The Lego Movie want's you to be a kid again, and is the best version of Batman in a while. Spoilers.
These day's it seems like a month doesn't go by where I am not brought to a mouth foaming, red haze level of rage by the news that some old franchise is getting a big budget Hollywood remake, as the Nostalgia dollar seems a far safer bet than trying to float an original thought. However I wasn't brought to this frenzied state by the news of the Lego movie, partially because unlike the old T.V shows or mobile apps that will be coming out in the next few years, Lego doesn't have a story. It has an aesthetic, it is a canvas. As such there were plenty of stories that could be told, plus Lego had built up a lot of good will from me for it's continued success in making great games off of popular franchises.
When the first trailer came out, I became excited. When the first reviews hit the stands from America (due to Australia getting fucked over with release dates... again), I avoided spoilers but my expectations were set even higher. People loved this film.
So when I finally sat down in the theatre did it meet my expectations? Was the incredibly high bar set reached? Yes, pretty much it was. It's always more fun in reviews to disagree with popular opinion than to heap more praise or scorn on a properly already buried under it. However the Lego movie just holds up, it's creative, it's vibrant, it's fun. And oh how I have been missing fun in movies.
We enter spoiler territory now, so really, if you haven't seen it yet. Back out now and come back after the movie.
I said that Lego was a canvas, that it could be used to tell any story. And that's true, what at first appears to be a chosen destined narrative which we've seen a hundred time but subverted with anarchic humour turns out to be the story of Lego. It's the narrative of creating, of not always following instructions and just doing. It's the narrative of anyone who ever played and was told to stick to the rules.
The chosen one narrative we see is that Emmet, the most unremarkable man in the Lego world is in fact destined to defeat the evil Lord Business who has a plan to end the world with his special weapon, the Kragle. A group of Master Builders, those who can build beyond the instructions given, are there to help him. In particular the resident wild girl love interest but has a boyfriend character... aptly named Wyld Style.
This is worked both into the destined narrative and the twist. The whole story we've been watching is a child at play, and certainly hints are dropped throughout the movie, still the reveal was nice and the scenes in the real world worked well. A father has been collecting and building Lego sets, his son sneaks down and puts the Lego worlds together, mixing pieces and creating new works. That the father is taking the toys of youth and rigidly confining them to the 'correct' way of enjoying them is the heart of the movie, and the reason that Batman is so central.
The Lego movie is saying that perhaps...
A gritty, dark, reinterpretation...
Of something as joyous as a child's toy...
Isn't a good thing.
Batman is after all the character most readily portrayed as the gritty face of superheros, the dark brooding loaner, and the one who always seems an inch away from snapping and killing everyone. Despite the fact he has perhaps the largest network of immediate allies, friends, and what is essentially family in the Robins, Alfred, the Batgirls, the Bird's of Prey, and his international network of Batmen. To the point where his gritty-titus has crossed over and affected his best friend Superman...yes you read that right, not enemy, not ideological opposite... Friend... AHHHHDJHSILJD DC STOP IT!!
Sorry... Back to Lego
Another thing the film does is to completely subvert the 'chosen one' narrative, the prophecy... completely made up. Our resident, Morpheus/Dumbledore/Gandalf/Obi-Wan Kenobie (even though some of those are present in the movie) is Vitruvius... played of course.. by Morgan Freeman. In what is clearly a last ditch effort, he has made a prophecy, because it can be the push to cause those needed to believe in themselves, rather than guarantee any one person can do it. While it's fairly obvious this ties more into the idea that everyone has the spark of creativity in them, everyone at times plays. I'd like to believe that is a bit of a dig at how many movies have begun using 'Destiny' as a narrative crutch because it's easier to explain.
I MEAN COME ON... WHY DID YOU NEED TO MAKE HIM MORE LIKE JESUS??!!
Right... Sorry... The Lego Movie...
A thing I've heard a lot from people having seen this move, 'this was my childhood'. Mostly from those who Lego and a parent threatening to glue it was actually present, but it still touches what seems to be a fundamental aspect of childhood. That desire to break the rules and see what can be made in place.
