Half-Baked and Stale. Ideas of All Shapes and Sizes...

  Ideas are a dime a dozen. Some are good, some are not. That’s just the way it is. Hopefully when creating a story somebody has the time and imagination to flesh out an idea to its ultimate fruition.
    We know that’s often not the case though. Especially in mass media we can see plenty of television shows, movies and even books that try out an idea and don’t quite reach the logical outcome they should.
    Was somebody pressed for time? Did they simply not consider all the ramifications of whatever it was they were trying to accomplish? Or maybe they did but somebody else had other ideas–a producer or an editor wanted something else and didn’t have the same vision the author did.
    There’s also the fact that some ideas simply exist to accomplish a certain thing and trying to extend them or alter their original premise causes fundamental problems. Consider the first Highlander movie. At the end, Connor MacCleod wins “The Prize”–the ultimate goal for all the Immortals in the story. After that point, the story is over. There is simply nowhere else to go for a further story.
    But that didn’t stop the show’s producers. They wanted a sequel and a further opportunity to cash in on this premise. They eventually made a sequel movie–even though there was nowhere further to go. They came up with a ridiculous premise that the Immortals were all aliens and came to Earth from another planet so we could have more of them show up to challenge Connor again. Further movies seemed to ignore this and the first movie’s ending as well, just throwing more Immortals at Connor to fight. (Frankly, anyone who enjoys the first movie should just ignore the sequels all together).
    Another story that comes to mind–and the one that prompted me to explore this in a blog in the first place–was the original series Star Trek episode, Mirror, Mirror. In that story, Kirk and several of his crew are somehow transported into a parallel universe where everyone is opposite to how they normally are. It’s a world where everyone is basically evil and selfish, opposites to the normal universe where everyone is good and altruistic.
    The premise works extremely well as a one-off. A look at how a person can be inclined differently given different circumstances. Are we inherently good or evil? Do we learn that behavior? Nature versus nurture.
    Over the years that premise has been revisited time and again. In the original DC Comics series from the 1980s, writer Mike W. Barr did an entire story arc where Kirk and crew from the Mirror Universe crossover with our regular heroes. (Its been years since I read that story but I recall enjoying it as a kid). The comics aren’t consider cannon though so they ultimately have no bearing on the official storyline.
    Years later, somebody (Peter Allan Fields and Michael Piller) decided to revisit the Mirror Universe in the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode Crossover. This kicked off four more sequel episodes in DS9, a two-part episode in Enterprise and two characters crossing over in Star Trek Discovery later on.
    The more we return to visit the Mirror Universe the more obvious it is the premise doesn’t really stand up as a concept. We are really expected to believe that an entire universe of beings is inherently self-serving and evil? That we get the odd freak, like Spock, who can accept pacifism but everyone else just struggles to better everyone else around them to their own benefit? Yes, that’s how the real world can be but not everyone is like that a hundred percent of the time. People can be good too and selfless. People love their families and friends. Not everyone is out to screw everyone else over constantly.
    That lack of texture makes the Mirror Universe a hard premise to accept. If it were really that bad, how could anyone even function long enough to accomplish anything of value? Why would there be a Terran Empire in the first place?
    (As an aside, if the Terrans conquered the Vulcans early on, why don’t they seem to have more advanced technology even the era of Enterprise? Never mind finding the Defiant to advance their technology more rapidly–which, while a cool idea, doesn’t explain why the I.S.S. Enterprise seems at about the same technological level as the regular Enterprise in that original episode).
    Also, the later episodes really have nothing new to say. It’s just the same thing all over again. The protagonists duplicates are evil and out to screw each other over. Our heroes are appalled, try to affect change and then return home. Rinse and repeat. It’s great popcorn entertainment but ultimately means nothing. 
    It might’ve been better to just leave the whole Mirror Universe alone in Star Trek. Or do a sequel episode in DS9 and then have just left well enough alone. Some things don’t hold up to further scrutiny and some ideas get more diluted the more we’re exposed to them (like the Weeping Angels in Doctor Who. An excellent idea once--but less and less cool the more we see of them).
    It’s pretty much impossible to be original in serial fiction one hundred percent of the time and everyone has their off-days, half-baked or just plain bad ideas. That’s life. But beating an old idea into the ground doesn’t really help endear anyone to a story concept. Sometimes to keep going on, we need time to imagine something newer and better. Sometimes just letting sleeping dogs lie is for the best.

DKA

The Mysteries of Life...

