspects of culture become lost in the translation to English. In some cases, this is due to the literal translation of dialogue, but in others it’s due to a physical mannerism or custom that simply can’t be translated. In a post about Lain’s Bear Pajamas in the Anime series Serial Experiments Lain, I mention an example of such a gesture that appears in Miyazaki’s Spirited Away. Of course, I got the details of the gesture completely wrong in that post, but the general concept is similar. Since Spirited Away is the next film in the Animation Marathon, I got the DVD and took some screenshots. The main character, a little girl named Chihiro, steps on a little black slug and the boiler room man, Kamaji, says that this is gross and will bring bad luck. So she turns around and puts her thumbs and forefingers together while he pushes his hand through (click the images for a larger version).

Chihiro

Chihiro

Chihiro

Now this is obviously some sort of gesture meant to counteract bad luck, but it’s a little strange. The dialogue in the scene helps, though the subtitles and the dubbing differ considerably (as I have been noticing lately). The subtitled version goes like this:

KAMAJI: Gross, gross, Sen! Totally gross!

(CHIHIRO puts her hands in the shape of a rectangle.)

KAMAJI (pushing his hand through the rectangle): Clean!

Quite sparse, though the meaning is relatively clear. The dubbed version expands on the concept a little more:

KAMAJI: You killed it! Those things are bad luck. Hurry, before it rubs off on you! Put your thumbs and forefingers together.

(CHIHIRO puts her hands in the shape of a rectangle.)

KAMAJI (pushing his hand through the rectangle): Evil… begone!

I noticed this gesture the first time I saw the movie, because I thought it was stange and figured that there had to be a little more to it than what was really being translated. On the DVD there is a little featurette called The Art of ‘Spirited Away’ and in one of the sections, the translators mention that they were baffled by the gesture, and weren’t sure how to translate it. After researching the issue, they concluded that it’s essentially the Japanese equivalent to a cootie shot. Of course, this makes a lot of sense, and it’s totally something a kid would do in response to stepping on something gross (this film, like many of Miyazaki’s other films, seems to nail a lot of the details of what it’s like to be a kid). It also illustrates that the boiler room man isn’t quite as gruff as he appears, and that he even has a bit of a soft spot for children. Interestingly enough, this gesture is repeated again by a little mouse (I think it’s a mouse), and the soot balls that work in the boiler room, though I don’t remember that (I’ll try to grab screenshots when I rewatch the whole film)

Again, Spirited Away is the next film in the Animation Marathon, and it’s probably the best of the bunch as well. Expect a full review soon, though I’m not sure how detailed it will be. Filmspotting (the podcast that’s actually running the marathon) is on a bit of a break from the marathon, as they’re doing their obligatory 2006 wrap up shows and best of the year lists.

Dubbing vs. Subtitles

One of the things movie snobs often complain about is dubbing, and when it comes to your typical live action foreign language films, I’m pretty firmly entrenched in the snob camp. However, animation is different, as it doesn’t suffer as badly from unsynchronized lip movement. Most humans find the human face engaging and are wired, seemingly from birth (faces are among the first things babies are thought to recognize), to read facial expressions and movements. So we’re very good at recognizing when someone’s voice doesn’t match their lip movements. Again, in a dubbed live action film, this produces a sort of cognitive dissonance. Animated films always have to deal with this (even when animation is matched to the voiceover, the fidelity of animation prevents an exact match), so it would make sense that a dubbed animated film would probably not be as jarring as a dubbed live action film. In short, I’m already accustomed to the cognitive dissonance caused by animated films, so dubbing should theoretically be fine. Beckonking Chasm recenty wrote about his adventures in Anime, and makes an interesting case:

I always watch the English dub versions. Not to disrespect the Japanese or their language, far from it, but I have absolutely no facility with foreign languages. (My abilities in English are bad enough.) Yes, one can read subtitles, and that’s how I always watch live-action foreign films. An actor’s voice is just as much a part of his performance as his face and the way he chooses to move.

However, when watching Liv Ullman and Erland Josephson argue about who gets to commit suicide first, I can see them in a familiar environment—I don’t have to wonder what the fantastical device is that they’re sitting on, I know it’s called a “couch.” Even in futuristic live-action films, I can still key in on what the environment represents to the characters and I don’t have to watch it continuously to figure out its nature.

In animation, however, everything is brand new. It’s all been designed deliberately from the blank page up—everything has a choice behind it. It’s also frequently imaginative and beautiful. I don’t like taking my eyes away from it in order to read subtitles—I’d much rather hear the dialogue so I can keep watching.