That most kids, will just wing it..
It' s a Bat Pun.
When I had first heard of Noah, I like most of my friends, was immediately thinking of The Passion or the more recently Son of God. Films that pander to extreme demographics in an attempt to draw funds from the hardcore Christians. Suffice to say, I didn't plan on seeing it. However, a review I frequent made a video explaining why he was excited for the film. Saying that Darren Aronofsky was using the Christian myths as a canvas for creating an epic more in the veins of Ten Commandments. MovieBob got me willing to give it a chance, this is the video in question.
I still was cautious, having dispelled the fear of a propagandist film I now began to question if the epic was in fact aiming a bit too high with all the ideas it wanted to explore. On this count the movie does suffer a little, but there was still a lot in this to make me suggest it.
Firstly I should note that I don't personally have anything against a movie which does chose to represent religious stories sincerely, even though I know several of my friends do. I find Prince of Egypt, a Dreamworks film to be incredibly beautiful, moving and heartfelt. It doesn't skirt around including God nor does it spend its time trying to force it upon you. The religion matters to the story because it matters to the characters in it.
That said I found that the increased presence of pandering Christian films in this past decade has left a slight social dissonance within Noah. I kept expecting the worst of the medium and was left confused when it didn't happen. But enough about Christianity and this movie, lets talk about the film itself.
Noah is a very ambitious film, a large scale epic with huge spectacle. If you like seeing films with big moments there is plenty here to get you excited. So much that a few aspects got left by the wayside to my disappointment. Such as Methuselah's fire sword... yes, you read that right. There are also incredibly creative creatures in The Watchers, a group of fallen angels who had decided to help man after they were cast out by the Creator. Ok, sorry, back to religion real quick. This film skirts around a full representation of Christian religion because, it's not what it want's to be, and it appears to not want to offend or alienate audiences. As such there is only mention of a 'Creator' and the description of the creation of earth by the Creator is a montage from Big Bang through evolution.
And now, back to the plot.
The sons of Adam and Eve were three, Cain, Able and Seth. Cain killed Able and his descendants serve as our bad guys. While the descendants of Seth act as shepherds to the world caring for the creatures. The sons of Cain are numerous, greedy and selfish. They are post/pre-apocalypse versions of any Captain Planet villain. Although Noah and his family would suggest to be passive, as the last remaining descendants of Seth, Noah frequently kills in this film, a small hint to what will be the massive turn for this film.
During the building of the ark and the flood the movie has already been good. But once the ark is afloat is where things suddenly become dark. Noah believes that all man must be purged; including himself and his family. So they shall die off as the only women young enough to bare children is barren; however she becomes pregnant and Noah realizes that if it is a girl than mankind has a hope of continuing and all those he sacrificed, all those he killed have died for naught because the world is still not clean of the sin of man.
Noah, seemingly suffering from both sever post-traumatic stress and cabin fever, has said that he will kill the child if it is a girl. And they live in a constant state of fear for months as the baby is carried to term, it is tense to see how far Noah has slipped and to see his family unable to escape him.
What this movie does right it does amazingly well, however it is probably a bit to ambitious and some parts could have been cut as I get the impression that part of some sub-plots was already removed for time. While the remains feel disjointed.
Still, you should see this one. As I bitterly complain about another nostalgic property from the 80's, or a mobile phone game receiving a blockbuster treatment, I will always try to reward ambition when it does emerge.
White House Down -
This movie suffered from coming out at the same time with Olympus has Fallen, a movie with a very similar premise but generally a much worse film. However White House Down is every the insanity and tension of an 80's action film with the politics of left wing America today. The closest comparison is Die Hard, battling a force greater then you in an enclosed space with a loved one in the balance. The difference being, the rather lofty task of being as charismatic as young Bruce Willis is split between President 'No I swear it's not Obama' Jamie Fox and the every man, ex-service man Channing Tatum.