    The Internet has been a boon for society in many ways. We can get instant news, instant information, buy products and services online. We can post our own projects–be they a blog, story, video or whatever else.
    But there’s a downside too.
    Once upon a time, we didn’t know (or think we know) everything about a given topic. There was speculation and mystery about some topics. What did someone mean with their artwork? The idea behind a movie or TV show when it wasn’t hit-you-over-the-head obvious? What was a song about?
    Mystery is essential in art. Be it a literal mystery or just an aspect of something bigger.
    Consider the movie Alien. What was the Space Jockey? Where did it and its ship come from? It was a really cool mystery until Prometheus came along and ruined the surprise for us (I loved the idea of the movie but ultimately the payoff was a waste of time). What about V'Ger's mysterious machine planet benefactors in Star Trek: The Motion Picture? Wolverine's origins (before they were explained into the ground by various writers).
    In Alien's case, the Space Jockey's origins were ultimately irrelevant. They exist as a plot point to move the story along. Still, it was fun to speculate on what might have been.
    I also think of things like action figures from the 80s. Often, the packaging stories/profiles told a different story of the character or back story then stuff like the comics or cartoons did. In the toys, Tarantulas (Beast Wars) was a ninja. In the cartoon, he was a mad scientist. He-Man’s mini-comics often told vastly different (and sometimes contradictory) stories of the characters adventures.
    Classically speaking, why is the Mona Lisa smiling? Is it just that she was in a pleasant mood as her portrait was being painted? Or perhaps she was smiling about some secret only she was privy to? Who knows. But it’s fun to speculate all the same.
    I think some of that mystery has been lost in modern mass media. Sometimes it feels like they're not even trying anymore. Compare something like the Rise of Skywalker with, say, Predator. The latter has plenty of mystery. The former, not so much.
    Mystery has eternal appeal to the consumer of art. It needs to be brought back to the forefront of popular media (and media in general, really).
    This also coincides with a need for new stories and concepts. How many times can you reboot Star Trek and keep it fresh? Yes, it's great to explore a story universe but eventually we learn it thoroughly and need something new. Even just taking familiar concepts and putting them in a new context can help immensely.
    Again, Corporate America is lazy. Trying to sell its varied audiences on the familiar rather then exploring new things. Familiar is a safe bet. Familiar is profitable.
    But, in the long run, familiar is detrimental to mystery. People inevitably get sick of the same old thing and seek new experiences.
    What can be done? Nothing when it comes to mainstream media. We can vote with our dollars and hope that one day somebody in charge sees the error of their ways.
    In the meantime, though, we can check out smaller authors and artists and try to seek out people who remember what the mystery is all about, devoid of needing to turn a giant profit for their corporation at all cost.
    The magic of mystery is still out there. We need only seek it out...

DKA  

The Never Ending Battle...