I’ve recently been watching more Anime, and the question of whether to use dubbing or subtitles is still up in the air for me. My live action snobbery has leaked over to animated films, so I’ve watched most everything with the original audio and subtitles, but I’ve also recently tried giving the dubs a shot as well (with varying results). However, I think Beckoning Chasm makes some interesting points. So when I started watching Ghost in the Shell, I decided that I’d give the dubbing a try. Bad move. The english voice acting was so bad that I couldn’t stand it and had to switch to subtitles. Then I noticed something interesting. The translations were completely different.

The opening scene in the movie features the Major on a rooftop, eavesdropping on some diplomatic meeting. The dubbed version goes like this:

BATOU: Major Kusanagi, Section 6 is in position and ready to move in.

BATOU: Major, are you there?

THE MAJOR: Yeah, I heard you.

BATOU: I’m surprised you could hear anything. What’s with all the noise in your brain today?

THE MAJOR: Must be a loose wire.

And the subtitled version was this:

BATOU: Major Kusanagi, Section 6 is ready to move in.

BATOU: Major!

THE MAJOR: I hear you.

BATOU: There’s a lot of static in your brain.

THE MAJOR: It’s that time of the month.

Quite a difference, and, um, a little sexist? Even disregarding that, it appears that the dubbing is a more natural translation, even if the voice actors can’t emote to save their lives. I finished the movie with subtitles on, then went back and turned on the english language audio with the english subtitles. It’s a bizzarre experience.

I didn’t watch the whole thing like that, as it’s a little distracting to be reading and hearing similar, but different text (talk about your cognitive dissonance). Oddly enough, even though I think the dubbed translation is better, I still think subtitles work reasonably well too. Some of the dialogue sounds ridiculous when voiced out loud, but reading it gives a different experience. Also, it makes sense that the subtitles would be different, as there is a limited amount of space to communicate the same information (apparently there is less space in subtitles than in the audio).

One of the problems with adapting books to movies is that an exact translation is nearly always doomed to failure. You can’t typically use the same dialogue as the book, for instance. It will sound stunted and out of place. No one talks they way people talk in books. Hell, no one talks the way they do in movies. That’s because the dialogue is adapted to the medium. You can get away with a lot more in prose, but movies need to convey a lot of the same information visually. This is why adaptations are so difficult. However, when I watched the subtitled version of Ghost in the Shell, the dialogue seemed much better when reading it than when listening to it (even though I liked the dubbed translation better). It’s almost like an accidental middle ground between a book a movie. It’s an interesting dynamic, and I’m not sure what to make of it. In the mean time, I’m going to have to experiment with dubbed versions of stuff that I’ve already seen. I wonder what Haibane Renmei is like dubbed? Is the translation different? Why do I have the feeling I’m going to spend my Christmas holiday watching anime with the audio and subtitles set to english (then again, December 25 is Anime Day, so perhaps this is appropriate)?

Animation Marathon: Ghost in the Shell

The next film in the animation marathon is Ghost in the Shell. Like the previous film in the marathon, Akira, I had already seen this movie a few times before revisiting it for the marathon. Unlike Akira, my original opinion of this film was relatively high, and this most recent viewing hasn’t changed my feelings much. Ghost in the Shell is not perfect, but it holds up well and is an excellent animated film.

Like Akira, Ghost in the Shell is often held up as one of the essential pieces of anime that anyone interested in the form needs to see. Historically, it was the first anime film released simultaneously in Japan and in other markets (notably the UK and the US), but it proved a little too complex to become a mainstream success. However, it found a market on DVD and has enjoyed cult status ever since.

The story takes place in a futuristic world where technology has advanced considerably and has begun to displace biological components of the human body (this even includes the brain). Cyborgs are common, and indeed, many people are more machine than human (those who can afford it, at least). One such cyborg is Major Motoko Kusanagi. She heads up a team that is part of section 9, an intelligence organization that tends to work more in the shadows (as opposed to their counterparts in section 6, whose role could be described more diplomatically).

The Major

All this technology comes at a price though. Increased internet connectivity and human-computer brain interfaces have introduced new vulnerabilities, and a new crime has appeared: Ghost hacking. The “Ghost” essentially represents a person’s individual identity (while the “shell” represents their physical body, be it biological or artificial), and hackers can access and manipulate a human’s ghost. A ghost hacker named “The Puppet Master” has appeared on the scene, hacking into various people, erasing their memories and programming them to do his bidding. Section 9, lead by the Major, has been chasing the Puppet Master for a while now, and some pieces of the puzzle are beginning to fall into place…

The Major likes to scuba dive

It’s a dense story, and the technological advances pose a ton of intriguing questions about the nature of identity. The Major, whose physical body is almost all machine, is understandably a little paranoid about her identity. Is she really who she thinks she is? Is anyone really who they think they are? What makes me what I am? If my consciousness is transferred into an artificial brain, am I still me? This is the sort of thing that will stay with you long after the film has ended. After watching Ghost in the Shell, Steven Den Beste wrote a fascinating article exploring these concepts:

Ghost in the Shell challenged me to consider the question of what I actually am. What makes me what I am?