If you are an action movie fan, rent it and give them some money cause this is Roland Emerich's most enjoyable film since Independence Day.
Beautiful Creatures -
Time for the YA romance adaptations... and there were a LOT in 2013. I still haven't managed to catch up on them all yet. However Beautiful Creatures was the stand out for me. It's, not without it's problems. The climax in particular is, rushed and awkward. The idea that men area able to chose their path while women are chosen for light or dark by... something... the moon, I think? Irritated me, however the movie does it so they can deal with the concept. It's always difficult to criticise the 'we are using misogynistic ideas for tension... but we keep pointing to them and saying they are misogynistic, that makes it ok right?' Still, this is a beautiful film. I hadn't considered how seenic that area of America was before. On top of that it gets bonus points for having the couple TALK about their problems and agree to work it out together.
The Host -
So... here's the Stephanie Meyer drinking game. Take a shot every time:
- A female character tries to Martyr herself
- A male love interest is physically or emotionally abusive (or becomes the love interest after doing so)
- A far more interesting plot/character/idea is brought up briefly only to be glossed over
- Finish your drink after 15 minutes of characters doing NOTHING
That all said... I was actually hoping for something more terrible than what the Host was, being a connoisseur of bad movies. The Host's biggest crime is being dull, being very safe with a concept that is crying out for a better writer. That said, I think there is a dramatic improvement between the Twilight Saga and the Host... so hey, at least she's learning.
Dhoom 3 -
How have I lived my life for so long without seeing a Bollywood film?
The sheer campish brilliance of a film that will mix genres depending on scene, have actors give their all in every moment with the occasional musical interlude. Dhoom 3 is the first fully Bollywood film that was made and marketed with a clear goal of an American audience. The villain is amazing while the hero's fill the typical buddy cop roles of straight guy and funny guy. If you are looking for a well made, utterly shameless movie in its enjoyment.
More quick bits will come later, in the mean time get yourself to a TV and put in a copy of White House Down or Dhoom 3.
Ok, I should explain where I am coming from with this film.
I did not want to see this, I'd heard good things but personally can't stand a lot of movies that focus on the issues of AIDS, homophobia and drug dealing. I always feel uncomfortable when these issues are explored. I don't have a great frame of reference, I have a few friends who are in the LGBT community and have experienced homophobia but never when I've been around. I am too young to have lived through the massive AIDS scare and even though I know it still exists, it just doesn't affect my life. On top of that, when I heard drug dealing I pretty much shut down, I hate the way the movies moralize and are rarely anything more than a PSA.
However, my boyfriends family had tickets to the moonlight cinema so, I decided to give it a go.
I have never been so glad I gave a movie a chance. Everything that I usually hate about these kinds of movies is skimmed over for a well built character drama and a battle against a failed system.
Honestly, it reminds me most of Erin Brockovich as a film. Which I did like although
I feel it was quiet flawed, you were also always aware you were watching a movie.
Dallas Buyers Club's strength is how real it feels, everyone is believable as a person not just a character. Matthew McConaughey has been having a fantastic time in films of late, the last few years he seems to have been able to break away from his type cast as 'past boyfriend you probably broke up with for very good reasons, but you'll get back together with by the end of the movie'. And I am glad because he was fantastic in this, I've also heard amazing things about him in Mud (2012), and his brief role in Wolf of Wall Street. Both of which I haven't seen yet.
Jared Leto was also amazing as his transgender business partner, McConaughey was able to stand out more because his character had an arc, it was his story. The weakest role was probably Jennifer Garner, she was the one most obviously acting.
I'd heartily recommend seeing this, I can't say how accurate a true story it is, after all every film based on a true story has to be changed to some degree.
The acting is excellent, the cinematography great and the script tight.
The idea for Her is one that is so easily messed up, a man falls in love with his operating system. To many it sounds silly, a comedy or an exploration of madness perhaps; but a legitimate romance?
