No Blade of Grass (1970)
During the seventies, the growing environmental concerns of the general public were beginning to appear as plot themes in both mainstream and independent film making. The science fiction genre proved the most practical medium for this with films such as Zero Population growth and Soylent Green. Cornel Wilde’s No Blade of Grass takes a different approach using an ecological disaster as the premise for a survival movie. As with Wilde’s previous movies The Naked Prey and Beach Red, the message is delivered clearly and with all the subtlety of a kick in the groin. Yet the director’s honesty carries weight as he boldly depicts how the trappings of modern civilisation are quickly stripped away in the face of impending disaster. Perhaps it was this candour that upset sections of the viewing public, who didn’t wish to confront the fragility of their own society or dwell upon their own potential for violence. Certainly the film’s distributor MGM were sufficiently bothered by what they saw, that they re-edited the movie prior to release to tone down some of the stronger content.
During the seventies, the growing environmental concerns of the general public were beginning to appear as plot themes in both mainstream and independent film making. The science fiction genre proved the most practical medium for this with films such as Zero Population growth and Soylent Green. Cornel Wilde’s No Blade of Grass takes a different approach using an ecological disaster as the premise for a survival movie. As with Wilde’s previous movies The Naked Prey and Beach Red, the message is delivered clearly and with all the subtlety of a kick in the groin. Yet the director’s honesty carries weight as he boldly depicts how the trappings of modern civilisation are quickly stripped away in the face of impending disaster. Perhaps it was this candour that upset sections of the viewing public, who didn’t wish to confront the fragility of their own society or dwell upon their own potential for violence. Certainly the film’s distributor MGM were sufficiently bothered by what they saw, that they re-edited the movie prior to release to tone down some of the stronger content.
Based on John Christopher’s novel The Death of Grass published in 1956, No Blade of Grass starts with a new strain of virus that has devastated the rice crops in Asia causing a major regional famine. Soon a mutation appears in Europe infecting all types of grasses including all grain crops. The subsequent food shortages rapidly lead to social disorder, looting and possibly even cannibalism. The UK parliament start to consider desperate measures to cope with the situation. Architect and war veteran John Custance (Nigel Davenport) decides to flee London along with his wife Ann (Jean Wallace), young son Davey, teenage daughter Mary (Lyn Fredrick) and her scientist boyfriend Roger Burnham (John Hamill). They intend to travel to Westmorland in Cumbria where John's Brother, David (Patrick Holt), has a farm. Many trials and tribulations beset them as they travel north and the group quickly find themselves having to adapt both physically and morally to a rapidly changing and hostile world.
John Custance is an archetypal alpha male and embodiment of the British officer class. He is pragmatic and is quick to adapt to the deteriorating situation. But he has moral and ethical limits. So when he forms a curious relationship with a young man called Pirrie (Anthony May), it is for a very specific reason. Pirrie is a sociopath who will happily turn a gun on anyone that impedes the ongoing plan. John determines he’s a necessary tool who can do some tasks that he may balk at. This becomes very clear when we first meet Pirrie at the local gun shop where he works. He doesn’t hesitate to shoot his boss and throw in his lot with John Custance when he learns of his plan to leave London. It is this initial instance of lawlessness that marks the families rapid moral decline. Later, after having been robbed themselves, the Custance family kill a couple in a farmhouse who refuse to give them shelter. “We have to fight to live, do you understand that?” John tells his young son and his friend. “Like the Westerns?” one replies. “Yes, like that”.
No Blade of Grass is very heavy handed with its themes and moral pronunciations. At the start of the film, the affluent dine in a restaurant while a news report on TV shows the realities of the ongoing famines elsewhere in the world. There are montages of stock footage showing pollution and sick animals to hammer home the message that this is a self-inflicted catastrophe. But like the director’s other films there is an earnestness to the proceedings. Sadly this gets somewhat lost in along the way due to the film’s exploitation trappings. There are numerous shootouts between civilians and the Army as well as other acts of violence. And then there’s a gratuitous double rape. The movie even manages to include footage of a real childbirth before a climactic battle between our group of survivors and a motorcycle gang, complete with Viking helmets. Wilde also uses flashforwards as well as flashbacks, colour filters and slow motion to make his point. There is even a bleak but charming folk song performed by Roger Whittaker that plays over the start and end credits.
Violence is a reoccurring theme in all of Cornel Wilde’s films. As a director he often depicts that violence is key to survival and can galvanise people into action to forge something greater. However it can also lead to self-destruction and comes at a cost. John Custance learns that there is a price to pay for collaborating with the likes of Pirrie and that often manifests itself as human collateral damage. Social collapse and the realities of returning to a neo-feudal existence do not seem to be compatible with John’s old-world principles and ideals. His attempts to “preserve the heritage of man’s greatness” bear little fruit at the end of the film. He secures a safe place to live in the remote North of England but it takes a great deal of slaughter to do so. Furthermore the motley group of survivors he picks up along the way still harbour all the flaws of the old world, such as racial prejudice, greed and notions of exceptionalism. No Blade of Grass is a clumsy and somewhat lurid piece of film making. It certainly won’t be to everyone’s taste yet it is an interesting curiosity.
Gaming Addiction and the World Health Organisation
The World Health Organisation (WHO) is a specialised agency of the United Nations that is concerned with international public health. It was established on 7th April 1948 and is based in Geneva, Switzerland. As a body it has been instrumental in the eradication of smallpox. Its current priorities include communicable diseases, in particular HIV/AIDS, Ebola, malaria and tuberculosis; the mitigation of the effects of non-communicable diseases; sexual and reproductive health, development, and ageing; nutrition, food security and healthy eating; occupational health; substance abuse; and driving the development of reporting, publications, and networking. Recently, unlike other health institutions, WHO has chosen to address the thorny issue of gaming addiction; a condition that is still heavily disputed and lacks a universally agreed definition.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) is a specialised agency of the United Nations that is concerned with international public health. It was established on 7th April 1948 and is based in Geneva, Switzerland. As a body it has been instrumental in the eradication of smallpox. Its current priorities include communicable diseases, in particular HIV/AIDS, Ebola, malaria and tuberculosis; the mitigation of the effects of non-communicable diseases; sexual and reproductive health, development, and ageing; nutrition, food security and healthy eating; occupational health; substance abuse; and driving the development of reporting, publications, and networking. Recently, unlike other health institutions, WHO has chosen to address the thorny issue of gaming addiction; a condition that is still heavily disputed and lacks a universally agreed definition.
WHO formally listed gaming addiction as a mental health condition in May 2019. According to their criteria based upon extensive research, gaming addiction it as a pattern of persistent or recurrent gaming behaviour so severe that it takes "precedence over other life interests". This definition, as stipulated by WHO, correlates with several other countries that have already identified this addiction as a major health issue. There are already private addiction clinics that “treat” this condition and the actions of WHO have certainly brought this particular health issue to the wider public’s attention. By adding gaming addiction to the latest version of the International Classification of Diseases, it removes some of the incredulity that the condition has met from certain health bodies.
The WHO guide contains codes for diseases, signs and symptoms and is used by doctors and researchers worldwide to track and diagnose disease. The guide suggests that abnormal gaming behaviour should be in evidence over a period of at least 12 months "for a diagnosis to be assigned" but has stipulated that period might be shortened "if symptoms are severe". At present the symptoms for gaming addiction include impaired control over gaming (frequency, intensity, duration), increased priority given to gaming and continuation or escalation of gaming despite negative consequences. Some healthcare professionals have welcomed the decision to recognise the condition. Dr Richard Graham, lead technology addiction specialist at the Nightingale Hospital in London said “It is significant because it creates the opportunity for more specialised services. It puts it on the map as something to take seriously”. However, he also stated that he would have sympathy for those who do not think the condition should be medicalised because he did see scope for misdiagnosis at present. "It could lead to confused parents whose children are just enthusiastic gamers."
It is this point that seems to be the biggest stumbling block for the universal acceptance of a medical condition of this nature. How exactly do you verify that the alleged addiction is actually taking up all available “neurological real-estate” and dominating thinking and becoming a total preoccupation for the patient? Because fandom per se can at time mirror these qualities. Subsequently, many psychiatrists currently refer to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), in which internet gaming disorder is listed as a "condition for further study", meaning it is not officially recognised. Because of this reasoning and prevailing attitude, it is clear that WHO may find their perspective challenged for the present. However, irrespective of the medical and semantical disputes, the field of game related addiction is still being scrutinised around the world. South Korea has introduced a legislation banning access for children under 16 from online games between midnight and 6:00 AM although effectively enforcing such regulation is difficult.
There has also been a degree of pushback from those in the video games development and retail industry. Naturally, as interested parties they are concerned about misdiagnosis and scope for ill-conceived legislation that may be rushed to address public concerns and tabloid campaigning. The Entertainment Software Association (ESA) trade group released a statement downplaying the WHO's concerns about addiction to video games and stated "Just like avid sports fans and consumers of all forms of engaging entertainment, gamers are passionate and dedicated with their time. Having captivated gamers for more than four decades, more than 2 billion people around the world enjoy video games. The World Health Organisation knows that common sense and objective research prove video games are not addictive. And, putting that official label on them recklessly trivialises real mental health issues like depression and social anxiety disorder, which deserve treatment and the full attention of the medical community. We strongly encourage the WHO to reverse direction on its proposed action."
It is clear that the video game industry is concerned about regulation and the potential impact the public perception of gaming addiction may have on sales. The problem lies in how to reconcile the positions of both WHO and bodies such as ESA. Both groups have genuine concerns. However, self-regulation and consumer concerns can often conflict with corporate interests and we have seen in the past several industries that do have harmful side effects fight tooth and nail to refute such claims. There is also the issue of once a universal definition for gaming addiction has been established, exactly what needs to be done to address the matter. So far, the most practical ideas are based around labelling and providing health warnings both on physical media, its packaging, as well as via digital platforms. Automated messages based upon time spent in-game as well as FAQs on logon screens are other possible avenues. Raising public awareness through labelling and media campaigns has proven beneficial with other health issues such as diet and alcohol consumption.
Another concern regarding gaming addiction is the creation of yet another “label” that can be either misdiagnosed, appropriated incorrectly or used pejoratively by the tabloid press. The symptoms of gaming addiction according to the WHO as they currently stand, could be ascribed to many children. Yet there are those who would argue such behaviour may be down to poor parenting which is theoretically a lot easier to correct. Using handheld devices and consoles as surrogate babysitters is no different from using the TV thirty years ago. There is also the possibility that gaming addiction could become the new “darling” of compensation culture and personal accident claims. I don’t think it is outside the realm of possibility that we could see a substantial class action against a game major publisher at some point. Then of course there is a risk that the average gamer could find themselves tarnished by fear and prejudice associated with gaming addiction, regardless of whether they personally are or not. Many gamers already do not include gaming as a hobby or pastime of their CV, for exactly that reason. It isn’t too much of a stretch to imagine certain quarters of the press trying to label all gamers as potential addicts and an employment risk.
Irrespective of whether you personally agree with the definition of gaming addiction as stated by WHO, I believe that the very fact that they’ve tried to address the issue is a positive thing and that there will now be a lot more research into the condition. In the fullness of time, we may finally arrive at an agreed and succinct set of criteria or we may find the complete opposite is true. That gaming addiction ultimately stems from an addictive personality per se, and that playing games is merely a conduit. Under such circumstance, addiction may occur via any leisure activity, thus exonerating gaming. Either way it is important that such matters are properly understood so appropriate treatments can be established. Also, fully understanding the situation means that the industry can work to accommodate addiction, rather than ignore it or exploit it directly. We may see some governments implement impractical knee-jerk rules and regulations, but we may also see the matter tackled in a mature and measured way by more progressive administrations.