What am I? That can be answered in many ways. I am a particular human being; I am this body. But is the entire body really part of the essential me? I don’t consider myself to be different – or to have died – if I trim my fingernails or get my hair cut. If I suffered a grievous injury and had a limb amputated, I would still be me. If I received a heart transplant, I would still be me. (And the donor of that heart would still be dead.)

The whole article is great and helps illustrate the intellectually challenging aspects of the story. The film explores these questions in detailed philosophical conversations that may be a little to overt for some, but it works well in a plot that intersperses enough action and intrigue to keep the viewer’s attention. While the film does include governmental agencies and a futuristic city, I think it’s worth noting that this future isn’t a dystopia. It’s a well realized vision of the future, but it actually doesn’t feel all that different from our own world. That is to say, things aren’t perfect, but we haven’t descended to the ninth circle of hell just yet either. This is a large part of why I enjoyed this film more than I enjoyed Akira. Both movies deal with big ideas and transcendant themes, but Akira‘s characters are shallow and unsympathetic and it’s ideas are only given a superficial exploration. Ghost in the Shell, on the other hand, has several sympathetic characters and it delves much deeper into it’s conceptual vision. The ending of both movies involves some ambiguity, but Ghost in the Shell‘s ending resonates deeper because I could empathize with the characters (even if the plot was a little convoluted).

A tank fires at the Major

Visually, Ghost in the Shell is impressive. Like Akira, it’s a spectacular piece of work, and quite engaging. The animation is extremely detailed and fluid (though I have to admit, I think I’m more impressed with Akira‘s animation). The action sequences are well orchestrated and sometimes approach a poetic feel. The soundtrack is evokative and well suited towards the subject matter, though the dubbed voiceover is amongst the worst I’ve heard. Ironically, I think subtitles may suit this script better than spoken word in some cases (see my musings on the varying translations on the dubbing and subtitled versions), as the longer monologues sound absurd when spoken aloud in a monotone voice, but don’t seem so ponderous when read by the viewer. Symbolism, such as the use of a wall charting the evolution of life in the climax of the film, is used but not abused. As previously mentioned, the juxtaposition of action sequences with philosophical musings may seem a little disjointed and jarring to some, but I was taken in by the film.

Visually stunning, intellectually challenging, and action packed

Ultimately, we’re left with a visually stunning, intellectually challenging, action packed movie. Unlike Akira, this movie had more of an emotional impact and it provoked interesting thoughts. It stuck with me, and forced me to ponder some of the great unanswerable questions. While I wouldn’t call it a perfect film, it is well worth the watch and definitely amongst the Anime essentials. Three Stars (***)

Update: Filmspotting has posted their review, and their feelings were mixed. Neither seemed to be impressed with the story (or couldn’t follow it) or the visuals, but Sam seemed to like it for the same reasons I did (though Adam did not).

More images and assorted comments below the fold…

Animation Marathon: Akira

There were only two movies in the Animation Marathon that I hadn’t seen before, and they were the first two. Next up is Akira, a movie that I have seen multiple times in the past. My first thoughts upon initial viewings were that it had some interesting points but that it was ultimately an incoherent mess. However, it should be noted that I originally saw the movie many years ago on a crappy VHS tape with a dubbed soundtrack and a washed out transfer. The movie has since been fully restored, digitally remastered, and perhaps most importantly, it’s recieved a new translation. As a result, the film looked great and I could follow the story much better this time around, and my opinon of the film has improved considerably. It certainly has some flaws, but it really is a spectacular experience. Spoilers ahoy.

Along with Ghost in the Shell (the next film in the marathon), this film is often held up as the pinnacle of Anime and, as such, is generally considered to be “essential” viewing for someone interested in the form. Historically, this is the film that brought Anime to America (it was my first exposure to Anime as well), so it’s certainly important in that respect. Even so, I don’t know that it really would make a good introduction to the form, unless you are really into the gritty post-apocalyptic genre.

Kaneda on his bike

The story begins by showing Tokyo consumed by a large explosion that apparently sets off World War III. Thirty years later, the war is over and Tokyo has been rebuilt. Like most post-apocalyptic worlds, this one ain’t pretty. The streets are overwhelmed with dissent and crime is rampant. The story follows a wimpy biker punk named Tetsuo and his friend Kaneda, who seems to be the leader of their makeshift motorcycle gang. The two get caught up in a governmental experiment that attempts to harness latent human abilities, and Tetsuo suddenly becomes endowed with psychic powers. I think Justin puts it well when he says: “As we all well know, from studying Carrie, rejected nerds with telekenetic abilities do not use their powers just for cleaning litter on the highways.” Tetsuo goes on a rampage through New Tokyo in an attempt to reach the mysterious Akira.