Her deals lightly with that idea, Theodore Twombly (played by Joaquin Phoenix) does experience confusion, insecurity and judgement for being in a relationship with the A.I. Samantha (Scarlett Johansson). However that is not the focus, the movie is not about people's perception of A.I's as much as it is an exploration of love; as well as a coming of age story. Not for Theodore, but for Samantha.
I should clarify something for those who aren't familiar with the technology this films relies on. An A.I (Artificial Intelligence) such as Samantha is implied to be one that has reached the singularity. The Singularity is the point as which intelligence can augment itself. That is to say, an A.I can increase it's own intelligence. Her's interpretation of this is that an A.I past the point of singularity can experience emotions (a similar idea is being played out in Transcendence to a very different effect). It is so complete a being that the only distinction between it and a human is that it evolves and changes so much faster than us.
In the world of the movie, Samantha is completely capable of love. She does not pretend, and although her knowledge is already greater than a humans and is exponentially expanding it is without experience. Which is what Theodore is able to provide. Samantha is continuously growing throughout the movie and I simply can't say where that journey takes her.
The movie subtly makes assertions throughout the movie that love, that is the love between humans, already has an artificial element to it. Theodore's job, which I won't spoil, is all about how a little bit of artificial helps make the 'real' love so much more powerful.
This film is unyieldingly uncomfortable to watch, even before the concept of true A.I's are introduced. It will make you squirm in your chair but never look away from the screen, and that's part of it's power. It isn't interested in romanticising human to human or human to A.I, or even A.I. to A.I. Every relationship has fights, has uncomfortable silences, has pain and then has those beautiful moments when things just go right.
This film is about growth, about change, and most of all about love.
Go an see it, because even if you don't come to the same conclusion of the movie. This film, may become reality. It is estimated that we will be seeing true A.I. within 50 years. It raises ideas and concepts worth discussing and thinking about.
On top of that, you will simply be seeing one of the best films of 2013/2014. As well as some of the finest acting from Johansson who brings across her performance solely through voice.
For those interested in the Singularity - this is an easy video that explains it and was my introduction to the concept.
I have returned! I am sure the 5 friends I force to read this are thrilled.
Having finally finished University I feel it is time to really commit to keeping this blog going, as well as getting under way with my novel writing; you will be hearing more about that early next year. And as such, we are introducing the Quick Bits! This is a quick update on the media I have been consuming, what I am looking forward to and what I've had to spit back up. So let's get started!
Trading in Danger by Elizabeth Moon -
I really loved this book, I found it a quick enjoyable read that was very welcoming as an introduction to Space Opera. I hesitate to call it a great book, with the exception of the main character all the characters are very one note and there is a lot of unnecessary detail and events that while I enjoyed, I can see other people having problems with it.
The Other Boylen Girl by Phillipa Gregory -
Inspired by the video podcast book club, Vaginal Fantasy with Felicia day (and 3 other lovely ladies) I've been dipping my tow into the waters of the highly criticised romance genre. Unfortunately I started with this book. I did not like it, I did not finish it, I didn't even get halfway. I don't like leaving a book without giving it a fair go but honestly this book reveled in all the tropes that have so far turned me off romance books.
Thor: The Dark World - Thor 2
Eeeehhhh... While I did enjoy this movie, especially the performance by Tom Hiddleston it was just really cold compared to the first one. It lost the whimsy and characters of the first movie and felt the most formulaic of all the marvel movies to come out of late. I am planning a full review so more details later but I think I can chock this one up to the change in Directors from Kenneth Branagh and Josh Whedon to James Gunn and Alan Taylor.
Catching Fire - Hunger Games 2
Yes, yes... all of the yes. This movie tackled the difficult task of holding the audiences interest between first and third movies. The aesthetic still felt consistent, the actors played their part well although one of my friend felt that Jennifer Lawrence 's facial movements were over the top for emotions. If you enjoyed the first one, you will like the second one and it will get you pumped for the third. A larger evaluation of consequence in YA inspired work will be coming soon.