Men in Black: International (2019)
I was very surprised when I saw a trailer for a fourth instalment on the MiB franchise, based on Lowell Cunningham’s 1990 comic book series about secret government agents battling alien infiltration of earth. The third movie from 2012 managed to keep its head above water despite a very troubled production. At the time of its release, I like everyone else, pretty much thought that the series had run its course. Yet we live in the age of belated sequels as well as hard and soft reboots. And although Will Smith’s star may well be waning, Chris Hemsworth is still box office gold. Hence, we saw the release of Men in Black: International this summer. The basic concept of the franchise remains the same but this time the action begins in the London Office and then takes a more international journey with such locations as Marrakesh and Naples. Emma Thompson returns as Agent O and Liam Neeson joins the cast as agent High T.
I was very surprised when I saw a trailer for a fourth instalment on the MiB franchise, based on Lowell Cunningham’s 1990 comic book series about secret government agents battling alien infiltration of earth. The third movie from 2012 managed to keep its head above water despite a very troubled production. At the time of its release, I like everyone else, pretty much thought that the series had run its course. Yet we live in the age of belated sequels as well as hard and soft reboots. And although Will Smith’s star may well be waning, Chris Hemsworth is still box office gold. Hence, we saw the release of Men in Black: International this summer. The basic concept of the franchise remains the same but this time the action begins in the London Office and then takes a more international journey with such locations as Marrakesh and Naples. Emma Thompson returns as Agent O and Liam Neeson joins the cast as agent High T.
After encountering aliens and avoiding having her memory wiped by MiB, Molly Wright (Tessa Thompson) spends years trying to track down the organisation. After infiltrating New York headquarters she is surprisingly given probationary agent status and teamed with Agent H (Chris Hemsworth) The pair find themselves assigned to London, when a duo of shape-shifting intergalactic assassins, known as the Twins, kill a member of alien royalty. Investigations uncovers a missing crystal that may well be a devastating super-weapon of mass destruction. However, it would appear that the Twins may be getting information from within MiB, allowing them to stay one step ahead and avoid capture. Is there a well-placed mole in their midst? Cue copious amounts of chases, CGI driven set pieces and noise. Lots of noise.
Men in Black: International earnestly tries to change the mix and embrace change. Tessa Thompson’s addition to the cast breaks the gender stereotype of the MiB. The screenplay by Arthur Marcum and Matthew Holloway (Iron Man, Punisher: War Zone) explores the idea of aliens as migrants, rather than hostile invaders by default. Yet this interesting concept goes nowhere and the film soon abandons it to focus on the nuts and bolts of its remit. Equally Tessa Thompson who gave an accomplished performance in Boots Riley’s satire Sorry to Bother You, is hardly given anything of note to do. Her character arc follows a similar path to that of Eggsy in Kingsman: The Secret Service. Rafe Spall does his best with a supporting role as the nerdy agent H, sparring with alpha male Hemsworth to provide some comic relief. Everything about Men in Black: International is polished but perfunctory. It has all the ingredients but somehow lacks any originality or vital spark.
I was expecting Chris Hemsworth to carry this movie but all the enthusiasm and spirit that he’s previously shown in the Avengers movies and in the Ghostbusters remake is conspicuously absent. And then there is the spectre of Liam Neeson who fell from grace after making ill-conceived comments at a press conference just prior to the films release. Although I am happy to separate the film from the man, others may not. Overall Men in Black: International is a superfluous entry into the series. It is watchable and can provide a modicum of entertainment if you have some time to kill. But it really has little of note to offer and it doesn’t leave much of an impression. Where viewers may be able to recollect keys moments from the previous instalment with Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones, I doubt they’ll be able to do the same within a few days of watching Men in Black: International.
Men in Black III (2012)
The original Men in Black movie hit our screens back in 1997. It was a box office success and was therefore followed by a mediocre sequel in 2002. It took a decade before we got a third instalment in the franchise. However, the popularity of the two lead actors contributed greatly to the success of this series and so despite well documented production problems Men in Black III was released in 2012. However, the delay between movies did have consequences. Will Smith, despite being an Oscar winner and box office star, had lost his way during this time and was not as popular with audiences. Men in Black III was a timely opportunity to reconnect with his core fans. So to ensure that the film hit all the required beats and stand a better chance of being a success, the Columbia Pictures brought back previous director Barry Sonnenfeld, in hopes of warding off the Hollywood curse of third movie instalments.
The original Men in Black movie hit our screens back in 1997. It was a box office success and was therefore followed by a mediocre sequel in 2002. It took a decade before we got a third instalment in the franchise. However, the popularity of the two lead actors contributed greatly to the success of this series and so despite well documented production problems Men in Black III was released in 2012. However, the delay between movies did have consequences. Will Smith, despite being an Oscar winner and box office star, had lost his way during this time and was not as popular with audiences. Men in Black III was a timely opportunity to reconnect with his core fans. So to ensure that the film hit all the required beats and stand a better chance of being a success, the Columbia Pictures brought back previous director Barry Sonnenfeld, in hopes of warding off the Hollywood curse of third movie instalments.
So how well does this third movie fair? Well the basic formula remain the same. Tommy Lee Jones’ Agent K is dry, irascible and set ups the jokes and Smith’s Agent J provides the pithy punchlines. This time round the plot follows intergalactic criminal Boris the Animal (Jemaine Clement) who escapes from a maximum-security facility and seeks revenge on his arch enemy, Agent K. Using that cinematic get out of jail card, time travel, Boris messes with the present, thus eliminating Tommy Lee Jones from the current timeline. This forces Agent J heading to travel back to the sixties and thus interact with an earlier incarnation of K (Josh Brolin) in an attempt to restore history. This leads to an enjoyable re-iteration of the MiB universe, viewed through the social prism of the 1969.
Now these ideas are all very good on paper, but it soon becomes self-evident that Men in Black III had indeed the production and script problems, throughout the course of its development. The pacing is a little off at times and the focus of the narrative is inconsistent. We get a story that offers many good opportunities and then spends time developing the least of them. However, it is the constant barrage of background details, sight gags, witty asides and pop culture references that save the proceedings. Both in the present and in 1969. That and the fact that although we are deprived of Tommy Lee Jones (he is not in the movie as long as you may think), we are compensated by a note perfect replacement in Josh Brolin. Emma Thompson is as always eminently watchable as Agent O.
Men in Black III is by no means a masterpiece and shows signs of studio interference. But due to the competence of all those involved it manages to rise above its flaws and is a deliver an entertaining and enjoyable experiences. The production quality is still top notch. The effects work is very good and once gain the movie showcases the talents of the great Rick Baker, although some of his remarkable physical effects work was replaced at the last moment with digital alternatives. The dependable charm and charisma of the two leads along with the multiple layers of content are sufficient compensation for the movie’s plot holes and inconsistencies. The fashionable use of the sixties as a setting also gives this third movie a shot in the arm. I don't think this is destined to be considered the best in the franchise but it is by no means the worst.
Real Neat Blogger Awards
I got tagged by fellow blogger, Magimos, as part of the Real Neat Blogger Awards. Now I’m not entirely sure what that is. It’s one of those things where you get asked a bunch of questions, then get to set some yourself and then tag other people to answer them. I certainly don’t mind answering questions. I’ve already written in previous posts how I’m a sucker for internet surveys. But I’m not keen on tagging people. It’s a little invasive for my liking and I’m a stickler for etiquette. By all means ask people if they’d like to participate but never inflict things on people without consent. To me it’s the same as random people cold calling and trying to sell you stuff. Or religious types, knocking on your front door and asking if you’d like to join a Cthulhu cult. So I’ll just write my responses to Magimos questions and then write a few questions of my own, which I’ll leave for other to reflect upon and answer if they see fit.
I got tagged by fellow blogger, Magimos, as part of the Real Neat Blogger Awards. Now I’m not entirely sure what that is. It’s one of those things where you get asked a bunch of questions, then get to set some yourself and then tag other people to answer them. I certainly don’t mind answering questions. I’ve already written in previous posts how I’m a sucker for internet surveys. But I’m not keen on tagging people. It’s a little invasive for my liking and I’m a stickler for etiquette. By all means ask people if they’d like to participate but never inflict things on people without consent. To me it’s the same as random people cold calling and trying to sell you stuff. Or religious types, knocking on your front door and asking if you’d like to join a Cthulhu cult. So I’ll just write my responses to Magimos questions and then write a few questions of my own, which I’ll leave for other to reflect upon and answer if they see fit.
Which one of your posts was the most fun to write? Why? I tend to enjoy writing all of my posts, although that said, sometimes when I’m researching an in-depth film review, I do get a strong sense of satisfaction. I like detail and supporting anecdotes. When writing longform posts about gaming, I enjoy a well-constructed argument that has supporting points and evidence. And as I write initially for myself, I have a tendency to laugh at my own jokes. Hence, I often include all sorts of superfluous pop culture references mainly because they make me smile. As for a favourite post that was most fun to write, I don’t believe I have one yet. May be that is to come.
Do you like milk and sugar in your tea or coffee? I spent nearly a decade working short term contracts and being self-employed. One of the things I quickly learned when regularly attending new work environments, was not to expect any facilities such as a fridge or access to a kitchen. So I trained myself to drink black coffee and to use sweeteners. I would often bring bottled water, instant coffee, a cup and “Sweetex”. An adequate cup of coffee could then be made with a microwave. If the latter was lacking on a lengthy contract, I’d buy one and added it to my expenses. However, now that I have stopped working, I enjoy drinking quality coffee with brown sugar. Oddly, despite being British I tend not to drink tea.
Do you prefer Dogs or Cats? In principle I like both cats and dogs. Pets bring immense joy to people and can be invaluable companions. As a child our family had cats. Mrs P was the opposite and favoured dogs. However, due to a range of factors we have not had pets since then. We have lived in premises where pets were not allowed and have held jobs where accommodating a pet hasn’t been practical. We have reconsidered the situation again recently but the big reason not to have a pet this time is personal health. However, my son has just acquired a kitten, so I can enjoy that by proxy.
What Harry Potter house are you in? (I’m a hufflepuff btw!) Bauhaus? Shit House? The Last House on the Left? Joking aside. I’d probably be in Slytherin just to be different. Bad guys always have more fun.
What’s the weirdest thing you’ve ever eaten? Baby Octopus. Pickled.
The God of Art has elected you to help him with a difficult question. You have to either delete one of your favourite shows/movies/games for ever or create another sequel/part/etc. of your least favourite show/movie/game! What do you do and what do you choose? I know this question was made in good faith, intended to be a fun thought experiment. However, I fundamentally dislike the concept that underpins it. IE The elimination of historical information. There are many aspects or our culture, be they events, concepts or social trends that can be retrospectively deemed problematic by contemporary standards. You cannot simply paint them out of existence and it is extremely dangerous to even countenance such things. The past has to be viewed within context. Also with regard to this question, I’m not too keen on deities of any kind. Except may be Cthulhu (as I’ve mentioned him twice now). So bearing all this in mind, it makes it very hard for me to address the question. Although the Steve Martin remakes of The Pink Panther are utter shite.