Tetsuo

Adapted from a 2,000 page Manga series of the same name, Akira touches on a lot of subjects. As with most adaptations of large bodies of work, there are some scenes or characters that seem out of place and it feels like there is a lot of complexity lurking beneath the surface, especially when it comes to the social and political issues that are only touched on in the film. However, the story works well as a whole. The ending is still a little confusing, but it’s much better than the garbled mess from the original translation. Thematically, the film is obviously alluding to Japan’s relationship with technology, specifically nuclear weapons. There appear to be strong cultural themes in the film that are a little hazy to a westerner like myself, but there is clearly something going on there.

The only issue I had with the story is that the most of the characters are not very likeable. Tetsuo and Kaneda are ostensibly the center of the film, but they’re both self-interested punks and not very sympathetic. I guess you’d call Tetsuo the villain of the movie, so it’s understandable that he’s not likeable, but Kaneda is supposed to be our hero, and he comes off as goofy, ignorant and immature (granted, he is a kid, but his silly comments were often quite jarring). The only characters that show a noble side are the three kids that are part of the government project, but while they play an important role, they’re really only bit characters. However, the film is able to overcome these deficiencies because its vision is sufficiently compelling, and there are plenty of interesting and ambitious ideas to keep the viewer occupied. Action sequences are also well composed and keep the story moving briskly, which helps.

Tetsuo falling

Speaking of vision, this has to be one of the finest examples of animation I’ve ever seen. It is perhaps a little dated, but when you take into account that this movie was made long before modern techniques (like CGI or digital image correction), it really is a remarkable achievement. Filled with vibrant colors and stunning imagery, the film is a rollercoaster ride from start to finish. I’ve included a bunch of screenshots from the film, but it’s worth noting that the animation itself – the actual movement of various elements on screen – is very well done (and can’t be captured in a still). The ambient soundtrack is atmospheric and evokative, with an interesting mixture of instrumentation and electronic music (that doesn’t seem at all dated and indeed, may even have been ahead of its time). Symbolic imagery (for example, Tetsuo’s growing powers are symbolized in a dream by a flood of milk… or towards the end of the movie, when Tetsuo is being consumed by his powers and regressing into a monstrous creature that engulfs everything in sight, his morphing body clearly takes on the shape of a mushroom cloud) is used, but not abused.

Akira returns!

Ultimately, while the kinetic action of the animation and story serves to hold the viewer’s attention, the film isn’t especially involving on an emotional level (I think this is due to the lack of sympathetic characters more than anything else). It does tackle some “big” ideas, but not in a way that will have you questioning life, the universe, and everything. In many ways it is a spectacular experience, and well worth the watch, but it is also a flawed movie. Still, thanks to the restored version, I’ve come to see why it’s considered an “essential” film for anyone interested in Anime (though I’m not sure it would be played on the traditional Otaku holiday known as Anime Day). Three stars (***)

More images and assorted comments below the fold…

Blogroll Call

Everyone loves to be on a bunch of blogrolls, but just because you’re there doesn’t mean you’ll get a lot of visitors. This becomes more true as the blogroll gets larger. Blogrolls are subject to an inverse network effect; the more blogs in the blogroll, the less valuable the link. Kaedrin gets a small amount of traffic, so even though I have a short blogroll, I’m guessing most of those blogs don’t get a ton of visitors coming from here. So I just figured I’d throw some additional links their way:

  • Transit of Mercury, Photoblogged: Jay Manifold takes some nice pics of the planet Mercury, as well as an amusing comparison of Manifold Observatory and Powell Observatory.
  • Team of Rivals: Andrew Olmsted reviews a recent book that chronicles Abraham Lincoln’s rise to the presidency, as well as the coalition he formed and maintained to fight the civil war:

    Lincoln’s ability to hold together a coalition of abolitionists, conservative Republicans, and war Democrats during the American Civil War stands as a signal feat of political dexterity that seems yet more impressive in light of more recent American history. … the book really hits its stride once Lincoln is elected and he assembles his Cabinet, beginning with his three rivals for the nomination. The contrast is particularly stark with modern politics, where Cabinets are formed from the victor’s circle of political allies. Lincoln, on the other hand, selected men who not only wanted the job he held, but who viewed him poorly at best in some cases. It’s hard to imagine a modern politician selecting men who viewed him with the kind of contempt Edwin Stanton viewed Lincoln, let alone getting the kind of results Lincoln did. Lincoln’s ability to get results from such disparate men is an impressive primer in leadership.

    Interesting stuff, and I think I’ll pick up the book at some point, as this seems to be an impressive example of compromise and tradeoffs (subjects that interest me) in action.