    I’ve been a sci-fi/fantasy geek since I was really little and first saw a little indie film called “Star Wars”. For me, Star Wars was always my first love. There was always sci-fi shows–Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rogers, Star Trek, The Black Hole, etc, etc. and then there was Star Wars. It was simply the gold standard in my mind. There was Star Wars and all other things.
    My first exposure to Star Wars was when I was three years old. My parents and I went to the now-defunct Zellers store at Kingsway and I got a C3P0 toy. I also remember seeing lots of promotional material for Star Wars–catalogues, collector cards that came with gum, posters, picture books, records with books, etc. I also remember going to the theater and seeing a trailer for something called The Empire Strikes Back and having my mind blown.
    I’m pretty sure I saw ESB first in the theater and later on, seeing ANH on TV. In those days, VCRs were scant. If you wanted to see a movie again, you had to wait and hope it played on TV or it got re-released in theaters (Back in the day, Star Wars and its sequels got re-released a lot). VCRs were for rich, progressive people (those first units were damn expensive. Also, my parents were cheap and backward when it came to new technological marvels–but that’s a story for another time).
    By the time Return of the Jedi came around, my memory was more developed and I can still remember what an awesome time it was (I was seven, btw). Luke had a cool new green light saber. I also remember all the colors–red guards for the Emperor; green rebel commandoes, the black and grey sterile look of the Death Star II... I recall the looong line outside Londonderry Famous Players theater as my mom and I awaited for the movie. I remember going to West Edmonton Mall and seeing it again later (I used the excuse that my sisters hadn’t seen it yet as justification. That same trip, I bought a copy of one of the issues of the ROTJ mini-series from Marvel Comics and recall seeing another kid and his father as they’d just purchased one of those cool miniature die-cast Star Wars toy sets that existed at the time. They were sitting on a bench fiddling with it as my mom and I furiously tried to find our way back to the theater and the rest of the family in the behemoth mall).
    About a year later, in 1984, Star Wars was over and I discovered something else called Star Trek. I’d always been aware of its existence, of course, but never gotten into it until then. It also blew my mind (what can I say? I was a kid! Everything’s exciting at that age). Of course, Star Wars was still the ultimate gold standard but Star Trek rocked too (and, truth be told, was better constructed overall).
    I was always a toy collector (in the kiddie sense. I’d buy them, open them, play with them, lose parts and/or have toys break or get lost). I collected everything. Star Wars, the scant few Star Trek toys I could ever find. Masters of the Universe. Go-Bots. G.I.JOE. Transformers. Etc, etc.
    This also lead me into comics. I started with scant issues of this or that and eventually went full-on collector with G.I.JOE, Transformers and myriad other comics–Avengers, X-Men, X-Factor, Captain America, Spider-Man...I sampled much of the output of the time and mostly enjoyed it.
    As you grow older, tastes change. So do writers, artists and the like on comics, TV shows, etc. You’re supposed to grow up, discover the opposite sex, get a job, move out and so on. The toys, comics, etc. are supposed to be put behind you as become an adult and become respectable.
    Of course, many of us still love this junk anyway. And that’s okay. There’s no law against it and, really, some of us have the spare time and want to keep up with it. Everyone needs a hobby right?
    Sometimes, though, I wish some of these money making franchises would just end, like chapters in everyone’s lives. Star Wars ended in 1983 with ROTJ. After that, we had the Ewoks and Droids cartoons. Then nothing for about five years....finally, Tim Zahn’s Thrawn trilogy hit stores shelves, followed by eight million books and comics of varying quality. Several new movies and TV shows and way, way more toys. As I write this, Star Wars Rebels is about to debut on TV and Episode 7 is coming out next year...
    Star Trek had a Next Generation then Deep Space Nine, Voyager, Enterprise.... TNG movies, a reboot with a new Kirk and crew and a sequel to that... also, a bazillion books and comics too.
    Everything old is new again. Battlestar Galactica came back re-imagined. Transformers and G.I.JOE never really went away... those Marvel and DC comics? Still grinding them out. Some are awesome while many are also terrible
    For me, new Star Trek just isn’t the same as the classic series. It’s still characters with the same names but they just don’t do it for me anymore. I’ve actually reached a point where I’m burned out on Star Wars. I really don’t think I care about the new trilogy... it can’t possibly match people’s expectations any more then the prequel trilogy could (it will likely be better but can anything match the memory of the first trilogy in people’s minds?)
    Marvel and DC have restarted, retconned, killed and resurrected, and everything in-between so much that none of the characters are the ones I grew up with. Fundamentally, they’re the same archetypes, of course, but the history and characters are gone. The people who worked so hard to maintain it are long gone. Retired, fired, dead... in their place are new blood who don’t always understand just what it is they have in their charge.
    So, you say, we should just end it all because one blogger is sick and tired of what’s out there. Abandon years of creativity and scorch the earth? Yes and no.
    I’m not opposed to new concepts, new characters and new stories. Back in the day, that’s what kept my personal odyssey going after all. After Star Wars, I moved onto Star Trek. Later on, Babylon 5... He-Man beget G.I.JOE which beget Transformers and so on. After Marvel/DC, I discovered Darkhorse and Image... The Avengers gave way to Watchmen and Miracleman (which is old but I actually only discovered recently).
    Sometimes, though, I wish we could truly retire some of the tried and tested things. Star Wars only exists now to make money for Disney. They even said they intend to release a new film every year! Paramount keeps churning out Star Trek movie after movie... Marvel’s going full steam on their superhero movies while DC tries to play catch-up. (There’s nothing inherently bad about Marvel’s movies, at the least, but how many super powered escapist films do we need per year before the general public gets burned out?)
    I wish these corporate money machines would risk more on new properties and concepts. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel every time out but it would be nice to let some stuff die–or at least rest a while (absence makes the heart grow fonder, after all) instead of constantly going back to the well for more. Of course, lately every time Disney does risk money on something we get a flop like John Carter or a project that doesn’t perform as well as expected, like Tron Legacy (okay, that was a sequel but at least it hadn’t been beaten into the ground in the intervening years).
    In the end, though, we’re powerless to stop the cycle. Only when people start voting en masse with their wallets will things truly change. Until then, each and every fan must be choosey about what they love and will accept–and what they will not. If you love a comic/book/show/movie/toy, support it if it’s good (and you want to, of course). But don’t just accept everything with a familiar brand just because... if you do, the people making it will just churn any old crap to satisfy their quota and the whole will suffer. Nobody needs that...

DKA

Oh My! The Sulu Conundrum...