What’s your favourite (movie/show/game) antagonist? This is an interesting question because when you think about it, antagonists tend to be far more complex and engaging characters, or at least they are in well written video games, movies and TV shows. So I could go for some cerebral response like Colonel Kurtz (Marlon Brando) in Apocalypse Now. Or how about the actor Michael Ironside? He’s played numerous charismatic bad guys throughout his career. But upon mature reflection, I prefer someone more matter of fact like Jason Vorhees from the Friday the 13th franchise. He’s uncomplicated and very consistent. Oh and let’s give the late great Alan Rickman a mention, as The Sheriff of Nottingham in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. He gives a wonderfully theatrical performance and has some killer dialogue.
My questions: Here are my questions that I have set. Some are serious, and others are light-hearted. If anyone sees fit to answer them, do let me know as I’d be interested in reading them.
1. How do you explain your passion for games to those who don't "get it"?
2. Do you have faith in your country’s political institutions?
3. Do you regret anything that you've written or said on a podcast?
4. Do you find common place social conventions, such as going for a drink after work, or inviting colleagues’ round to dinner, a pleasure or a chore? (Feel free to replace examples with something more appropriate to you if required).
5. If you played games as a child, did your parents place any restrictions upon your pastime?
6. You are standing behind someone who is unaware of your presence. Armed only with a seven-inch filleting knife, what is the most efficient way to kill them?
7. Do you consider video game ratings to be important?
8. Do you ever find that your own personal values, principles and ethics put at odds with the wider gaming community?
9. Share a valuable lesson about life that you've learnt the hard way.
10. Is there a blogger or podcaster who has quit the scene or retired that you would like to see make a return?
A Month in Gaming
Last month panned out pretty much as I expected. Blaugust and writing daily blog posts took up a fair amount of my leisure time. And then I lost a few days due real-life social activities. What gaming time I had was focused mainly on The Elder Scrolls Online. I’m sorry to say that I’ve ground to a halt in The Lord of the Rings Online. My level 113 Guardian remains at the Black Gates and for the present I simply do not feel disposed towards working my way through Mordor again, which I did just a year ago on my primary character. I have undertaken a few quests with my level cap Lore-master and will endeavour in the weeks ahead to at least complete the Vales of Anduin region. LOTRO at present doesn’t have much of a hold on me, although I may well become more enthusiastic once the next expansion is formerly announced.
Last month panned out pretty much as I expected. Blaugust and writing daily blog posts took up a fair amount of my leisure time. And then I lost a few days due real-life social activities. What gaming time I had was focused mainly on The Elder Scrolls Online. I’m sorry to say that I’ve ground to a halt in The Lord of the Rings Online. My level 113 Guardian remains at the Black Gates and for the present I simply do not feel disposed towards working my way through Mordor again, which I did just a year ago on my primary character. I have undertaken a few quests with my level cap Lore-master and will endeavour in the weeks ahead to at least complete the Vales of Anduin region. LOTRO at present doesn’t have much of a hold on me, although I may well become more enthusiastic once the next expansion is formerly announced.
At present ESO is more than keeping me busy. I’m enjoying the Ebonheart Pact main story and have also experimented with my Necromancers skills. I currently have a Magicka build that gets things done and I’m rather pleased that I figured it out for myself. The game is filled with content, engaging zones along with plenty of other players. Furthermore, unlike other MMOs, ESO has accessible group content. I tend to group with two friends and we can tackle delves and even group bosses that can be found in each zone. Then of course there are the Dolmen. ESO is the only MMO that I play where doing something collectively is not an uphill struggle. You form your group, travel to where the action is and get on with it. There are no complexities involved, be they cutscenes or copious amounts of bestowal dialogue. I even got a free mount and non-combat pet for being a Twitch prime customer!
Looking ahead to this month, I have high expectations for the new story mission, Awakening, coming to Star Trek Online on Tuesday 10th of September. I have been critical of late of the way Cryptic seems to be taking a somewhat scattershot approach to modernising the game but new narrative content is new narrative content. The question remains will the new story along with patrols, events and sundry system changes be enough to keep me regularly engaged with STO? I’m not so sure. I must admit I’ve be considering dusting off an old game such as Starfleet Academy or even give the mobile game Star Trek: Fleet Command a try. Although the former is more likely as I bought this classic recently from Good Old Games for a ridiculously cheap rice. Although Star Trek: Fleet Command looks intriguing, I’ve already been burned by the other mobile game Star Trek Timelines. I really enjoyed the concept and the way the missions panned out after you selected your away team. But is had a typical mobile game business model and eventually you hit a brick wall and have to start spending money to progress.
I may also trawl though my back catalogue of games on Steam, the Epic Store, Origins and Uplay and see if there’s anything that immediately takes my fancy. I recently managed to fit in the single player game Mafia. Therefore, I see no reason why I can’t do that again. I certainly feel it will provide some variety to this column which fast seems to be becoming “MMO corner”. Someone mentioned point and click games recently on the Blaugust Discord Server and I’ve suddenly become very nostalgic for the genre. I have keys for the Syberia trilogy somewhere among my game collection. This franchise has quite a following and the games are critically acclaimed. Perhaps I should give them a go. Or maybe I’ll dust off one of the earlier Sherlock Holmes games from Frogwares. Either way both would be interesting experiments as well as providing something to write about.
Thoughts on Blogging Part 10
The end of Blaugust Festival of Blogging 2019 presents the perfect opportunity to write another entry in my “Thoughts on Blogging” series. According to the Blaugust schedule this is the “lessoned learned week”, although I’m not too keen on that specific phrase. It sounds too much like the sort of bogus, sombre platitudes that politicians trot out in the wake of some national tragedy. But such is the nature of semantics and such is the curious fashion in which my mind works. So rather than worry of the wording, I’ll just simply reflect upon the past month and consider what it means for my writing, both present and future. Because I do believe that over the last month, I have had a minor epiphany with regard to my relationship with blogging.
“Dear Sir, please send fish. Best wishes, Binky”
The end of Blaugust Festival of Blogging 2019 presents the perfect opportunity to write another entry in my “Thoughts on Blogging” series. According to the Blaugust schedule this is the “lessoned learned week”, although I’m not too keen on that specific phrase. It sounds too much like the sort of bogus, sombre platitudes that politicians trot out in the wake of some national tragedy. But such is the nature of semantics and such is the curious fashion in which my mind works. So rather than worry of the wording, I’ll just simply reflect upon the past month and consider what it means for my writing, both present and future. Because I do believe that over the last month, I have had a minor epiphany with regard to my relationship with blogging.
A month and half ago, I was feeling unmotivated and not particularly disposed towards writing on a regular basis. Yes, I have had demands on my time and a degree of stress brought about by real world issues. But that’s life. There’s always something going down. And such negative mindsets often end up becoming self-fulfilling prophecy. However, along comes Blaugust offering a shot in the arm (or a kick in the butt), as it always does. I find that groups are better at fostering a sense of enthusiasm and momentum for these sorts of activities. So I got busy writing. I composed a few posts that offered advice in the hope that my experience may be of use to others. I also began writing about the things I enjoy again. Only this time it was mainly due to passion, rather than a sense of obligation. I stayed the course and felt good doing it.
“Good for you”…
Blaugust has confirmed a few suspicions I’ve harboured about my own style of writing. I don’t do brevity. If a point is complex then take as much time necessary to explain it properly. Write what you believe to be right, not what you think people want to hear. If you find yourself on the wrong side of a prevailing consensus, then so be it. In fact enjoy the perspective. Also, stop wasting your time waiting for that article you’ve always wanted to read, that says that thing that you passionately believe. Just go write it yourself and be done. Blaugust has also once again proven that I work better to a plan and I need to be organised. Time can be found to do things, if you deem them important enough. I believe Scotty said something like this and who am I to contradict the greatest engineer in fiction?
“Bullshit, Mr Han Man”
So what next? Well I intend to keep writing. Regularly. I see no reason why I can’t continue as I have throughout August. There’s always a film to review or an article over on Massively Overpowered that is wrong and needs to be rebutted (I jest of course. Or do I?). I’m also going to dust off my notes and get back on track with writing my book. The one that is planned, researched and just needs writing. And I believe that a podcast is due. So I’m going to send out emails invites to pressgang some guests and set a recording date. Life is too short and I’m getting old and need to stop being excessively diplomatic and accommodating to other people. To paraphrase a quote from Enter the Dragon “we forge ourselves in the fire of our will”. So unless I hear cries of “Bullshit, Mr Han Man”, I’m just going to crack on and do my thing. Which is write (with emotional content).
More Cult Movie Soundtracks
A few years ago, I wrote a post about cult movie soundtracks and how many of these movies are often blessed with a high quality score from an established composer. The subject came up again recently when I was visiting the British Film Institute with friends, and several other examples were discussed. Hence, I thought it would be prudent to write a follow up post with another selection of material, as it continues to amaze me how often the most appalling films can still have outstanding soundtracks. With this idea in mind I've collated five films that are for various reasons are labelled “cult” and have suffered the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” over the years. All have scores of interests and note, though for different reasons. I have chosen a track from each soundtrack which I think highlights the musical excellence and integrity of the composers involved. The genres are varied as are the musical styles and nuances of each piece. All clearly demonstrate how a well-conceived score can embellish and enhance a movie, effectively becoming a character in its own right.
A few years ago, I wrote a post about cult movie soundtracks and how many of these movies are often blessed with a high quality score from an established composer. The subject came up again recently when I was visiting the British Film Institute with friends, and several other examples were discussed. Hence, I thought it would be prudent to write a follow up post with another selection of material, as it continues to amaze me how often the most appalling films can still have outstanding soundtracks. With this idea in mind I've collated five films that are for various reasons are labelled “cult” and have suffered the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” over the years. All have scores of interests and note, though for different reasons. I have chosen a track from each soundtrack which I think highlights the musical excellence and integrity of the composers involved. The genres are varied as are the musical styles and nuances of each piece. All clearly demonstrate how a well-conceived score can embellish and enhance a movie, effectively becoming a character in its own right.
I've always found it paradoxical that a movie such as Ruggero Deodato's notorious Cannibal Holocaust (1980), features such a haunting score by Riz Ortolani. I won't debate the merits of Cannibal Holocaust here but it’s a very morally ambiguous and controversial piece of cinema. It’s certainly not for those who are easily shocked. Yet its soundtrack underpins the narrative superbly. The opening theme, set against aerial shots of the Amazon rain forest, features a very gentle and haunting refrain. You would think such a piece would be more at home in a romantic drama or even a late seventies commercial. However, it is further repeated at various times during the film, often juxtaposed against scenes of abject barbarity.
Solomon Kane (2009), based on Robert E. Howard’s fictional "dour English Puritan and redresser of wrongs", is an underrated action horror movie. It manages to bely its modest production values to blend atmospheric European locations with a strong cast. The action is robust and James Purefoy carries the story forward and compensates for some of the film’s logistical failings. The tone and spirit of the proceedings is very much in the idiom of Hammer movies such as Captain Kronos. The score by German composer Klaus Badelt is grandiose and focuses on the central character of Kane. The main theme is used with suitable variations to reflect both the bombastic fights sequences and the moments of quiet religious reflection.
How can I possibly write about cult, obscure and trash movie soundtracks without at least one piece by the legendary Ennio Morricone. The maestro seems to have a knack of writing quality material for some awful films. Hundra (1984) is an Italian-Spanish fantasy film co-written and directed by Matt Cimber and starring Laurene Landon. It’s a kind of female Conaneque, sword and sorcery movie with a bogus feminist agenda. Beneath a wafer-thin veneer of gender politics is a generic exploitation movie. The actions scenes are weak, the story is formulaic and the performances are negligible due to the ADR inherent in such international co-productions. Yet the Morricone score stands out. Hundra’s main theme is simple and effective and there’s a chase scene with a whimsical accompaniment.