  • Ars Technica 2006 holiday gift guide: Make shopping for the geek in your family a little easier with this guide (sheesh, that sounded like advertising copy *shudders*). Most of the hardware and gadget gifts are pretty good, though expensive. However, they also include lots of interesting books and smaller gifts as well. Ars always has interesting articles though. I’ve already mentioned the Ars System Guide on the blog recently, but they also have reviews of the Wii and PS3 that are worth reading.
  • Casino Royale: Subtitle: Die almost never � nearly forever! Heh. Alexander Doenau’s take on the latest Bond flick is roughly in line with my own feelings, though one of these days I’ll get around to talking more about it on the blog.

    Which may beg the question of some audiences: where is the fun when there�s nary an insane scheme to be seen, and no psychedelically decorated gyrocopters? (thank you, Roald Dahl). The answer lies partly in Bond himself. Without the scary misogyny that Ian Fleming endowed Bond with 50 years ago, Daniel Craig plays Bond as an excellent bastard. This is a Bond so confident in his own skills that he doesn�t give a care who sees him because he has a licence to kill. This is probably the only Craig film we�ll see in which Bond is able to cut as loose as he did in Uganda, because part of the story involves developing a marginally more sensible and responsible MI6 agent, but he takes the sorts of risks that make the movie fun without being stupidly unbelievable.

    I love the description of James Bond as an “excellent bastard.”

  • Steven Den Beste has an interesting rating system (another subject I’ll tackle on the blog at some point). He uses a 4 star scale, but also includes a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” graphic (for obvious reasons). This is interesting because it allows him to recognize a technical accomplishment without actually recommending the film (for instance, I would give Grave of the Fireflies **** with a thumbs down because it is masterfully produced, but so heartbreaking that I can’t actually recommend it). In any case, if you scroll down on the link above (no permalinks there), you’ll see that Steven has started rating individual anime episodes for a series called Kamichu. For episode 6, he rated it zero stars with six thumbs down. I wonder if he liked it?
  • A collection of Jonathan Swift’s journalistic texts: Ralf Goergens over at Chicago Boyz makes an Jonathan Swift-related annotation to Neal Stephenson’s Baroque Cycle:

    Attentive readers of Neal Stephenson’s Baroque Cycle will remember Daniel Waterhouse reading a a number of astonishingly vile newspapers. Some of the most acrimonious articles were from Jonathan Swift, writing for Tory papers. Stephenson didn’t make that part up, the articles can be found here.

    I didn’t have time to do more than a bit of browsing, but some of the historical characters from the Baroque Cycle are mentioned, like Marlborough, Bolingbroke, Harley and of course Queen Anne. There also are extensive footnotes explaining the concrete circumstances under which the articles appeared.

  • Weblog Awards: Kevin Murphy notes that since he was inexplicably passed over for the Weblog Awards, he might as well add a bunch of categories and simply declare winners. Normally, this would seem like the actions of a snarky blogger, but since Kaedrin won a Koveted Kevy, I’ll say it was the result of long-standing multifaceted research project considering nearly 2 billion blogs. Also, Kevin apparently knows something I don’t: Kaedrin won the Best Blog With A Japanese Word As Its Title. Hmmm. It would be pretty funny if it actually was a Japanese word (anyone know what it means?)
  • The New Threats: John Robb continues his incisive commentary on global guerillas:

    As the debate over the value of the Iraq study group’s report rumbles on, it’s important to reflect on larger frame within which this debate is taking place. This frame, little discussed, encapsulates nature of the threat we face in Iraq and will be increasingly likely to face in the future. With Iraq, we can catch a glimpse of the new class of threat that will increasingly define our future (and given that even a glimpse is enough to stump the establishment should be a dire warning). This new class of threat is characterized by its bottoms up pattern of growth rather than the familiar competition between nation-states. It percolates upwards through catalyzed organic growth until it overwhelms our ability to respond to it.

    My general reaction to Robb’s theories is that he is usually too pessimistic and that there must be a better way to fight these global guerillas, but he always makes for interesting and worthwhile reading.

  • Depressing Anime: Fledgling Otaku’s thoughts on Grave of the Fireflies are a little harsher than my own, but I have to say that he’s justified in calling it anime for emotional masochists. Don’t miss the comment threads on that post, the follow up post, and the recent post (in which he mentions my review). Like me, the more he learns of the context, the more he says he can appreciate its value as a work of art.
  • Tax Law Is Complicated, But Is It Vague? : James Edward Maule reads about a Judge who “struck down a portion of the Patriot Act on the ground that despite amendments to the provisions they remain ‘too vague’ to be understood by ‘a person of average intelligence’ and thus are unconstitutional.” As a professor of tax law, he wonders if the Internal Revenue Code is actually vague, and asks some interesting questions:

    If everything that could not be understood by a “person of average intelligence” were to be declared unconstitutional and removed from the planet, what would remain? Is there something wrong when a patient cannot understand a medical procedure used by a surgeon? Is there something wrong when a driver does not understand the engineering formulae used in designing the bridge over which the vehicle is crossing? Is there something wrong when someone enjoying a fine meal cannot understand the recipe?