    Is Mr. Sulu gay? We all know the actor who played him, George Takei, came out several years ago. Since then he’s championed gay causes and been omnipresent with his “oh my” catchphrase on social media.
    But is the character of Hikaru Sulu also gay? Nothing is ever conclusively stated in-story about Sulu’s sexuality. Star Trek seems to be void of gay people in general. In part, this is a product of its time. People simply didn’t have gay characters in TV shows in the sixties (Takei related an anecdote how he tried to get Gene Roddenberry to put an openly gay character in the show but Roddenberry was reluctant to, citing that he couldn’t go that far and get away with it on network television). Why the 80s The Next Generation and subsequent spin-offs are also devoid of gay characters is less clear since things had changed a lot by then.
    Looking at the story as it played out, we notice Sulu never has a romantic interest in the story. Not ever. (The mirror universe Sulu does seem to express an attraction to Uhura but since he’s from a parallel universe it’s possible he is straight. This doesn’t really answer the question of whether or not main universe Sulu is gay though). Every other character gets a romantic interest to some degree–Scotty dates a dancer in one episode (Wolf in the Fold); Chekov has a lost love (The Way To Eden); McCoy marries an alien priestess in another (For The World Is Hollow And I Have Touched The Sky); Uhura has a thing for Scotty (Star Trek 5. Admittedly, a stupid movie but...)
    The only time we get any sense of a family for Sulu is in Generations when we meet his daughter (Demora Sulu) at the helm. Even there, though, we’ve previously never heard any hint of Sulu having a family and this comes out of the blue. (Several books expound upon her back story, notably The Captain’s Daugher by Peter David. The books however are not canon).
    The truth of the matter is Hikaru Sulu was a named background character in the original show and he was kept around throughout the movie era, being given further drips of character here and there. There was never much attempt to develop his character, any more then Chekov, Scotty or Uhura got much in-depth characterization. They always had to play second fiddle to the series leads, Kirk, Spock and McCoy. The movies were worse in some respects–two hours to tell a Kirk-centric story. While fans were salivating for more of Sulu et al. we got some scraps thrown at us–Sulu gets a promotion and his own ship, etc. But there simply wasn’t the time or ability to focus much on Sulu, Chekov and Uhura.
    There’s no concrete evidence Sulu is gay. But there’s also no evidence contradicting the idea either. Sulu never seemed to marry or even express any interest in women in the filmed canonical stories. His daughter exists in Generations but her existence comes from out of nowhere. It seems likely the initial script called for Sulu himself to be at the helm but they couldn’t get Takei to sign on and decided to amend the story to include his “daughter” instead. (Ronald D. Moore co-wrote the script and has stated the film was rushed and not his best work). In my opinion, Generations is a story best forgotten–particularly the parts concerning the original crew (ironically, the story doesn’t really work without Kirk...)
    There is the one instance in The Motion Picture where Sulu is flustered when showing Ilia the controls at the Navigation console (I can’t remember if that scene is in the final cut or not. That movie’s been re-edited so damn many times it’s gotten confusing). It could be he’s excited by the thought of an alien woman who’s culture is sex based–because he’s straight and into her. Or it could be that he’s gay and simply unable to comprehend the sheer alien-ness of her cultural heritage (okay, this is a bit of a stretch on my part). But it’s possible. After all, humans are simply more private about such things and the Deltans are very much open about their sexuality.
    Perhaps Hikaru Sulu was gay all along and we just never realized it... if that’s true then Star Trek was even more revolutionary then we ever realized.

DKA

The Unending, Unerring War for the Stars...

    It’s a commonly accepted fact among most geeks that the Star Wars prequel trilogy was not very good. Generally, the common response is one of hate or disgust whenever the films are brought up. After many years and much deliberation, I’ve been forced to agree.
    I wanted to have liked these movies so much. I really did. I tried for a long time to justify Lucas motives in making them the way he did. In the end, I just had to accept that they weren’t well made. (I’m not going to make any statements about how he’s destroyed my childhood or ruined Star Wars forever, etc. I’ll leave such judgements up to the more hyperbole-prone fans).
    Part of the problem lies with the methods George Lucas used to make the newer films. He chose, for better or worse, to do things in an assembly-line style. This is great from a practical standpoint. You line up your various targets in a row and then take them down in succession. Lucas took each of the varied tasks and set them up in a corporate sort of structure–this department does this and that one does that, etc.
    One need only look at the films to see the truth of the matter. The wardrobe, art department, visual effects, practical effects, music and so on are well executed. Even the advertising department did a wonderful job of getting people, time and again, to come in and see films that continued a story they had loudly and publicly decried on the internet.
    Where this system failed miserably, however, was that Lucas did the story himself and, after however many drafts, decided what he had was good. This deviates from the mess that was the making of A New Hope, where many people worked on tweaking and outright re-writing the script until we arrived at we saw on screen. It’s been said repeatedly that Lucas needed an Editor or at least others’ input for the prequel trilogy. Sadly, in his confidence that he had the right set-up to make the films he certainly overestimated his own ability to pull off a satisfying story. And what is any film, no matter how efficiently its executed, without a good story first and foremost?