Lucio Fulci’s first instalment of his “Gates of Hell” trilogy is an atmospheric, off kilter horror outing. City of the Living Dead (1980) features his hallmark excessive gore but unlike his previous movie Zombie 2, the linear narrative is replace with a more dream like story line. Many scenes are visually striking but the plot doesn’t really make logical sense. However there are sufficient maggots raining from the ceiling and actors vomiting up their intestines to keep the audience focused elsewhere. The soundtrack by Italian composer Fabio Frizzi is creepy and uniquely European. The scene in the crypt at the climax of the movie has a great cue that plays as zombies stagger around burning.
If you are not familiar with Michael Mann’s The Keep (1983), then it’s difficult to know where to start. The film is based upon a gothic horror novel by F. Paul Wilson about a group on German soldiers based in a Romanian fortress during World War II, who are picked off one by one by a vampire like creature. Mann’s second feature film took this tale and adapted it into a curious science fiction horror movie. The production was “difficult”, ran over budget and studio executives panicked at the kind of experimental film making that ensued. The movie was taken away from the director, re-edited and released in a very truncated form. It failed at the box office and Mann has subsequently disowned it. It boasts a sophisticated soundtrack by German electronic music band Tangerine Dream. Like the film itself, the score just has to be experienced and digested to be fully appreciated. Similarly, the score has had a troubled life and there has never been an official release that contains all music used. But what remains is intriguing even when listened to outside of the context of the film itself.
Video Game Avatars and Our Relationship with Them
Blaugust founder Belghast tweeted the following question last night along. “There is a discussion happening elsewhere so I'm curious. For me all of my game characters are just cosmetic shells for the digital "me". Getting the impression I am deeply in the minority here”. Obviously, he’d had encountered at interesting debate about our relationship with the characters we create and utilise to play video games and wanted to explore it further. So I and several others tweeted back our thoughts on the matter, which made for interesting reading. However, even as I was doing so, it became apparent that such a subject needed a blog post for an adequate response. It’s a big subject. Fellow bloggers Rakuno and Shadowz have already posted their take on this weighty topic. I suspect that this will be a very popular subject to explore because it is very personal and subjective.
Blaugust founder Belghast tweeted the following question last night along. “There is a discussion happening elsewhere so I'm curious. For me all of my game characters are just cosmetic shells for the digital "me". Getting the impression I am deeply in the minority here”. Obviously, he’d had encountered at interesting debate about our relationship with the characters we create and utilise to play video games and wanted to explore it further. So I and several others tweeted back our thoughts on the matter, which made for interesting reading. However, even as I was doing so, it became apparent that such a subject needed a blog post for an adequate response. It’s a big subject. Fellow bloggers Rakuno and Shadowz have already posted their take on this weighty topic. I suspect that this will be a very popular subject to explore because it is very personal and subjective.
I mainly play games from the RPG and MMORPG genre for their narratives. I like lore rich stories, especially those that are linked to licensed intellectual properties. What games such as The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, The Lord of the Rings Online and The Elder Scrolls online offer me is the opportunity to experience a story and have a degree of influence over the outcome. The games are an enhanced form of reading. Instead of visualising realms and characters in my mind, I get to see them first-hand and move freely among them. They speak to me and react to my choices (within the confines of the game). My avatar is the means through which I navigate this environment. Although I may spend time creating a character, giving thought to their appearance and their name, ultimately, they are merely a conduit. A means to experience the story. I do not see them as an extension of myself or imbued with elements of my personality. They have no true agency. Games are not sufficiently sophisticated enough at present, that we can supply our own responses to questions and the NPCs act on them.
Now I’m sure for gamers who embrace roleplay, their relationship with their MMO character is much more complex. Your avatar becomes more than just a three-dimensional, mobile interface with the story. It becomes a part that needs to be acted. A separate dramatic entity. It may be similar to yourself with regard to ethics and morality. But roleplay also offers the scope to explore personalities that are contrary to your own. Then there are those players who like to create a backstory for their character. They may reflect traits that the player does not have themselves. Their avatar may also be radically different from the player. There is the option to play as a different ethnicity or gender. Thus the character can provide both a sense of change as well as empowerment. I can certainly see the appeal of this and how it enhances the escapism that games can offer. However, I am not a trained psychologist so I won’t speculate too much in matters that I’m not qualified to do so. I will leave it to others to discuss projection and such concepts as the “imago”.
Although character creation in an MMO is restricted by the parameters of the game, it is still an act of creation, subject to our personal preferences. We further stamp our likes and dislikes upon it by giving it a name. Names are an intrinsic aspect of identity. Yet the real deciding factor is how we relate to our avatars. Is it merely a functional tool to experience the game or is it a facet of our self? When you play an RPG or MMO are you merely passively observing the narrative or do you see yourself as a protagonist in a play? A method actor who reacts to NPC interactions as if they were as tangible as a real-world experience? I think this is the core of the distinction. Naturally, those who approach gaming with the latter in mind are going to have a far more complex relationship with their avatar. Where gamers who favour the former approach will see things in more practical terms. Like a “bicycle that you are fond of” as Rakuno stated. The emotional connection comes from the fact it facilitated such enjoyable experiences.
I suspect as video games advance and MMOs incorporate ever better AI technology, we may well find ourselves playing games with more complex forms of communication and interaction. At that point your character may well cease to be just a factotum and become something more nuanced. Imagine an MMO where if you behaved poorly, wantonly destroying things and attacking NPCs, the game adapted to your virtual personality. What if it wasn’t just your actions in game that determined this but the way you spoke and the manner in which your character conducted themselves. I suspect such player/character relationships would be far more complex and an absolute field day for “Shrinks”. But for the present, my Argonian Necromancer, Jubal the Questionable, in The Elder Scrolls Online is simply an avatar in the traditional gaming sense. There’s not that much of me there, apart from my love of words and writing which accounts for the dramatic name. Plus I don’t have a tail or a penchant for staying moist.
Staying Motivated
According to the Blaugust Festival of Blogging timetable, the designated writing prompt for week number five is titled “Staying Motivated”. Because at some point, all content creators will find themselves either too tired, unwilling or simply unable to produce any new material. You may well have the time and resources to do so but lack inspiration to actually apply yourself. It’s a perennial question for anyone who writes, live streams or produces videos and podcasts. Like most problems of this nature which are dependent upon personal and subjective factors, it does not have a standard or easy answer. Staying motivated is a personal battle that you have fight by yourself, in your own way. If you find a solution that works for you there’s no guarantee that it will be applicable to others. However, there are some practical steps that can be universally taken that can contribute to staying motivated.
Motivation is a psychological concept and not an actual location
According to the Blaugust Festival of Blogging timetable, the designated writing prompt for week number five is titled “Staying Motivated”. Because at some point, all content creators will find themselves either too tired, unwilling or simply unable to produce any new material. You may well have the time and resources to do so but lack inspiration to actually apply yourself. It’s a perennial question for anyone who writes, live streams or produces videos and podcasts. Like most problems of this nature which are dependent upon personal and subjective factors, it does not have a standard or easy answer. Staying motivated is a personal battle that you have fight by yourself, in your own way. If you find a solution that works for you there’s no guarantee that it will be applicable to others. However, there are some practical steps that can be universally taken that can contribute to staying motivated.
If you truly are just writing for yourself, then there is no requirement for any sort of schedule. It also means the question of motivation is greatly mitigated. But if you do write to interact with your audience, then a schedule is a useful thing for both parties. Therefore set a schedule that you know you can sustain. Be honest and realistic with yourself. If it’s just one post a week, so be it. At least everyone then knows where they stand. Once you’ve got a clear idea of how often you want to write (or whatever it is that you do), find the time and use it. If it helps, prepare some sort of reward such as a tasty snack, gin or ketamine that you don’t get until you’ve achieved your goal.
I find that on occasions, there are days when the writing just flows. On such days I publish a blog post and “bank” anything else I produce for another day. Film reviews tend not to be time sensitive, can be written on the fly and left to build up in my “drafts” folder. These can then be rolled out on days when my writing mojo is waning. Then there are feature columns and recurring blog posts. Articles in which you summarise what you’ve been up to. And again let us not underestimate the popularity of sharing screen captures from games and such like. If you managed to obtain that obscure armour set after grinding out a specific instance, then let people know.
“No lollygagging”
Although I do advocate schedules, I also advise taking breaks from your content creation, when you feel the need. However, if you do regularly produce content then you may want to notify your readership of your pending absence. If people know in advance that you’re taking a break, they’re more likely to return later. If you simply vanish without explanation, then your audience will evaporate over time along with any goodwill. I would also add that if like me, you tend to produce content regularly, don’t take too long a break. In my experience the longer your away, the harder it is to return.
One way to keep busy and stave off any loss in motivation is to collaborate with your fellow blogger, streamers and podcasters etc. Group writing projects can yield interesting results, especially when debating subjects that are contentious or have multiple perspectives. Podcasters and streamers can have guests on their shows or facilitate round table debates. Not only do such projects boost your motivation and strengthen community bonds, they also offer a degree of promotion for your online presence.
To date, no Lion has ever written a blog post of note
For many of the people participating in Blaugust, blogging or whatever other form of content creation you’re pursuing, is a hobby. If treat it as such, in a manner that you can sustain, it will remain so. Pushing yourself beyond what you can reasonably cope with, is the quickest way to fall out of love with the thing that you’re doing. That’s not to say you should shy away from applying yourself and sometimes maintaining a degree of discipline. But you have to find a mode of operation that is right for you. A degree of introspection and honesty is also required so you don’t bite off more than you can chew, or conversely, sell yourself short.
Finally, stay in touch with the community after Blaugust and keep a presence on the Discord server. Being around like-minded people is invaluable for staying engaged and focused. After a busy and engaging event such as Blaugust, it can feel like things grind to halt in the days and weeks afterwards. It is not unusual for many content creators to actually stop if they feel that the support network has gone. But it is still there, so it is important to keep the lines of communication open.
Separating Art from the Artist
In recent years, the #MeToo movement has made it abundantly clear that the film, TV and video games industries are far from idyllic work environments that pop culture implies that they are. Allegations of rape, sexual assault, bullying and general bullshit abound. There have been convictions and such matters are slowly being given the scrutiny they deserve. But it’s an uphill struggle for the victims because vested interests will always resist potential changes to the status quo. There are wider discussions to be had about many artistic and creative industries being glorified “boys clubs” and then there is the culture of “blaming the victim” but those are for another day. I don’t think they’re going to resolve themselves over night, sadly. On this occasion, I would like to reference the composer Jeremy Soule, because he is the latest artist to have serious allegations made against him. Naturally, this has caused a great deal of discussion among his fans. Soule’s work on The Elder Scrolls and Guild Wars franchises is very well regarded. Hence a common refrain that stems from these sorts of situations is “I now feel conflicted about this individual work”. It raises the old chestnut about separating art from the artist.