  • Take my advice, or I�ll spank you without pants.: Johno over at the The Ministry of Minor Perfidy takes note of the glorious Chingrish of actual English Subtitles used in films made in Hong Kong. Some of my favorites:

    9. Quiet or I’ll blow your throat up.

    11. I�ll fire aimlessly if you don�t come out!

    18. How can you use my intestines as a gift?

    18. How can you use my intestines as a gift?

    19. This will be of fine service for you, you bag of the scum. I am sure you will not mind that I remove your manhoods and leave them out on the dessert flour for your aunts to eat. [sic, of course]

    20. Yah-hah, evil spider woman! I have captured you by the short rabbits and can now deliver you violently to your gynecologist for a thorough examination.

    21. Greetings, large black person. Let us not forget to form a team up together and go into the country to inflict the pain of our karate feets on some ass of the giant lizard person.

    This sort of thing is funny, but bad translations are also responsible for ruining a lot of decent foreign movies.

  • Extremely Cool: Indeed it is:

    The Antikythera Mechanism is a 2000-year-old device, somewhat resembling a clock, found in 1902 by sponge divers in the waters off a Greek island. It has long been believed that it was a form of analog computer, used for astronomical calculations, but its precise operating mechanism was not well-understood.

    Interesting stuff.

  • Not the intended market, but still fun: Fritz Schranck has been sucked into What Not To Wear (one of those smug reality shows that berate people for having bad style, then attempt to help them out). While I’ve never seen this show, similar reality shows do have that sorta “I can’t look away from this trainwreck” quality that makes them entertaining.
  • DM of the Rings: In terms of link love, I’ve been woefully neglectful of Shamus’s brilliant DM of the Rings comic, which somehow manages to be both humorous and insightful (well, in terms of RPG gaming anyway). Using screenshots from the movies, it’s essentially what the Lord of the Rings would have been like if it were played as a D&D game.

Holy crap, that took a while. I just realized that I would have probably been better off if I’d just done one or two a day. That way I’d have had posts every day for at least a week! In any case, stay tuned for the weekly Animation Marathon review (This week, it’s Akira. Review should be up Tuesday or Wednesday).

Aliens Board Game

A little while ago, I became reaquanted with a game that I used to play often – the Aliens board game. I haven’t played the game in about ten years or so, and I found it interesting for a number of reasons. Gameplay is a bit of a mixture of other gaming styles, combining the arbitrary nature and futility of board games with the wonky dice and damage-table style of RPGs (Ok, you shot the alien with your pulse rifle. Roll for acid!) I noticed a few things about the game that I never did before, some good, some bad.

Before I get into those observations, I’ll have to explain the mechanics of the game a bit. The game comes with a few maps and there are a couple of scenarios that you can play, each of which is basically re-enacting a memorable scene where the colonial marines get their asses handed to them from the movie (i.e. the initial encounter with the aliens under the reactor, the later encounter and retreat through the air ducts, and a single player scenario where Ripley rescues Newt and fights the alien queen). There was also an expansion pack which featured an additional scenario. Since we’d all played the game countless times in our youth, we decided to mix things up a little and combine the regular map with the expansion map. Basically, we start at one end of the map and have to make ourselfs to the other end. This is easier said than done.

We hand out all the player cards randomly. Most of the characters are colonial marines, but there is a surprising amount of variability between characters and their abilities. Most characters are given two moves per turn, though Ripley, Apone, and Bishop have three. In terms of weaponry, some of the characters are significantly better than others. Hicks, Ripley and Apone have quality weapons to choose from. Drake and Vasquez have those awesome smart guns. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there’s the Burke character, who has no weapons (he’s essentially used as alien bait, as he should). Since there were only a few of us, we each got multiple characters to play with (which is a good thing, for reasons I’ll get into in a moment). I ended up with three relatively lame characters: Corporal Dietrich (who was armed with only a pistol), Lieutenant Gorman (whose Pulse Rifle was the most powerful weapon in my group), and Private Wierzbowski (who was armed with an incinerator). Gorman’s an ok character to play, except he’s a tool in the movie. Dietrich isn’t quite as useless as Burke, but damn near so. Wierzbowski isn’t the greatest character to play, but he’s awesome in the movie (The Wierzbowski Hunters are one of those wonderful phenomenons that could only be possible on the internet).