What They Did Right...

   Most articles I’ve seen quickly jump to “what’s wrong with the films”. There are certainly many problems but there are also a few things they managed to get right.
    As seen on the various documentaries included with the DVDs/Blu-rays, Lucas ran a very impressive operation when he filmed the three films. Each time, he was efficient and organized when he filmed these movies. He knew exactly what he wanted, how he wanted it and how to get there. It seems like waste was kept to a minimum.
    The special effects are top notch, by and large. Lucas depended heavily on CGI instead of practical effects in these films. Most of it still holds up years later and looks very impressive even on a home screen. Additionally, the props and wardrobes are well done and very realistic looking when you watch the movies.
    The music is also excellent. Especially in The Phantom Menace, it’s clear John Williams brought his “A” game to his efforts. New compositions, such as Duel of the Fates, the Trade Federation “invasion” music, the Tatooine street music and many others demonstrate this amply. Even Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith have their moments, although they don’t feel quite as creative overall when compared to the first four films (I’ve heard it said that Lucas wanted Williams to make places where he could just insert pre-recorded themes into the later films. I’m not certain if this is true or not but it does seem a logical option when one listens to the soundtracks as performed).
    As previously mentioned, the advertising efforts were also excellent. The trailer for Phantom Menace made me want to rush out and see it. I don’t recall Attack of the Clones trailer as much but the Revenge of the Sith teaser was excellent. Obviously the commercials (and efforts) made people desire to go out and see the films time and again.

BZZT! WRONG!

    Of course the huge failure of the prequel trilogy is its awful storytelling. I’ve seen it mentioned that The Phantom Menace is structured horribly, without really having a main protagonist (one of the best commentaries on the matter that I’ve seen is the Redletter Media reviews, HERE). We really don’t know who to cheer for in TPM and after all is said and done, wonder why Qui Gon Jin is even in the story to begin with. Or why the characters make half of the choices that they do.
    Attack of the Clones is interesting but right away I knew it was a terrible movie. I was in a daze after TPM but AOTC was bad right off the bat. Once again, we have things happening that are either irrelevant or poorly executed so that we can get to the special effects and action. Perhaps one of the story’s most critical flaws is the romance between Anakin Skywalker and Padme (side note: Why was she Queen Amidala in the first movie and then Padme Naberrie in the second? No one even tried to reconcile the name differences for the character. I mean, yes, she has a double in the first film so the dual identity sort of makes sense. But how does “Amidala” relate to Padme or her time as Queen? I could never figure that one out). The romance storyline is largely given a backseat compared against Obi-wan’s mystery plot and is never convincingly done. We know Padme likes Anakin on some level but why does she suddenly decide to fall in love and marry him? He goofs off around her, whines a lot and then his mommy dies so he goes and kills a bunch of Sandpeople. In the right hands, this could’ve made sense. As it is, it’s a mess and unconvincing). Two cut scenes from the movie where we meet Padme’s family and they discuss Anakin a little behind his back help but they could’ve gone further still.
    On a minor note, the title is also terrible.... apparently Lucas was going for some kind of fifties sci-fi movie homage but it fails miserably and seems horribly out of place. The Phantom Menace and Revenge of the Sith titles I have no qualms with.
    Revenge of the Sith has its moments, but there aren’t enough of them and it’s still hampered by some bizarre story choices (wasting too much time on the Separatist ship, for example, and not being convincing enough in why Anakin turns to evil when all he really wants is to save his wife. Also, having most of the critical “Clone Wars” story happen off-camera between films).
    It’s clear Lucas didn’t plot out the whole story ahead of time, instead having broad story “beats” to achieve in each segment (Padme meets Anakin. Check. Obi-wan trains Anakin. Check. Anakin turns evil. Check. And so on...) If he’d taken the time to look at the big picture (beyond his bank account total) he could’ve figured out what he needed to do and set it up over the course of all three films instead of the willy-nilly nature of the story we got.
    Who knows? Maybe George was so busy running his empire that he didn’t have the time or creativity to devote to making a new story right. In that case, he really should’ve gotten some writers that he trusted and let them go to town on it instead.

A New Vision...