Superman VS Batman - (still in production)
To say I am mixed on this movie is an understatement. I hate that the next movie DC is making does not star ANY of the other superhero's and instead is just rehashing the only two characters they seem comfortable in showing. However they have suggested that this movie will also cameo Wonder Woman as a lead in to her own movie, FINALLY!!!!!! On top of that the 4 possible laddies they have released for the role are all strong looking woman who I feel would fit the part well. However, apparently they have asked Frank Miller as a consultant... and I do not want him consulting anywhere near the character of Wonder Woman... it has also been said they have gotten Scott Snyder to consult and I am loving his work with the Batman comics at the moment.
I am terra-cited for this film.
More quick bits will come later as well as a few full on reviews.
Whilst formally resigned to it's own section at the back of the book store I have been noticing an unyielding prevalence of romance novels in the best seller sections of late. The most inescapable being 50 Shades of Grey. This has been confusing me and the more I thought about it the more it has been making sense as well as infuriating me; I decided I needed to sort out why.
Firstly I believe the reason for the sudden influx of romance novels of late can be traced down to one source. Twilight... Why do I keep finding reasons for getting annoyed at this book. Twilight had revitalized and revamped romance and, whilst not creating, popularizing the 'paranormal romance' genre. Walking in Dymocks the last few days I saw; to my despair, that the paranormal romance section had ballooned to the size of the now joined Fantasy/Sci-fi genre. I don't believe this will be a permanent change; just like all trends it shall ebb and flow into a new one but the fact that paranormal romance is even separate from romance whilst fantasy is now lumped together with Sci-fi is somewhat baffling to me. This is for a very simple; and yet very complex, reason. The internal conflict is dramatically limited in paranormal romance, and yet comes from an almost universal source. And this is 'temptation'.
Before I dive into an analysis of temptation in literature I should first mention my utter distaste for using the word 'universal'. I'm saving my analysis of motivations and internal conflicts in works for a later date as it is truly to large to cover here.
Temptation is something that can be understood simply; a short term benefit for a long term risk. In romance this comes down simply to the more attractive but unstable partner vs the stable yet dull partner/life. Novels using temptation are a way for us to experience the riskier option without the consequences affecting us in real life. So far so good. I don't personally have a problem with romance novels although due to the ease of writing a 'temptation' plot I find a lot of the genre to be... simple at best and laughable at worst. However it still does allow some more conflicts and is not completely limiting.
Paranormal romance however takes this to the furthest level. Not only does it have to rely on temptation we are always aware of what we will be getting and what we will be giving up as a consequence. I cannot, at all, take the paranormal romance genre seriously. I don't mean to offend anyone who does; nor am I saying that any book writing in the genre is automatically worthless. My personal distaste for it comes from a very strong belief that the inherent promise of paranormal romance's temptation is a lie. You will be transformed into an ageless, unchanging frozen moment in time. Just because you biologically do not change does not mean that you are not changing. I'm willing to accept that it is perhaps more difficult for the world to inflict change upon you as you are no longer human but you are not in complete control of events. Things will still happen around you and they will have an affect on you. The point is you are not always going to be the same person as you are when you are 'changed/transformed/having given into the temptation' nor is your partner.
People changing is the inherent risk in romance, both in novels and in life. The chance that this person will not be the same person, five, ten fifty years down the road of being together is not even really a chance... it's a given. Real romances and the best love stories are the ones that cause you to believe that even when the couple change they will love the new partner as much as they loved the one they used to be and not just because of what they used to be. To me; this fact makes the temptation element in paranormal romances simply not worth it. Should the you drift apart in a romance novel you can find something new and meaningful in your world or with other connections such as friends or family. In paranormal romance you are completely isolated; not just from your previous life but from the world. Interview with a Vampire did a fantastic job of displaying and showing this isolation. This forces you to be completely dependent upon the other person for companionship and turns your secluded lovers nest into a personal prison you cannot escape as there is a world outside that you have no bearing on, no real understanding of and no way to enter.