In recent years, the #MeToo movement has made it abundantly clear that the film, TV and video games industries are far from idyllic work environments that pop culture implies that they are. Allegations of rape, sexual assault, bullying and general bullshit abound. There have been convictions and such matters are slowly being given the scrutiny they deserve. But it’s an uphill struggle for the victims because vested interests will always resist potential changes to the status quo. There are wider discussions to be had about many artistic and creative industries being glorified “boys clubs” and then there is the culture of “blaming the victim” but those are for another day. I don’t think they’re going to resolve themselves over night, sadly. On this occasion, I would like to reference the composer Jeremy Soule, because he is the latest artist to have serious allegations made against him. Naturally, this has caused a great deal of discussion among his fans. Soule’s work on The Elder Scrolls and Guild Wars franchises is very well regarded. Hence a common refrain that stems from these sorts of situations is “I now feel conflicted about this individual work”. It raises the old chestnut about separating art from the artist.
We can all write a long list of disgraced artists if we think about it. People who at one time produced outstanding music, made great films, staged plays or were great philanthropists and benevolent charitable benefactors. Consider Michael Jackson, Woody Allen, Kevin Spacey and Louie C.K. The list sadly keeps growing. It’s a very rude awakening when you discover that people you admire and revere are in fact monsters. Furthermore, this is not a modern problem. Charles Dickens, William S. Burroughs and Charlie Chaplin all had very chequered pasts. So what are we supposed to do when we discover that something that we enjoy is created by a such a person? Well a common answer is that you must take the art and effectively remove it from the context of the artist that created it. But like many notional concepts, trying to put in to practice is harder to do. It is something that requires a willing sense of cognitive dissonance, as well as being able to govern your passion. That is not going to be easy for many people. And then there’s the issue of fandom, which muddies the waters even further. Fans are not always the most self-aware or emotional literate societal group.
I first encountered the concept of separating art from the artist when at school, studying English literature. T.S Eliot stated, “I have assumed as axiomatic that a creation, a work of art, is autonomous,” in 1923. There subsequently followed a new way of appraising literary work, which attempted to make analysis more like a science. The focus was on the words, their meaning and context and the authors relationship with their work was sidelined. This method and variations of it have prevailed for a long time and where still used when I was being educated in the eighties. French literary theorist and philosopher Roland Barthes declared in 1967 that authors doesn’t create a text. The reader does, by reading it. Each new reading effectively reinvents it. Therefore texts have no fixed or definitive interpretation. Oh and it gets even deeper. I have read arguments that film and music are not owned commodities but cultural gifts bestowed upon society. The viewer or listeners opinion has to trump that of the artists, because they have been solicited to give a personal subjective opinion. This theoretically will negate the auteurs ability to control the interpretation of their work and will therefore tempers their institutional power.
But these ideas tend to mainly exist within the confines of the classroom and academia. They are both abstract and cerebral which therefore limits their practical application. Plus there is another issue that stems from our revulsion against fallen artists. There is an inherent cultural assumption that we expect our artists to be virtuous by default. That is not to say that we should be advocating for them to be the opposite but it reveals a societal propensity to put artist on a pedestal by dint of being an artist. Musicians, actors, writer and film makers begin their careers as everyday people, like you and me. Therefore they will have the flaws and failings that we all share. In fact some would argue that their creative abilities draw upon their flaws, vices and failings. Yet the moment success, fame and personal validation are achieved we seem to give artists a cultural free pass. We cosset them and make excuses. Are we actually contributing to the creation of monsters?
Upon reflection it would appear for many people there is no easy way of separating art from the artist. Because our relationship with art is deeply personal, it seems perfectly reasonable to take it personally when someone you admire transgresses. So if you no longer wish to support an artist, then don’t buy any more of their work. If you cannot bring yourself to listen to their music then purge your CD collections. We are not purely rational beings. Art is emotive, so are artists and so are we. But I believe that we have to confine out emotional responses to the likes of Jeremy Soule and Michael Jackson, to just ourselves. I do not advocate that as a society we try to erase the art of those who are in disgrace, due to some perceived collective moral outrage. Hiding from awful events and the things that they touch does not address them. Also it is usually the art we encounter first and not the artists. Hence, we do not know in advance their human failings. And irrespective of what we may know after the fact, if a piece of art touches you can that truly be retrospectively refuted?
So where do I stand on all this? Well I do strive to separate art form the artist. However, that does not mean that I’m an apologist for their crimes. If you want me to write 2,000 words on the films of Roman Polanski, I will do so and focus purely on that. If you also ask me to write a comparable amount of text on his failings as a person, then I can accommodate that as well. When I’m listening to Billie Jean, watching Manhattan or Jeepers Creepers, I do not by default immediately focus upon the creative artist and their iniquities. Nor do I totally banish them from my thoughts. I find my own personal point of emotional and ethical equilibrium. Because although a singer, actor or director may be tainted, that doesn’t have to transfer to my relationship with their work, which was pure initially. If you allow the artist to spoil the art, it negates the contributions of all of those who were also involved in the creative process, which is inherently unfair. The truth is the myth of an auteur is exactly that. But this is my philosophy and my means of coping. We all have to find our own. Ultimately if this dilemma makes you angry, then that is something else that you can lay at the door of the artist that has gone rogue.
Further Changes Coming to Star Trek Online
A decade ago the MMO genre tended to favour quite complex game systems. It is what the playerbase expected and allegedly preferred. But tastes and prevailing trends change over time. Plus game developers often see a change in staff and alterations in their creative visions. Hence over time, game systems can become unwieldy, esoteric and frankly annoying. So when a decision is made to refine, rationalise and improve these systems, it can be a complex task to undertake. Furthermore not only are there the practical and logistical realities of having to tackle ageing code, there is also the choppy waters of community relations to navigate. Because regardless whatever you seek to change, there will always be those who will oppose it and consider it an outrage perpetrated upon them, comparable to the Peterloo Massacre.
A decade ago the MMO genre tended to favour quite complex game systems. It is what the playerbase expected and allegedly preferred. But tastes and prevailing trends change over time. Plus game developers often see a change in staff and alterations in their creative visions. Hence over time, game systems can become unwieldy, esoteric and frankly annoying. So when a decision is made to refine, rationalise and improve these systems, it can be a complex task to undertake. Furthermore not only are there the practical and logistical realities of having to tackle ageing code, there is also the choppy waters of community relations to navigate. Because regardless whatever you seek to change, there will always be those who will oppose it and consider it an outrage perpetrated upon them, comparable to the Peterloo Massacre.
For years a common facet of the MMO genre has been factions. A new player made a choice when creating their character to affiliate to a specific faction which would permanently separate them from those who were aligned differently. It makes narrative sense in some respects and certainly suited the prevailing genre attitudes of twenty years ago. But thing change and although some people really dislike that fact, nowadays such dogmatic attitudes towards factions have softened. The One Tamriel update did away with the faction driven regional boundaries in The Elder Scrolls Online in October 2016 and the game is arguably better for it. However, one of the biggest obstacles facing the removal of factions in other games is often lore. And that lore becomes even more immutable when it derives from a third party, licensed intellectual property. Which brings us to the case in question, namely Star Trek Online.
When Star Trek Online launched in 2010, you could play as Federation officers and once you hit level 20, it unlocked the option to play as a Klingon. However, that Klingon alt was by default at level 20. It took a while before this changed so that players could level a Klingon allied character and play though a unique backstory. Over the years other factions have been added to the game including the Romulan Republic. Although there has been a degree of sharing assets and resources, lines of demarcation have remained. Romulan ships can only be used by Romulan characters. The same policy has been maintained for the Klingon Empire. However, Cryptic have decided to remove this restriction from the Romulan faction, as part of their ongoing updating and modernising the game. Cryptic are also overhauling the events service within the game, which up until now has been part of the wider reputation system. The UI is to be amended and event progress is to be tracked as a subset of the mission journal. Instead of working like reputation projects which require daily input, the new interface will display an experience bar. Progress will also be account wide for those players with multiple alts.
Both of these changes seem very reasonable at first glance. The first question most people have asked is whether this restriction will also happen with Klingon ships? Sadly, it would appear that rights holders CBS, have some very particular caveats in their license arrangement, so the answer is “no” for the present. However, being able to fly a Romulan ship on my Federation character, is an interesting proposition, as they have some stout vessels with good stats. From a financial point of view (some would argue Cryptic’s default position) it opens up a whole new range of ships to buy. This change is also a shot in the arm to the Admiralty system, as I can now add more Romulan vessels to my deck. But some players would argue this change comes at the expense of class identity and the relevance of factions per se. STO was initially created around the traditional trinity of DPS, Tank and Healer with its Tactical, Engineering and Science classes. But this has long been abandoned in any meaningful sense. The additions of factions in recent years has also been half hearted. None are truly independent and at some point in levelling, have to ally with either Starfleet or The Empire.
You can argue that there’s a lot to put right in STO. The game still has a lot of bugs, many of which have persisted for years. Cryptic seem to be tackling matters in a somewhat erratic fashion. The current streamlining of the game has seen the loss of The Foundry, older missions “temporarily” removed from the game for updating and Tier 6 ships level scaling so they can be used immediately. Some of these things work, other do not or are a loss to the game. I have never felt that there has been adequate promotion of the Romulan, Klingon or other faction storylines in STO. The game is very much focused on the Starfleet perspective. Cryptic has stated that the numbers show that most players are overwhelmingly Federation orientated but if more effort had been made to promote and maintain the other faction’s storylines and resources, would things have been better? I’d argue that the Romulan Republic story arc is the best in the game from a narrative and lore perspective.
I cannot help but feel that Cryptic have pursued whatever can be added to the game, at the expense of what is already present. The Kelvin Timeline is not exactly popular with core Trek fans yet it was dovetailed into the game. And no sooner had they released the superb Deep Space Nine themed expansion, Victory is Life, it was dismissed and they went hell for leather with the integration of Star Tre: Discovery related content into the narrative. I suspect that they may have a rabbit to pull out of the hat regarding Star Trek: Picard. But that doesn’t bode well for the return of classic missions like City on the Edge of Never and others, which are awaiting a makeover. I applaud Cryptic for trying to bring STO up to the standards of modern MMOs but I’m not sure about the route they’re taking and whether they be able to achieve their goals with their “tinkering”. I also would like to see more narrative content delivered more regularly. As ever, time will tell. Unhappy players vote with their feet sooner or later.
Apocalypse Now Final Cut (1979)
Writing a review of Apocalypse Now is a somewhat redundant exercise, unless you have never seen the any of the previous versions of the movie, or your analysis is offering a unique and wholly original perspective. It is one of the most scrutinised, dissected and studied films in the history of cinema. Furthermore, the stories associated with the films tumultuous production have become as equally legendary as the movie itself. There is as much apocrypha associated with Apocalypse Now as there are legitimate anecdotes. In many respects the documentary Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse, which was shot during the films production, is equally as fascinating as the iconic movie. So with all this in mind, I will simply try to succinctly summarise my thoughts on this third version of Francis Ford Coppola’s magnum opus, which has been officially labelled “Final Cut” by the director.
Writing a review of Apocalypse Now is a somewhat redundant exercise, unless you have never seen the any of the previous versions of the movie, or your analysis is offering a unique and wholly original perspective. It is one of the most scrutinised, dissected and studied films in the history of cinema. Furthermore, the stories associated with the films tumultuous production have become as equally legendary as the movie itself. There is as much apocrypha associated with Apocalypse Now as there are legitimate anecdotes. In many respects the documentary Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse, which was shot during the films production, is equally as fascinating as the iconic movie. So with all this in mind, I will simply try to succinctly summarise my thoughts on this third version of Francis Ford Coppola’s magnum opus, which has been officially labelled “Final Cut” by the director.