    Lucas’ broad strokes were fine, he just didn’t execute them right. Looking at what he had, he should’ve axed the whole kid Anakin thing and made him a teenager to start with. Hire one actor to play the character (someone who could act and could pull off a believable Anakin, whether he’s mellow, a hothead or whatever). Have him be believable, want to do right and end up giving into the temptations of the dark side. For my two cents, make him a Han Solo-like character...after all, the audience should like him so they can cheer for him instead thinking he’s a whiny, obnoxious twerp like the Anakin we got.
    Also, drop the whole religious-sounding thing where the Jedi abstain from relationships. It was stupid and really didn’t serve the story all that well. They were Jedi Knights, not Jedi Priests after all.
    Decide what you want to do with Padme–is she a queen, a politician, something else all together and stick with it. She should be strong minded and independent. Their relationship should be less over the top and more natural. Make us believe it and feel sad when Anakin goes bad. No more of this she died because she lost the will to live crap.
    Have some villains show up in the first movie and stay through until the third one. Yes, Darth Maul was cool but he died immediately with no real character development and had to be replaced by surrogates such as Count Dooku and General Grievous. Why not have had him stay until the late second movie or even the early third one? We get to know him a little, see him fight the bad guys-maybe beat them thoroughly–and then he gets his comeuppance in act three. Maybe Palpatine employs him with the secret plan that either Anakin will defeat him and join the dark side–or perhaps the best man will win. So Ray Park wasn’t an actor so much as a stuntman. No problem. Get him into an acting workshop, give him at least the basics. Done.
    Either drop Qui-gon all together or have him be the apprentice to Obi-wan and have him die heroically early on. Obi-wan, Anakin and Padme should be the main focus of the story. Everyone and everything else is secondary.
    Why not have the clones be the result of a mad eugenics war? Perhaps the Sith or somebody is creating an army to conquer the Galaxy and the Republic capture their own clone machines and grow some soldiers (or have them be reprogrammed to fight for the Republic). Yes, it’s a more simple approach. But Star Wars and simple go well together so why over-complicate things too much? Also, the droids were laughably bad opponents in the trilogy and shouldn’t have been there in the first place.
    Either no Jar Jar all together or replace him a more mellow, less spastic character. He really served no purpose in the story (other then to piss off adults and make kids buy toys). The idea of a cgi character was cool but the character himself was not.
    Character and story are the key elements to a satisfying movie–Star Wars or not. Sadly, we did not get this in any of the three prequel movies.


Episode 7 and beyond...

    In Fall of 2012, George Lucas sold Lucasfilm (and Star Wars) to Disney. The Mouse immediately decided they would do a Episode 7 movie as part of a new trilogy. Additionally, JJ Abrams will direct the film. I think Abrams sensibilities are well-suited to Star Wars (and a lot less so to Star Trek–but that’s another story).
 
    Will the new trilogy succeed? Probably. But I’m not sure I really care anymore... also, no matter how many classic SW actors get involved, this story should’ve been told decades ago. Now that they’re all old and able, at best, to mentor new characters in the story it just won’t be the same. People will come in with big expectations (like before with TPM) and come out disappointed. You simply can’t go home again so there’s no pointing in expecting to relive your childhood with new films.  
    They should not set the movies after Return of the Jedi. Go somewhere else, if you must make more. Do Knights of the Old Republic--or come up with something all-together new but using the familiar elements (Jedi, space battles, etc.) Trying to ride the classic trilogy’s coat-tails further is only a recipe for fan disappointment in the end.  
    In the end though, no matter what happens we’ll always have the classic trilogy as it existed and nobody will ever be able to take that away from us, no matter how many sub-par prequels or sequels get made.
   They also want to do a new SW movie every year. Every in-between year will be a stand alone film that ties into some aspect of the overall universe. Personally, I think this is a terrible idea and will burn people out on Star Wars, ultimately ruining the brand. As it is, Lucasfilm had milked the concept hard this last decade and this will only make things worse (I’m already sick of Star Wars–something I never believed could be possible at one time).
    May the Force be with you...

DKA

Something to Believe In...