Players on the map (click for larger)

That’s it man, game over man, game over! *

As already mentioned, our goal is to make our way from one side of the map to the other. Every turn, four aliens are added to the board in semi-random places (as the game proceeds, more aliens are added per turn). While most of the players only have two moves per turn, the aliens have four moves. If an alien enters on or next to your position, you have to roll a ten sided die. Most of the time, the result is that you are “grabbed” by the alien. Essentially, you need to be rescued by one of the other players, illustrating the cooperative nature of the game.

So the game begins, and the initial four aliens are inserted onto the board. The way the game goes for a while is that we take out all of the aliens, and move forward if possible. Eventually my characters are leading the pack and make it to the next map (half way there!), and the DM equivalent decides that we need to start adding more aliens per turn. At this point, we’re fending off aliens from all directions, and we start to take on more and more casualties. Some aspects of the game were becoming clearer to me:

  • Weapons & Range: As I previously noted, my three characters were armed with a pistol, a pulse rifle, and an incinerator. The pistol is next to useless (if you ever play the game, don’t choose the pistol – use the incinerator) as it’s range is absurdly low and even then, you have to make a tough role to hit your target. The pulse rifle is actually a decent weapon with a good, long range. The incinerator is another short range weapon, and I cannot use it to rescue any of my teammates (I could kill the alien, but I’d also be burning my teammate).
  • Turns: As it turns out, I’m the last person to go each turn, so in addition to my mostly short range, there usually aren’t any aliens left for me to shoot at. So every turn, I end up moving forward, while everyone else is stuck rescuing their teammates (sometimes me, even though I can’t return the favor).
  • The Aliens: Even if you don’t start adding more and more aliens per turn, the game becomes more challenging because as you progress throughout the map, the aliens begin to surround you and they’re more difficult to attack when they’re coming from multiple directions (if you can get two aliens lined up in a row, a single shot can kill both aliens…)

As a result of my turn placement and my characters’ lame short-range weapons, I ended up leading the pack. Lieutenant Gorman, my only decent combat soldier, got attacked by an alien relatively early on, and when a teammate shot the alien, Gorman got sprayed by acid and died. This left me with Dietrich (pistol) and Wierzbowski (incinerator).

We had come to a standoff. The second map had more walls and obstructed views, so it took the aliens longer to reach us, but we also couldn’t pick them off from afar. Wierzbowski finally proved useful, as you can use the incinerator to set up a “fire wall” that the aliens can’t cross for a turn (This ability is particularly useful on the second map because of all the choke points). Still, our ranks were being worn down. I was able to block the forward onslaught, but the aliens came in on the flank and mounted a devestating attack. More than 50% of the original team had perished, and some of us were wounded (which makes it harder to hit targets). Dietrich had become completely disabled, so I had Wierzbowski pick her up in the hopes of feeding her to an alien if I got into trouble.

The game was running a little long at this point, so the DM decided to insert the alien queen (this isn’t really supposed to happen, but we like a challenge). The queen is significantly more difficult to deal with, and she managed to kill the remainder of our team… except Wierzbowski who had made his way into a room with a single block choke point. Using the firewall ability, I was able to make it to the final hallway before being attacked. I managed to take out a couple of aliens with my incinerator, but I had to sacrifice Dietrich in order to get away. Alas, the queen had made her way around, and the valiant Wierzbowski finally succumbed to her deadly advance.

Our variations on the rules aside, it’s actually a pretty well balanced game. The aliens are appropriately formidable, and they only become moreso as the game progresses. As in the movie, you can’t really complete a scenario without taking significant casualties, and even though our team did pretty well, there’s no guarantee that we’d have made it (even if we didn’t add the queen). The game was made in 1989, and is no longer available. You can find it on eBay, but it commands a relatively high price tag… It’s an interesting game, but it’s not really worth the high price these days. In the 90s, the game was a lot of fun. These days, other games have far surpassed it (especially video games). Still, it’s nice to play an old favorite every now and again.

* I should note that the game does not come with those nice figurines in the picture above. The game has these chinsy cardboard pieces with pictures of the characters and aliens. Functional, but not as nice as the figurines. Also, yes, I’m a huge nerd and can name all the colonial marines without having to look them up.

Animation Marathon: Grave of the Fireflies

Of the six films chosen for the Animation Marathon, Grave of the Fireflies was the only one that I hadn’t heard much about. The only thing I knew about it was that it was sad. Infamously sad. After watching the movie, I can say that it certainly does live up to those expecations. It’s a heartbreaking movie, all the moreso because it’s animated. Spoilers ahead…

The film begins by showing us a 14 year old boy lying dead on a subway platform, so you can’t really say that the filmmakers were trying to hide the tragedy in this film. The boy’s name is Seita, and through flashbacks, we learn how he came to meet his end. Set during the last days of World War II, the story is kicked off by the American firebombing of Seita’s city. Seita’s father is in the Japanese Navy and Seita’s mother is horribly wounded by bombing, eventually succumbing to her wounds. The entire city is destroyed, leaving Seita and his little 4 year old sister Setsuko homeless. For a time, they take refuge with an Aunt, who seems nice at first, but gets grumpier as she realizes that Seita isn’t willing to contribute to the war effort, or to help around the house. Eventually, Seita finds an unused bomb shelter where he can live with his sister without being a burden on their Aunt. It being wartime, food is scarce, and Seita struggles and ultimately fails to support his sister.