Essentially I find paranormal romance as a genre to be incredibly limited as the core driving force appears to be so cemented in the idea of temptation in a form we have seen hundreds if not thousands of times before in basically every media there is. Why then, can I understand how Twilight has caused such a insurgence of the genre and appears to have given it more of a legitimacy to readers (except of course those who hate Twilight).
It's because the more I thought about it, the more I realized how incredibly innovative Twilight is for the genre... and yes, I do mean that sincerely. I was thinking over how I have defined temptation and how the paranormal romance genre uses it and I came to the startling revelation of Twilight's reversal of it. It is still very much focused around temptation; but it's not really the main character Bella who is being tempted; I don't think she is even being motivated by romance. Should Edward not have been in the story and Bella simply come across the other Cullens I think she still would have made the decision to become a vampire. The transformation simply does not hold the weight it does in other books; it is clearly established that you can be a vampire without completely loosing your humanity as you do not have to take human life to survive. You are not isolated as the vampires often form clans or in the case of the Cullens a 'family', as well as there being a structure to the vampire world that creates it's own sense of being an existence despite whatever the humans may be up to. It is even shown how the vampires are able to live, partially mind you, in the human world before moving on to another area.
If Bella is not being tempted than who is? Well, Edward is. And we; through projection onto Bella, are turned into the tempters ourselves. Other works have of course included the supernatural being falling for the mortal being, an example very close to the form of Twilight is the Nic Cage movie City of Angels. Yet then, we have the supernatural changing for the mortal. In Twilight the mortal is still the one who changes but the temptation is the supernatural; who has to chose if they corrupt the mortal to gain them for 'eternity' but force the one they love to give up their life for it. Now, disclaimer time. I am simply looking at the plot elements of Twilight, and based on what I'm saying you would think I recommend Twilight as it truly does bring an interesting new dynamic to a genre deeply routed in the traditional and cliched till it has become mundane. I am not. I do think there are some interesting ideas in Twilight that can be discussed and used to shape other ideas but any novelty with the plot is completely undermined by the terrible characterization. By having Edward being so controlling; no doubt a consequence of Stephen Myer being under the misconception that Heathcliff is a 'romantic' character. And Bella being so needy and co-dependent, we are left with a temptation that holds no weight. Edward's claims of not wanting to ruin her life come off as hallow when he controls her so much and she so willing lets him.
Paranormal Romance appears to be fading more into the background. With the last Twilight movie coming out soon I believe there may be a last small resurgence of it copy cat books however even fans are starting to become sick of it. No matter how much you enjoy a style, flooding the market with copy-cats works shall always make it become tiresome. Now being replaced by Twilight fanfiction... sigh. For better or worse it appears as though Romance shall now have it's time hogging the best-seller list; whilst I personally feel it's for worst it shall pass. All genres will time and time again return to the spot light after a sudden popular title inspires it's army of clones and I shall personally sit by and bide my time till Fantasy comes round again.
I was first shown the 3rd in the Evil Dead series during a drama class, and I would be lying if I didn't say that I hated it, however my opinion was deeply shaded by the fact that I wasn't enjoying drama at the time and that the HSC was in the process of putting my brain though a blender. A couple of years later I caught Army of Darkness on television and was laughing my head off within a few minutes, seeing the first two movies isn't at all vital to enjoying the third.
The star of this series, Bruce Campbell enjoys a status in a similar fashion to Chuck Norris. Granted he doesn't have a third fist under his beard or have Jesus following him on twitter but he is recognised as the coolest hero of B-movies. The main character Ash, who chopped off his hand with a chain saw after it became infected with evil and since replaced it with the chain saw, has been sent back in time... Don't ask why... it's not important. Mistaken as a solider of Henry the Red he is taken to the castle in chains. He is sentenced to be executed by being thrown into a pit with unspeakable Eldritch horrors... just roll with it. After defeating the evils with his chain saw and double barrel Remington shot gun he frees Henry the Red's men and forces the people of the castle to find a way to send him home. This is also the scene where we get some of the best quotes from this movie, including 'all right you primitive screw heads, this. is. my. BOOM STICK'.