    Religion is a divisive issue. Is there a Supreme Being that created us all? Or did life just evolve somehow? The idea of offering penance to a deity has been around as long as man has existed.
    Over the past two thousand years many terrible things have been done in the name of God. People of other faiths have been oppressed, persecuted and even murdered. Children have been molested, the weak minded have been lead about to and fro by men who use God to have their own way. It has not even stopped to this day and age.
    Is Religion fundamentally bad? Is it wrong to have faith in an all powerful Creator? It’s a decision we all must come to in our own time and our own way. If that spiritual need is present in your heart, or alternatively absent, then you should do whatever you feel is right for you.
    Stripping away the politics of the matter, a system of belief where people attempt to better themselves is not fundamentally bad. Can anyone really say teaching people to love one another is a bad thing? Tolerance, understanding and love are things we need more of in this world as well an ability to step into another’s shoes and see their perspective, whether or not we ultimately agree with it.
    Beliefs are an important aspect of a person’s character. Even more so in fiction. While I can know someone in real life and not be clear on their every defining character belief it would be death for a writer not to expound upon these qualities within the confines of a fictional tale. A character with no beliefs is hollow and inaccessible to the reader. 
    Often, writers don’t give characters actual religious beliefs. Either because they’re atheists themselves or perhaps they don’t feel like putting up with the hassle that will inevitably bring when a reader who disagrees with that point of view assimilates the material and protests. Primarily being a SF writer myself I haven’t ventured much into the territory myself, more often because it doesn’t seem like it really matters to the character in the circumstances presented.
    If a character believes in God–or doesn’t–it can be an effective story tool, assuming the writer had the competency to make it interesting and relevant in-context to the character’s world view or journey within the story. Simply portraying a character as a redneck hick because of his religious views, or contrarily as a godless liberal, is sloppy writing and demonstrates a distinct lack of understanding of the fundamentals of character building. People are not stereotypes and a character cannot afford to be either.

    To demonstrate, take Star Trek V. The main antagonist, Sybok, embarks on a journey to find the Vulcan paradise Sha-ka-ree. There, he hopes to meet God himself and learn the meaning of existence. It’s a terrible movie but does manage to effectively use a character’s religious drive to compel him toward his ultimate goal in life. Imagine what a well written story could do with something like that.
    Beliefs are important. No matter where a character gets them, they define their very existence. Whether from religion, a good parent or a role model, a character learns to be a good person. To trust in strangers, offer help to those in need and spread love around. Conversely, the same can be said for negative tendencies–a character learned to be cruel and inhumane, to take from the weak and spread misery. Our life experiences help define our beliefs and make us who we are.
    Of course, a character has to learn and grow in context of the tale a writer is telling too. If a character doesn’t learn or change from their experiences, what is the impetus of the story? Certainly, Star Wars is about the good guys versus the bad guys on the surface level. But on a deeper level, it’s also about Luke Skywalker moving from the role of a subservient adolescent to the role of a man and assuming all the responsibilities that being the last of the Jedi encompasses.
(I am aware, of course, that one can tell a story where the character learns nothing. But the more satisfying visceral stories always have some element of change to them. Something the reader/viewer can take from the tale, even if it does end up being a relatively straight forward concept such as maturity).
    Religion and belief can also be effective in a story when it comes to the examination of whether people are inherently good or evil. Are we born a certain way or do we learn behavior along the way? Perhaps it’s a mixture of the two? If we are born a certain way, inclined to good or cursed with evil, why is that so and can we do anything to fight nature. Are we free willed or destined to a certain path... If we are born neutral, why do men ever incline their nature toward doing bad? Is it malice or self interest? The possibilities are endless and interesting in a capable writer’s hands.
    The best tales are reflections of real life. Tales of good and evil. Of belief that motivated a character to make one of two choices along their life path. Whether they brought hope to the oppressed or pain and misery to others. Whether they can, or even should, stray from whatever path they have chosen and the end results of doing, or not doing, so.

DKA

Continuity Cop...