This isn’t quite like any other animated movie I’ve ever seen. It’s a powerful and evocative film. It has moments of great beauty, even though it’s also quite sad. It displays a patience that’s not common in animated movies. There are contemplative pauses. Characters and their actions are allowed time to breath. The animations are often visually striking, even when they’re used in service of less-than-pleasant events (such as the landscape shot of the city as it burns).

After I finished the film, I was infurated. Obviously no one really enjoys watching two kids starve, suffer, and die after losing their family and home to a war, but it’s not just sad. As I said before, it’s infuriating. I was so pissed off at Seita because he made a lot of boneheaded, prideful decisions that were ultimately responsible for the death of his sister (and eventually, himself). At one point in the film, as Seita begs a farmer for food, the farmer tells him to swallow his pride and go back to his aunt. Seita refuses, and hence the tragedy. But at least he’s young and thus reckless, which is understandable. While I was upset at Seita’s actions, I really couldn’t blame only him and the film did prompt some empathy for that character. I can’t say the same of the Aunt. Who lets two young kids go off to live by themselves in wartime? Yeah, Seita wasn’t pulling his weight, but hell, your job as an adult is to teach children about responsibilities… It was wartime for crying out loud. There had to be plenty to do. Yeah, it’s sad. Especially when it comes to Setsuko, who was only 4 years old. But other than that, it was infuriating, and I wasn’t sure how I was going to rate the movie. Then I read about some context in the Onion A.V. Club review of the movie (emphasis mine):

Adapting a semi-autobiographical book by Akiyuki Nosaka, Takahata scripted and directed Fireflies while his Studio Ghibli partner, Hayao Miyazaki, was scripting and directing his own classic, My Neighbor Totoro. The two films were produced and screened as a package, because Totoro was considered a difficult sell, while Fireflies, as an “educational” adaptation of a well-known historical book, had a guaranteed audience. But while both films won high praise at home and abroad, it’s hard to imagine the initial impact of watching them back to back. Totoro is a bubbly, joyous film about the wonders of childhood, while Fireflies follows two children as they starve, suffer, and die after American planes firebomb their town.

…Nosaka, who lost his own young sister under similar circumstances, apparently intended his book in part to chronicle his shameful pride, while Takahata explains … that he wanted viewers to learn a moral lesson from Seita’s hubris. Instead, he reports, they mostly sympathized with the boy, which is easy to do.

It turns out that my feelings about the film were exactly what the filmmakers were going for, which kinda turned me around and made me realize that the film really is brilliant (in other words, my expecation of the film as having to be “Sad” made me feel strange because, while it was certainly sad, it was also infuriating. Now that I know the infurating part was intentional, it makes a lot more sense.) As the Onion article brilliantly summarizes, “not so much an anti-war statement as it is a protest against basic human selfishness, and the way it only worsens during trying times.” And that’s sad, but it’s also quite annoying.

The animation is very well done, and while some might think that something this serious would not be appropriate in animation, I’m not sure it would work any other way. One of the most beautiful scenes in the film shows the two children using fireflies to light their abandoned bomb shelter. It’s a scene I think would look cheesy and fake in a live action film, but which works wonderfully in an animated film. Roger Ebert describes it well:

It isn’t the typical material of animation. But for “Grave of the Fireflies,” I think animation was the right choice. Live action would have been burdened by the weight of special effects, violence and action. Animation allows Takahata to concentrate on the essence of the story, and the lack of visual realism in his animated characters allows our imagination more play; freed from the literal fact of real actors, we can more easily merge the characters with our own associations.

In the end, while this is definitely an excellent film, I find it difficult to actually recommend it (for what I hope are obvious reasons). This type of movie is not for everyone, and while I do think it is brilliantly executed, I don’t especially want to watch it again. Ever. In an odd sort of way, that’s a testament to how well the film does what it does. (***1/2)

Filmspotting‘s review is not up yet, but should be up tomorrow. Check it out, as they are also reviewing The Fountain (which I reviewed on Monday).

(In a strange stroke of coincidence, I had actually watched Miyazaki’s My Neighbor Totoro just a few days before Fireflies, not quite mimicking the back to back screenings mentioned in the Onion article, but close enough to know that it was an odd combo indeed (and I can’t imagine the playful and fun Totoro being a “harder sell” than the gut-punch of Fireflies.))