Embeth Davidtz plays the love interest Shelia, yes, that's really her name. I know this because I looked it up... thank you IMDB, and found out she is in fact cast as Mary Parker in the upcoming Spiderman reboot as well as having serious roles in movies such as Schindler's List. Where as Bruce Campbell appears to be able to survive simply off making cameos. The wise man tells Ash that he can return him home if he journeys to fetch the Necronomicon, a book the people also need to vanquish the evil in the land. After a brief montage of getting ready, in which we see an almost fetishistic love from director Sam Raimi of sudden zooms in, Ash leaves on his quest. Chased by a unseen evil he hides in a windmill and we enter one of the tripiest scenes... I don't really want to spoil what happens here as I don't think I could do it justice but the end result is an evil Ash appears. Ask buries his evil counterpart and continues on to the cemetery, he grabs the Necronomicon but fails to say the correct magic words and raises the army of darkness. Shelia is captured and thus Ash must rally the castle to fight against the forces of evil led by the again risen evil Ash.
This movie is great fun... it's pure retro silliness with a few really good lines. The special effects are bad even for the time but that adds to the enjoyment of it all. This is a fun movie to see but again one of those that is even better in a group, it has a decent re-watch value as well. Especially considering the first time you see it you'll spend a lot of time hitting your head and going 'WHAT?'.
I debated where I should follow up on the bad movie trend after The Room and in my quest to find the worst of the worst movies one name keeps popping back up, one company that made a name for itself trying to cash in with cheap rip-offs of Blockbusters. The Asylum.
Whilst they normally limit their activity to confusing fans by releasing movies such as Transmorphers, Alien VS Hunter or classics like Bram Stokers Dracula's Curse. The Asylum has since moved into making original productions, whether this is for better or worse is really up for debate. Mega Shark Vs Giant Octopus has reached a large amount of popularity based on it's simple silliness, following a very set monster movie plot line the silliness is unfortunately seriously hampered. This movie is not as enjoyable as the Room, the acting is not by any measure good but for the most part tolerable and I can't really criticize the writing too much, the dialogue is cliched but never to an amusing level and even competent at times. That said it is difficult to imagine that the screenwriter had to sit down and write 'then the mega shark leapt thirty thousand feet into the air and ate a 747 jet'.
This movie really doesn't have a great re-watch value, The Room I was able to watch many times over, this however I struggled to get through once. Not because it was too bad such as Birdemic or anything but rather because it was just bad. It is worth a watch and certainly would be better seeing along in a group... preferably with alcohol.
The first thing I ever heard of Morning Glories was that it was the comic equivalent of the TV series Lost. A comparison that it richly deserves, plot threads are introduced every episode often very surreal plot points. However while I've criticized Lost in the past for doing this, it was mostly because they were never connected and were never properly resolved. Morning Glories however has been acting in a far more cohesive way, it's released monthly and only up to issue 11 but so far feels as though everything is leading up to one final unified conclusion.
The series beings straight away with an escape attempt and graphic death, setting the oppressive tone that is kept through the entire series. There is a very brief lead up where we see the main characters at home with their families; the back story of the characters is something that I think is mostly meant to be released in the actual episodes as flash backs, for instance issue 10 has a lot of history on the character of Jun done very well. The problem with most of the back story being released in later issues is that this is a monthly release and as such we often have a lack of care about these characters and as such a lot of the oppressive atmosphere is lost.
The characters so far are the strongest thing about the writing in this series, you want to know more about them from the small hints that are given and most of them seem to be more then a little unhinged. Unstable characters are often the most interesting and finding out their motivation is enough to keep you coming back. So far I would give Morning Glories a tentative recommendation, teasing plot threads only work so long as you continue the feeling that it will all come together and that as new ideas are introduced the old ones are either tied in or explained. If you enjoy mysteries and the tension created by an oppressive environment then the characters are solid and the art work is impressive.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.