    Everyone likes their fiction to make sense, no matter what form it takes. For the most part, it does. Writer, artists, film makers, etc. go out of their way to make their plot and whatever points they’re trying to make understandable to their audience. Badly written fiction can fly in the face of this, as can projects rushed out before someone’s considered the idea carefully or if someone’s not properly edited it.
    There’s continuity that matters and continuity that doesn’t. Ridley Scott’s recent production Prometheus is set in the same universe as his seminal work, Alien. For the most part it works as it is but there is one glaring continuity issue that goes unexplained... in the original film, the Space Jockey as it’s known, is around twenty feet tall. The Engineers/Space Jockeys in Prometheus seem to all be around eight feet tall. This is necessary for them to be comparable to the humans in the film in the practical sense but the size discrepancy is never addressed in-story. Is it just a retcon–a this-is-how-it-is-now-deal-with-it situation or is there some reason they’re smaller that was cut from the theatrical edit (we know at least twenty minutes were trimmed from the film). We might assume that since they have a mastery of genetic engineering that there is some reason for it–but at best all we can do is make assumptions. Try to fill in the blanks with our own logic rather then know for certain what the film makers intended (if anything).
    The discrepancy in this instance matters to me. Even if it were a simple line or two, it should be addressed somewhere. Taken together, this compromises internal story logic within the two films overall. It’s comparable to having a character act completely different between two acts of a story with no explanation given. It stands out and it shouldn’t.
    There is also continuity that doesn’t matter. Sometimes it can be a challenge deciding which is which and it always falls to personal perspective on a given concept. 
    Certain movies I tend to ignore in my own universe. Nothing after Aliens exists, as far as I’m concerned (Alien 3 is basically a rehash of the first and it’s story is depressing. I do concede the film is well produced and visually pleasing but I hate the story. Alien Resurrection is pointless and the less said about the Alien vs. Predator movies, the better). I also don’t care for Die Hard 4, Star Trek Generations, Robocop 2 and 3 or the Abrams Star Trek film.
    A great example of when continuity doesn’t matter is the Transformers concept. Even from the get-go, the original Generation One concept contradicted itself. The comic went one way and the cartoon its own. The cartoon was more widely seen and established a lot of the beloved character types the fans know and love today (monotone Soundwave, dumb Grimlock, treacherous Starscream, etc.) The comic was better written generally though, and many of its stories still stand up well even today (while the cartoon plots are dated in many instances). Both featured essentially the same characters in the same overall set-up but didn’t follow each other’s stories or internal continuity (it would have been a difficult feat but not impossible).
    The UK comic, which was in effect a third continuity (featuring the US comic’s stories and also stories that happened between issues of that comic but which may or may not have counted to the US comic continuity) tried following a loose cartoon continuity by acknowledging the events of the 2005 based Transformers: The Movie and even having some of its character time travel back and forth to the present. It was a cool idea but it ended up making things even more complicated in the final analysis as things that happened before the movie chronologically had to be retconned out–theoretically–in order for the future-set movie to happen and still make sense as it originally did. The Transmasters UK fan club of the nineties tried to do a comic and set about explaining how the Generation One comic, Generation Two comic and TF:TM could have all occurred in the same continuity (in my opinion they were so focused on the continuity fixes it interfered with trying to tell a good story in their fan comics/text stories of the time).

    To me, Transformers exist in several sub-sets. Instead of trying to make it all work together, I accept that the G1 cartoon and comic were two different continuities. End of story. The Marvel UK comic was it’s own thing, which related to the US one but was not the same “Universe” per se. With the advent of the recent Regeneration One comic, I now see Marvel’s comic as Marvel US G1 comic; Marvel UK G1 comic; Marvel G2 comic, which continues the G1 US comic; and also, Regeneration One comic that continues the Marvel G1 US comic in a different continuity all together. It sounds confusing but trying to reconcile all this contradictory information so it can work together sensibly is more effort then it’s really worth.
    I feel like I can enjoy a story, regardless of whether or not it fits with everything that’s come before. IDW’s recent Autocracy comic tells a new origin for Optimus Prime and the start of his personal battle against Megatron. It’s a great tale and I accept it for what it is. But there have been other tellings of his origin and I like those too for different reasons. I can’t accept Autocracy as the one and only definitive telling. It’s a good story and a good interpretation but I can leave room for other versions, if they end up telling a worthy tale. I don’t have to try and figure out how it all fits together in my personal universe or shun one for another. And like with the earlier examples, if I hate something (Star Trek Generations) I can completely ignore it or pretend it happened in an alternate interpretation.        
    This even appears to be happening in official media at times. Notice that Lance Henriksen played Charles Weyland in Alien vs. Predator while Guy Pearce played Peter Weyland in Prometheus. It is possible that one is the ancestor of the other. But AvP was released in 2004 and was presumably more or less the present time. Prometheus has its Weyland giving a TED speech (in a viral video. Does that count as really happening in this instance?) that takes place in 2023. They could be related but AvP 2 implies that the Yutani Corporation already exists in the present as well. It seems like Prometheus is ignoring the AvP movies all together and doing its own thing (which is fine with me. I hated the AvP movies).
    Will the Before Watchmen comics count in comic fans minds as really happening? DC Comics is counting on them being accepted but many despise the very idea of their existence. Watchmen is beloved by many–if people despise the idea of prequels they don’t have to accept them as part of the “real” story if they chose not to. The reverse also applies.
    Taking this a step further, we define our reality through our perspective. We gather information from varied sources then act on it. We can decide what’s important in life, be it something as trivial as fiction or even more important matters (it seems like that’s what certain political parties excel in. Not always a good thing but true despite it). One man can see himself as outgoing while others interpret him as shy. A person can be seen as a jerk by some but a saint by others. Who’s right? Who’s wrong? Perhaps both are depending on the circumstances.
    As long as a story is good, I’ll like it. Continuity be damned. It may fit my idea of the “real” way it happened or it may not. In the end, it has to entertain me above all else. If it doesn’t then the rest is irrelevant.

DKA