Apocalypse Now Final Cut has been restored from the original camera negative via a 4K scan. Previous transfers used for the Redux version, were made from an interpositive. The new version has a runtime of 183 minutes, with Coppola having cut 20 minutes of the added material from Redux print. The original theatrical release in 1979 ran for 147 minutes. As for changes in scenes, the extended plot detour that takes place on the de Marais family's rubber plantation remains. Some critics consider this to be an unnecessary digression that slows the narrative. I see it more as an interesting statement on imperialism and its failures, which are subsequently being repeated by the United States and their interventionist foreign policies. The extended episode with Lieutenant Colonel Kilgore (Robert Duvall) culminating in the theft of his surfboard also remains. However, the scene in which Willard (Martin Sheen) and his men find the Playboy Bunnies, marooned after their helicopter transport has run out of fuel, has been removed. So has one of few daylight scenes showing Kurtz (Marlon Brando) reading aloud from Time Magazine to a group of Cambodian children. No further new footage has been restored to the film either.
Upon mature reflection, I would say that Apocalypse Now Final Cut is the most polished and substantial version of the film out of all three edits. It makes its points about the nature of war, its inherent absurdity, as well as contradictions and does so at the right pace. This time round Willard’s journeys upriver to both a metaphorical and literal place of insanity, is done at exactly the right pace. There no longer feels like they’re narrative gaps or changes of pace. For those familiar with the bootleg VHS assembly print that was in circulation in the early eighties, there are still several legendary scenes missing. But I would argue that they wouldn’t really add anything to the overall film. If any still exist then they would better serve as “extras” on the Blu-ray release. The beautifully restored print is also a timely reminder of how complex action scenes use to constructed in the pre-digital age. The helicopter attack on the coastal village is still a staggering feat of logistical organisation and co-ordination.
More Podcast and You Tube Recommendations
As part of the Blaugust Festival of Blogging, I thought I’d take the time to promote some of the content creators whose work I enjoy. Despite all the white noise, click bait and snake oil salesmen, there is still a wealth of good material to be found online, be it blogs, podcasts, You Tube channels or streamers. Most of what I currently enjoy, I discovered through word of mouth. I feel more disposed towards trusting the views and opinions of friends than I do of “recommendations” made by Google and You Tube, driven by their “questionable” algorithms. These are often determined by key words and have no ability to ascertain quality. So here are a mixture of You Tube channels, podcasts and blogs that I wholeheartedly recommend. Between them they cover such subjects as movies, gaming, comedy and history. Feel free to leave comments about my choices and share your own recommendations.
As part of the Blaugust Festival of Blogging, I thought I’d take the time to promote some of the content creators whose work I enjoy. Despite all the white noise, click bait and snake oil salesmen, there is still a wealth of good material to be found online, be it blogs, podcasts, You Tube channels or streamers. Most of what I currently enjoy, I discovered through word of mouth. I feel more disposed towards trusting the views and opinions of friends than I do of “recommendations” made by Google and You Tube, driven by their “questionable” algorithms. These are often determined by key words and have no ability to ascertain quality. So here are a mixture of You Tube channels, podcasts and blogs that I wholeheartedly recommend. Between them they cover such subjects as movies, gaming, comedy and history. Feel free to leave comments about my choices and share your own recommendations.
Dark Corners Reviews. If you have a liking for cult, obscure and trash cinema, then Dark Corners Reviews can provide in-depth commentary upon such content. Presented by writer Robin Bailes, films such as The Clones of Bruce Lee, Trog and Warriors of the Apocalypse are dissected in a droll and knowledgeable fashion. Robin also provides some very detailed retrospectives on classic horror movie franchises such as Universal Horror movies of the thirties and Hammer Studios Frankenstein series. These are extremely well researched and offer intelligent genre analysis along with clear love and affection. Dark Corners Reviews has been running for over five years so there is a wealth of content available on the channel. It is also interesting to see Robin refine his style and technique over time.
Extra Credits. Created by Daniel Floyd and James Portnow in 2008, Extra Credits was initially a You Tube channel about video games studies. However over the years it has broadened its scope and now offers regular content analysing Science Fiction, History and Mythology. Each subject is presented as an animated video with casual but extremely informative narration. It’s a great way to come to grips with weighty subjects such as the history of the Irish Potato Famine or Greek Myths. The games study videos are all written by those with first-hand experience and explore such subjects as common mechanics, development schedules and sales and monetisation. Furthermore, the videos are always presented in an upbeat fashion, even when tackling tough issues. The team also put out updates to previous videos and will correct or append content where appropriate. It’s all extremely professional, intelligent and yet presented in an entertaining and easily digestible format. All involved seem to be genuine and likeable. Something that’s quite rare online these days.
Rule of Three. This is a somewhat niche market podcast but is really excels at what it does. British comedy writers Joel Morris and Jason Hazeley invite other comedians, actors and writers to discuss what they find funny and provide one example for discussion. Hence you will get the likes of comedian Phil Jupitus waxing lyrical about animator Chuck Jones, comic actor Kevin Eldon heaping praise upon The Rutles and writer Charlie Brooker dissecting the comedy genius of the movie Airplane. The show is informative, extremely funny and at times an utter geekfest. These guys know about their craft (as do their guests) and among all the humour and banter, the budding writer can glean a lot of useful information via their show.
Scormus Fails. As long as I can remember, Scormus (formerly known as the MMO Troll) has been writing, podcasting, producing You Tube videos and live streaming. He is a familiar face in the MMO fan community; part of the furniture if you will. Like many of us, he has seen an ebb and flow in his content and audience. Yet he doggedly produces content, tries different mediums and talks about the things he loves. He knows he’s not to everyone liking but he is resolutely his own man. You have to admire someone who just does their own thing and keeps going. Over the years his sense of humour has grown on me and I enjoy dipping into his various content. I think he sends a very positive message to those who are just starting out on their blogging, podcasting or streaming career.
Murf Versus. I wrote a blog post a while ago about how overfamiliarity can be fandom’s Achilles Heel. In my case it’s movies. I’ve seen a lot and therefore, it takes more to impress, surprise or inspire me. However, a great tangential way to enjoy material you’re already familiar with, is through the experiences of others. And that is why I enjoy Murf’s blog. He and his partner Diane regularly sit and view classic films and do their upmost to put aside their own cultural baggage and give a fair and logical appraisal. Sometimes they find a point of entry and some common ground. Other times not so. Murf writes eloquently and thoughtfully. His musings are often astute and mature. He is also happy to eschew critical consensus. If he doesn’t like a cinematic sacred cow, he’ll happily say so and provide cogent reasons for doing so. So if you are more than just a casual movie viewer then do take a look at his blog. You may or may not agree with him on certain films but you cannot fault his honesty.
Transporter 3 (2008)
Do I really need to present you with some sort of plot synopsis for Transporter 3? No, I didn’t think so. More of the same as Frank Martin (Jason Statham) and his police chum, Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) become embroiled in yet another high-octane escapade. There's fights, car stunts, exotic international locations and a strong sense of humour. This time, the disposable love interest is a Ukrainian girl named Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) who fulfils her role succinctly. The film benefits by being set back in Europe, after the mistake of basing Transporter 2 in the US. This time, the story takes us to such locations as Budapest and Odessa. The international film crew once again bring a veneer of panache to the production that is conspicuously absent in US action movies. For a modest budget fil, Transporter 3 it looks very good. Again the proceedings are given a boost by a pertinent soundtrack by Alexandre Azaria and a selection of European “tunes”.
Do I really need to present you with some sort of plot synopsis for Transporter 3? No, I didn’t think so. More of the same as Frank Martin (Jason Statham) and his police chum, Inspector Tarconi (Francois Berleand) become embroiled in yet another high-octane escapade. There's fights, car stunts, exotic international locations and a strong sense of humour. This time, the disposable love interest is a Ukrainian girl named Valentina (Natalya Rudakova) who fulfils her role succinctly. The film benefits by being set back in Europe, after the mistake of basing Transporter 2 in the US. This time, the story takes us to such locations as Budapest and Odessa. The international film crew once again bring a veneer of panache to the production that is conspicuously absent in US action movies. For a modest budget fil, Transporter 3 it looks very good. Again the proceedings are given a boost by a pertinent soundtrack by Alexandre Azaria and a selection of European “tunes”.
The fight scenes and car chases are well crafted and pitched at the right level for a PG-13 rated action-fest. The devil is in the editing, which is done in a very modern idiom, as you would expect. It is this fast pace style that allows the film to be get away with some of the content. The violence is strong but not dwelt upon. There are also some subtle references within the fight sequences to other classic films. Particularly Fist of Fury and Game of Death. Film buffs will know them when they see them. The dry banter between Statham and the sundry heavies he dispatches works well and embellishes the action. The franchise by this instalment has developed a sense of self-parody and there’s an amusing scene in which Frank give chase, not via some high-performance car but by bicycle instead. The joke works well, which is a surprising for a film that is derivative of a genre, that in itself, is self-plagiarising.
Transporter 3 has no pretensions to be anything else, other than what it is. It is very dumb, stylised and no cliché is left unturned. Its tone is pitched just right for this sort of movie. There is a running joke about Frank not liking to get his suit dirty when fighting and his disrobing becomes a potential weapon. The underlying homoeroticism of previous movies is openly explored this time (“You’re the gay?”) and is rather amusing. All in all, this film delivers perfectly what you expect in such a genre offering. Director Olivier Megaton (Taken 2 and Taken 3) thrives on this sort of material and seems to know inherently how to handle it. For once the movies rating and content do not work against it. The Transporter franchise may well be commercial and disposable, but it is also very entertaining. This in some respects, is the best sequel. The TV series that followed was lacklustre and the 2015 reboot failed to ignite audiences’ interest, despite Ed Skrein doing his best. The shadow of Jason Statham looms large in this franchise.
Cheap Beer
I often trot out the old adage “you get what you pay for”. However, upon reflection I think it’s a saying that should be used carefully. If employed when referring to buying a shirt, then it carries weight. I recently bought a double cuff shirt from Hawes & Curtis and the high price reflected the quality of the stitching and material. I could have bought another shirt for a tenth of the cost from Primark but it simply wouldn’t have been comparable. So on this occasion, the phrase was relevant. But if employed with regard to products like biscuits or laundry detergent then it doesn’t always hold up. Because the adage implies that a cheaper product is inferior by default, yet that is patently not the case with the examples I’ve given. Many supermarkets range of store brands can provide good alternatives to well-known premium products. It can be a process of trial and error to discover them but they do exist. Also even though attitudes are changing, there is still a lot of snobbery and brand loyalty associated with grocery shopping. In the UK the is a clear hierarchy of supermarkets.
Cheap and cheerful or a surprisingly good bargain?
I often trot out the old adage “you get what you pay for”. However, upon reflection I think it’s a saying that should be used carefully. If employed when referring to buying a shirt, then it carries weight. I recently bought a double cuff shirt from Hawes & Curtis and the high price reflected the quality of the stitching and material. I could have bought another shirt for a tenth of the cost from Primark but it simply wouldn’t have been comparable. So on this occasion, the phrase was relevant. But if employed with regard to products like biscuits or laundry detergent then it doesn’t always hold up. Because the adage implies that a cheaper product is inferior by default, yet that is patently not the case with the examples I’ve given. Many supermarkets range of store brands can provide good alternatives to well-known premium products. It can be a process of trial and error to discover them but they do exist. Also even though attitudes are changing, there is still a lot of snobbery and brand loyalty associated with grocery shopping. In the UK the is a clear hierarchy of supermarkets.
So where is this all going, I hear you ask? Well, I want to discuss cheap bear. Actually, I specifically want to discuss one particular brand but we’ll come to that in a moment. First, a few words about my drinking habits. I enjoy a wide variety of alcohol and drink several times a week. I’m a bit of a seasonal drinker favouring heavier red wines and stout in autumn and winter, then moving to lager and white wine during the warmer months. I also like gin, vodka and brandy. I have a personal drinking hierarchy. For example I will sometime buy an artisan beer and drink it to savour its flavour. Alternatively, if I’m drinking socially at a barbecue or some similar event, the alcohol consumed tends to be more generic. I’ll happily add lime to a standard mid-tier lager. But I wouldn’t bastardise a fine malt whiskey. And then there’s very cheap alcohol. Strong beer or cider that is specifically manufactured for the purpose of rapid intoxication. I tend not to buy these products.
Michael Caine only drinks beer “in a thin glass”…
Now I was in Aldi today. If you are not familiar with the supermarket, it’s a German chain. They are rapidly increasing their share of the UK market. They sell predominantly their own range of products or have exclusive contracts with European suppliers that are not so well known in the UK. Hence you avoid the mark up associated with premium brands but that doesn’t mean that the quality is inferior. Over time Aldi has managed to swim against the tide of cultural snobbery and now enjoys a very eclectic cliental that straddles several socio-economic groups. As the weather is pleasant at present and looks to stay that way for the bank holiday weekend, I thought I’d buy some beer. So I ended up buying 12 cans of Rheinbacher Premium Pilsner. Each pack of four 500ml cans cost £3, so I spent £9 in total. 500ml fills my favourite pint glass with just a centimetre or so gap at the top. The beer itself is a pale lager in the North American style. It pours with a pale gold body with a light white head. It has a fruity aroma and a mild, sweet malt taste. It’s doesn’t reinvent the wheel but it’s surprisingly pleasant and makes for solid evenings drinking if you stick with it.
Is this man a beer snob? Who knows?
Out of idle curiosity, I did a little digging online and discovered that there are numerous beer aficionados running review websites. Rheinbacher Premium Pilsner scores surprisingly well, although you quickly ascertain that a percentage of beer drinking community are utter snobs. And like most snobs, their prejudice is founded in irrationality. Because the main criticism of this particular beer is its price and where it is sold. Factors that have zero relevance regarding its taste. However, despite the garrulous inanities of the idiot brigade, there were plenty of positive reviews. Which brings me full circle back to my opening gambit and getting what you pay for. Sometimes, something can be inexpensive without compromising on quality. Today’s purchase was a nice reminder to look beyond traditional brand loyalty and try something new. Cheap does not necessarily mean poor quality. I suspect that there are “hidden gems” in all supermarkets. I shall certainly be doing some further experimenting next time I go to Aldi.
Player Representation and Video Games
There was a time when you bought a game, played it, possibly completed it and then that was the end of the matter. Along the way you determined whether you were enjoying it. Often that conclusion dictated how much time you spent playing. Gaming at this point in time, was a relatively straightforward business transaction. If your experience was broadly positive, you’d remember the publisher and look favourably upon their future products. As for the actual business dynamics, it was simple. You paid for the game up front and then later decided the respective value of that financial transaction. How things have changed and not necessarily for the better. We now live in the age of “live services”, microtransactions and games where your expected to forever put your hand in your pocket if you want to keep playing. Games are no longer one-off purchases. Games are an ongoing symbiotic relationship. Or if you want a bleaker analogy, games are a form interactive, quasi-legal, addiction.
There was a time when you bought a game, played it, possibly completed it and then that was the end of the matter. Along the way you determined whether you were enjoying it. Often that conclusion dictated how much time you spent playing. Gaming at this point in time, was a relatively straightforward business transaction. If your experience was broadly positive, you’d remember the publisher and look favourably upon their future products. As for the actual business dynamics, it was simple. You paid for the game up front and then later decided the respective value of that financial transaction. How things have changed and not necessarily for the better. We now live in the age of “live services”, microtransactions and games where your expected to forever put your hand in your pocket if you want to keep playing. Games are no longer one-off purchases. Games are an ongoing symbiotic relationship between player and vendor. Or if you want a bleaker analogy, games are a form of interactive, quasi-legal, managed addiction.
As a publisher, if you are selling a continuous smörgåsbord of content to a player base that you want to keep paying, there comes a point where you have to interact with that community and maintain the pretence that your interested in them beyond their ability to keep paying. Hence in some game communities, particularly in the MMO genre, you sometimes get some form of player representation. The most immediate one that comes to mind is The Council of Stellar Management in EVE Online. It’s a player advocacy group consisting of 10 members democratically elected by the players to advise and assist developer’s CCP in the evolution of the game. Back in 2013 Turbine created a player council for The Lord of the Rings Online. An exercise that lasted until 2016. More recently I discovered that there was even a player senate for Star Wars Galaxies Legends. Yes, a game that is officially defunct but has a grey emulation server, has player representation. And many other games, although lacking such councils, have community managers, preferred influencers and high-profile players who are happy to act as a go between.
But does any of this representation work? Is it a genuine conduit between developer, publisher and consumer? Or is it just an PR exercise, that attracts the wrong sort of people, ending in acrimony, rancour and dissent, rather than inclusion, cordial relationships and glasnost. We’ll here’s a quote from Massively Overpowered editor, Bree Royce about the recent SWGL player senate elections. "It did occur to me along the way that in thumbing through the candidates’ platforms, I’ve already spent more time considering the election in an emu for a dead video game than most people spend on actual elections that affect their real lives. That’s… depressing". Yes, it is indeed. Plus I’m sure that electioneering within any game’s community is going to be rife with the same duplicitous, mealy mouthed, spurious bullshit that is endemic with real world canvassing. Politics uses the illusion of inclusion to advance the interest of specific groups, often at the expense of others. Why should that be any different in a game community than in the real world?
From my own perspective, I’m not aware of the LOTRO player council ever having achieved anything of any note. If they did it certainly wasn’t overtly publicised. Having checked though archived blog posts I wrote at the time; it seems that the whole enterprise was nothing but a source of problems. All of which can be distilled into one simple point. Gamers are not a uniform group. They are motivated for a multitude of different reasons and unlike Belinda Carlisle, don’t dream the same dream, nor want the same thing. Hence player councils of these type are seldom truly representative. And just like forums and subreddits, it’s the most vocal that seek to be elected so they can lobby for what they want. Furthermore, for such an enterprise to work, it also requires goodwill and genuine intent from the developer or publisher side. Considering the growing iniquities of the so-called “Triple A” video game industry, the likelihood or there being any to begin with is risible.
I am reminded how during the #gamergate debacle, by the time the main stream press had actually got wind of the matter, there was a debate as to whether there needed to be a “face of gaming” to go on TV chat shows and put the gamers side of things. This was another truly ludicrous idea, based upon the erroneous assumption that gamers are a cohesive social group with a common agenda and set of values. Mercifully it quickly withered on the vine. Overall, there is no quick, easy and accurate way to compartmentalise gamers and represent them. Frankly, old school market research and surveys, with all its flaws and baggage, is potentially a more suitable tool. Overall, I still think it’s a mistake for players to perceive video games as anything else other than a commercial product and themselves as consumers. Yet this myth that the MMORPG genre is some how more than the sum of its part and due to its social component, some sort of autonomous collective, still persists. Considering how often things have ended in tears, you’d think some gamers would have learned by now. But there are none so blind as those who will not see.
The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! (2012)
The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! is Aardman Animations fifth feature film and is based on the first two books in the Pirates! series by Gideon Defoe. For reasons known only to the marketing department, this movie has been retitled The Pirates! Band of Misfits! for its US release. When, I first saw the trailer for this movie way back in 2012, I thought that it had the potential to be a witty, inventive, quirky, and entertaining piece of film making, because that's what Aardman Animations does. The day they produce an inferior product is the day to quit watching movies, right? But let us not forget that even the most exemplary studio record can be blemished by the occasional wrong step (Yes, I'm looking at you Pixar after Cars 2). Happily that is not the case here. Having seen The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! twice now, it is an extremely droll and clever animated movie. The film was nominated for the 2013 Academy Award for Best Animated Feature but lost to Pixar's Brave.
The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! is Aardman Animations fifth feature film and is based on the first two books in the Pirates! series by Gideon Defoe. For reasons known only to the marketing department, this movie has been retitled The Pirates! Band of Misfits! for its US release. When, I first saw the trailer for this movie way back in 2012, I thought that it had the potential to be a witty, inventive, quirky, and entertaining piece of film making, because that's what Aardman Animations does. The day they produce an inferior product is the day to quit watching movies, right? But let us not forget that even the most exemplary studio record can be blemished by the occasional wrong step (Yes, I'm looking at you Pixar after Cars 2). Happily that is not the case here. Having seen The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! twice now, it is an extremely droll and clever animated movie. The film was nominated for the 2013 Academy Award for Best Animated Feature but lost to Pixar's Brave.
The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! is a finely tooled, richly embellished, genuinely funny piece of film making. It works on so many levels and once again succinctly demonstrates that Aardman Animations totally "get" the art of film making in every possible way. Furthermore you have a movie that can genuinely appeal to all age groups. There's none of your contrived focus group driven, age or gender specific targeting here. Just an engaging film that is accessible to all and entertaining on multiple levels. Hollywood take note. You don't need a bunch of bean counters pawing over market research and surveys to make a successful and quality film. You simply need to have an abiding love and respect for the medium, as well as a good screenplay. It also helps if you credit your audience with some degree of intelligence. Plus make sure you have Jokes. Lots of jokes. Sight gags, slapstick and verbal humour.
Okay, for those who insist on a plot synopsis, the narrative focuses on the Pirate Captain (Hugh Grant) who is desperately trying to win the much-coveted Pirate of the Year Award. But he's not exactly at the top of his game and is often ridiculed by fellow Pirates Peg Leg Hastings, Cutlass Liz and Black Bellamy. Furthermore the Pirate Captain's crew are somewhat lacklustre, being named after their personal attributes and foibles. These include such individuals as the Pirate with Gout (voiced by Brendan Gleeson and looking suspiciously like the actor to), the Pirate with a Scarf, the Albino Pirate and the Surprisingly Curvaceous Pirate (who is in fact a woman). After boarding the Beagle and capturing naturalist Charles Darwin (voiced by David Tennant) in a desperate attempt to improve his reputation, the Pirate captain discovers that his new parrot Polly is actually the last Dodo. Darwin convinces him that such a discovery could be invaluable to all concerned. I shall say no more than that. The plot even manages to have a few twists that may surprise the audience.
It is a cliché to say "hilarity ensures" after providing a plot summary. In fact it is often a prefix which carries a degree of derision or irony, as so many comedy films confuse hilarity with being crass. However in the case of The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! The phrase can be genuinely used. The humour is subtlety different from Aardman Animations usual Wallace and Gromit fare, but is no less charming or emotive for it. There is a strong streak of traditional English humour throughout the movie that reflects a strong understanding and love of the UK's comedic heritage. From Monty Python and Douglas Adams to the Goons. It manifests itself in both overt and subtle ways. From Darwin’s chimpanzee butler Mr Bobo (who sports a monocle and communicates with cure cards) to the underlying fixation with ham. Every scene is packed with visual embellishments and throwaway gags. Certainly, this is a film that can happily sustain multiple viewings and still offer up new surprises.
The craft involved in this cinematic undertaking is staggering. There is CGI in places, usually to deal with wider environmental aspects such as the ocean and the weather. But pretty much everything else that you see is traditional hand-crafted stop motion animation and it works beautifully. The range of expressions along with the pathos and drama that is created via the medium puts a lot of contemporary Hollywood fodder to shame. If you watch any of the “making of” extras found on the DVD and Blu-ray release of the film, you'll see and appreciate the minute attention to detail that the animators have lavished on every aspect of the production. Often it only registers fleetingly on the screen, but it’s all done due to a consummate love of their craft and its presence enhances every single frame.
As film making is a financial endeavour as well as an artistic one, Sony Pictures decided to temper some of the British excesses of this production and create a separate version for the US market. As previously mentioned, the title of the film was changed and some minor jokes that referenced foibles of UK culture were removed. Furthermore, there have been some alterations to the voice acting. The Albino Pirate, voiced in the UK version by Russell Tovey, was replaced by Anton Yelchin. Similarly, Ben Whitehead's performance as The Pirate who likes Sunsets and Kittens, has been replaced by Al Roker. Overall these changes do not undermine the film in any major way. However, if you’re a cinematic “purist” then I would recommend the UK print over the US version. Either way, if you enjoy animated movies then The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! is well worth viewing. Aardman Animations are an exemplar of all that is best in film production and standout like an oasis of talent in the current desert of Hollywood mediocrity. Plus any movie that features Swords of a Thousand Men by Tenpole Tudor on the soundtrack can’t be bad.
Do MMOs Have a Specific Window of Opportunity?
World of Warcraft was the MMO that broke the mould. The reasons for its success are too numerous and complex for this blog post, so let it suffice to say that it rode a perfect storm of factors and has maintained a strong presence for fifteen years. And as a result, subsequent developers have often sought to duplicate its success. Yet frequently the opposite has happened. In fact several MMOs have launched and experienced a brief time “in the sun” only for things to come crashing down thereafter. Perhaps the most well-known example of this was SWTOR which experienced a triumphant launch in December 2011, yet within three months the majority of players had left for pastures new. It took the game going F2P and a lot of hard work by BioWare to claw back the playerbase. It has also been argued that many MMOs have grown too big for their own good? It is true that a new player starting a game such as LOTRO today has a long slog ahead of them and some may simply find that too daunting.
World of Warcraft was the MMO that broke the mould. The reasons for its success are too numerous and complex for this blog post, so let it suffice to say that it rode a perfect storm of factors and has maintained a strong presence for fifteen years. And as a result, subsequent developers have often sought to duplicate its success. Yet frequently the opposite has happened. In fact several MMOs have launched and experienced a brief time “in the sun” only for things to come crashing down thereafter. Perhaps the most well-known example of this was SWTOR which experienced a triumphant launch in December 2011, yet within three months the majority of players had left for pastures new. It took the game going F2P and a lot of hard work by BioWare to claw back the playerbase. It has also been argued that many MMOs have grown too big for their own good? It is true that a new player starting a game such as LOTRO today has a long slog ahead of them and some may simply find that too daunting.
The reason I mention these two points is because I think they are linked and reflect a shift in mindset towards MMOs. Many of the older MMOs were originally based around group content and the formation of guilds. As a result many titles have a sizeable community of players that have reached level cap with multiple alts. Players such as this have played through pretty much all the content that the game has to offer. They play within guilds that have lasted years and have strong social bounds. Now consider a new player that has just started playing LOTRO for example. They have a prodigious amount of content to play through before they reach level cap. Furthermore because many players now prefer to play solo, they have an even more arduous task ahead of them.
Now I know some will argue that it's not about racing to level cap but the journey itself. This is a fair point if you are a player who is content to work through content in this fashion. However many games developers are still focused on the so-called endgame and creating new content for those at level cap. If you start playing LOTRO today, the only way you can reach Western Gondor or The Grey Mountains is if another player summons you there. It's a shame that so many of the older titles are hindered by such a linear approach to landmass and content but that's the way these titles were created. I personally would like to see more of an open world approach like The Elder Scrolls Online where content scaled according to your level and you are broadly free to go where you want.
So considering these points, I am beginning to think that for many MMOs there is an initial window of opportunity as to when it is most favourable to start playing the game. I started playing LOTRO in late 2008, just after The Mines of Moria expansion launched. As I was playing through The Shire, Bree and The Lonelands, senior members of my guild were levelling from fifty to sixty in Moria. However because I was very invested in the game at the time (it was my first MMO) I managed to catch up within nine months. I am now part of the group of players permanently at level cap and I can therefore immediately enjoy whatever new content Standing Stone Games develops for the game.
The Elder Scrolls Online and Guild Wars 2 are both relatively new titles, so I think one could start playing these games and still be participating during the optimum window of opportunity. Plus they do not have such a difficult levelling curve or level cap that is extremely high. Is this the same case with EVE Online, Final Fantasy XIV or Black Dessert Online? I'm not so sure. These are games where the key to success is the investment of time. Some MMOs have mechanics or store items that will allow you to level quickly but does that really solve the issue? There is an inherent contradiction in selling an item to boost your level, hence paying money to bypass playable content. But levelling through intermediate level content can be a lonely process sometimes. Zones can be devoid of other players. At least in Guild Wars 2 the game downscales players to the zones specific level thus providing an incentive for the veteran player to return. Sadly many other titles do nothing to encourage players at cap to revisit lower level areas.
I also think this window of opportunity may be tied to wider factors, other than the games progression system. Many MMOs experience a period when the fan base thrives and produces a wealth of content. This can be blogs, guides, podcasts, You Tube videos or livestreams. However this tends to be cyclical. Due to the rise of the casual player and their migratory nature, this if often more pronounced. I remember sites like the LOTRO Combo Blog that used to aggregate fan related blogs. It has long since gone. Another example you can see is the way your Twitter timeline may be awash with content regarding a new title and then over time it simply fades away. Twitch TV is also another interesting litmus test. A look at the homepage will quickly tell you what is popular and what is not. Is the window of opportunity for MMOs therefore not only verifiable but also clearly getting shorter?
There are other genres and franchises that experience similar optimum windows of opportunity. Harry Potter and Friday the 13th are two examples from the movie industry. There was a clear period in time when both were immensely successful franchises. However, their transition from silver screen to multiplayer game took a lot longer and perhaps the proverbial boat was missed. The Wizarding World eventually found a home in the mobile gaming market and not as an MMO. Friday the 13th fared slightly better as a multiplayer game and captured a nostalgia wave. Yet it was ultimately hamstrung by legal issues surrounding the rights to the franchise. MMOs take a lot of time to develop and the market trends can change during that time. Amazon Game Studio appears to have halted the development of New World. Is this game now going to be repurposed to tie in with their Middle-earth themed TV show. If that is the case the game may launch during the optimum window of interest.
Finally there is an odd codicil to this question. We have seen recently a trend towards “Classic” servers which strive to serve up a broadly comparable experience to that of launch and the first year of an MMO. Is nostalgia the key to successfully creating a second window of opportunity for a game. Is it sustainable? Or is it going to have an even shorter arc? So far, the LOTRO Legendary Servers seem to be ticking over and I have not at present seen any data pointing to a decline in population. Perhaps the launch of World of Warcraft Classic on the 27th August will provide a greater insight into the longevity of nostalgia. In the meantime there is much to reflect upon, as the points raised here have barely scratched the surface of the matter. Because when we talk of a window of opportunity for an MMO, there is the player perspective and then there’s the business perspective. For all the market research and data analysis, I suspect that there are also some other factors that are much harder to quantify.
The Bourne Legacy (2012)
Jason Bourne originally graced our screens for the first time seventeen years ago. The Bourne Identity was a gritty, minimalist take on the espionage genre and a welcome change from the excesses of the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. The story arc was sustained over three movies and ended efficiently and succinctly. After which Matt Damon moved on, as did the director of two of the movies, Paul Greengrass. Which leaves us with The Bourne Legacy; the tangential sequel that arrived in 2012. A film that exists because the money men and bean counters hate to pass up on a franchise until it has been squeezed utterly dry. Hence, they commissioned the writer of the series, Tony Gilroy, to come up with a screenplay and direct a spinoff movie. Jeremy Renner was cast in the lead role. Yet despite narrative and production continuity, The Bourne Legacy was not a Jason Bourne movie with the star appeal of Matt Damon. Although the film turned a profit, it had the lowest box office returns out of the entire franchise.
Jason Bourne originally graced our screens for the first time seventeen years ago. The Bourne Identity was a gritty, minimalist take on the espionage genre and a welcome change from the excesses of the Pierce Brosnan Bond era. The story arc was sustained over three movies and ended efficiently and succinctly. After which Matt Damon moved on, as did the director of two of the movies, Paul Greengrass. Which leaves us with The Bourne Legacy; the tangential sequel that arrived in 2012. A film that exists because the money men and bean counters hate to pass up on a franchise until it has been squeezed utterly dry. Hence, they commissioned the writer of the series, Tony Gilroy, to come up with a screenplay and direct a spinoff movie. Jeremy Renner was cast in the lead role. Yet despite narrative and production continuity, The Bourne Legacy was not a Jason Bourne movie with the star appeal of Matt Damon. Although the film turned a profit, it had the lowest box office returns out of the entire franchise.
The plot is constructed in such a way to dovetail nicely into the existing storyline. Whether its clever or contrived, I'll leave you to judge. Aaron Cross (Jeremy Renner) is an enhanced soldier from the Outcome program. This is the military's equivalent to CIA’s Treadstone project. After the events of The Bourne Ultimatum, Colonel Byer (Edward Norton) decides to eliminate all traces of Outcome. Not just the agents, but all medical researchers and admin staff. I wouldn't be surprised if that included the cleaners and stationery suppliers as well. So it's not long before Cross goes on the run the run with Dr Marta (Rachel Weisz), the one scientist who designed the physically and mentally enhancing "chems" that cross must take daily. Cue two hours plus of chase scenes, followed by plot exposition by character actors such as Stacy Keach and Scott Glen, followed by more chase scenes. Rinse and repeat.
It’s all very professionally made and somewhat soulless. One of the main selling points of the original Bourne trilogy was the lead character’s amnesia, struggle for identity and possible redemption. This plot device is absent from this movie and thus we’re much less emotionally connected with our hero. The concept of chemically altering a person into a Nietzchean superman is initially intriguing, portraying Cross as an addict. However it is conveniently dispensed with when we discovers that going cold turkey reveals that the drug’s effects are permanent. The ending leaves matters conveniently open for yet further exploration. Overall, The Bourne Legacy is somewhat perfunctory with its matter of fact, A to B style of film making. The movie lacks any dramatic focus.
The Bourne Legacy will provide you with adequate entertainment if you want nothing more than a technically competent chase movie for two hours or so. If you like your fight scenes edited so quickly you haven't a clue who just wupped who, then you're in for a treat. Yet considering the strength of the cast, this is a somewhat grey action movie. Apart from The Hurt Locker and The Town, I have yet to see Jeremy Renner in a role that he excels in. Certainly not any of his performances as Hawkeye, the dullest member of The Avengers. Overall, fans of the entire franchise can easily skip this instalment. It is worth noting that Matt Damon returned for a fourth movie in 2016 which provided a codicil to the Jason Bourne story arc. However, even this may not be the definitive end to the franchise. A further spinoff television show called Treadstone is due to be broadcast in October this year.