Weekly Geekly Rundown for November 17, 2023

Disney's Wish, Gamma World, Conan, and White Christmas...now that's a rundown.

How a Review Can Make You Want to See a Film

Kate Erbland’s recent lukewarm review of the new Disney film Wish over at IndieWire had a number of effects on me as a reader and I’d like to discuss them as this week’s random aspect of culture. If you haven’t figured out the format for the Weekly Geekly it’s: 1) random aspect of pop culture that strikes my fancy, 2) reviews and commentary from Luke Y Thompson and Courtney Howard (two film reviewers that I don’t always agree with, but who are very good writers and critics in general), 3) a classic comic book recommendation (if I have time), 4) a classic role playing game recommendation, 5) a classic music recommendation, and all tied up with 6) a classic film recommendation.

I try to have a little something for every aspect of geekdom. I also want to talk about things that might have been overlooked in the past and to share things I encounter that are interesting. Consider it the Substack equivalent of the old White Dwarf or Dragon Magazine of the gaming explosion era. In that era, those magazines weren’t house organs published merely to promote their own products, they were commentaries on pop culture with book and film reviews, articles about games by other companies, and arguments in the letters sections. Reading those as a kid shaped the way I think about things and I want to recreate that feeling here at the Geekerati Newsletter. With one caveat. Most the talk about “new” stuff will happen during the week and with the Weekly Geekly being the TCM version of the Newsletter.

Now back to our regular scheduled random aspect of pop culture. In a past Weekly Geekly Rundown, I wrote about a phenomenon in film criticism culture that I like to refer to as “The List of Supposed to Like.” This list is not really a list so much as an attitude by gatekeepers in film fandom who hold a particular canon as precious, often without understanding why that canon is so precious. These gatekeepers “like” all the “good” films (Ozu’s Tokyo Story for example) and they “dislike” all the “bad” movies (The Grey Man), but the reasons they give often lack depth because they are rooted in “supposed” to like/dislike. For the record Tokyo Story is fucking brilliant for a variety of reasons and I love The Grey Man as an actioner.

If you want to see the difference between someone who loves films because they genuinely love them and someone who loves them because they are “supposed to”, then watch the two Criterion Closet clips below.

Luis Guzmán, in addition to being a talented actor, loves movies and it shows in this clip. Look at how engaged he is emotionally with every film he discusses in the video. These films moved him and he knows why he loves them. Since he is also a talented actor who examines films in a deep way, he also knows why these films work in general.

Charlie Day, on the other hand, just kind of likes the stuff he’s supposed to like. Truffaut? Check. Hal Ashby? Check. Kubrick, Altman, Cassavetes, Ozu, Lee, Varda? Check, Check, Check, Check. His examination of the closet has zero surprises. Compare Michael Shannon’s “God bless God for making Peter Sellers” reaction to Being There to Day’s at the 1:40 mark. Day’s analysis isn’t wrong, but it isn’t filled with joy and love. For a film he says he loves, he sure talks about it in “so and so who also did such and such for me".” It’s a very Hollywood response. I’m being a bit hard on Day here, who I tend to like a lot as a creator, but I think there’s a bit of “I’m in the Criterion Closet so I better play it safe and like the supposed to list” going on. The thing is that while Criterion features Bresson’s Diary of a Country Priest as often as they can, UGH, they just featured The Craft, The Quick and the Dead (Raimi), and I Know What You Did Last Summer on their streaming service. Criterion itself is willing to go beyond the list and I wish Day had too.

Which brings me, finally, to Erbland’s piece for IndieWire. You see, IndieWire’s critics sometimes come across as “The List of Supposed to Like” is all that matters kinds of writers. I adore Anne Thompson and she writes and podcasts there and has fresh opinions, but the other writers frequently advocate the “Supposed to Like” in a fairly predictable manner. That isn’t what’s wrong with this particular review, but given their penchant for gatekeeping it always comes to mind when I read a relatively mid review there.

“So, Christian. What is wrong with this review?”

Thanks for asking.

First, while it contains an opinion regarding the overall quality of the film, it’s pretty much just a synopsis of the film. I get a beat by beat rundown of the plot. So much so that I now REALLY want to see the film because I LOVE the older stories that the plot is echoing. Dunsany’s Queen of Elfland’s Daughter is among my favorite books and this film echoes it’s “what would it be like to be ruled by magic” premise. Being governed by someone who steals the dreams and wishes of others in order to oppress would be a horrifying premise. That’s what I imagined was going on based on Erbland’s review, and it would fit nicely with referencing a host of fairy tales about the power of wishes, but it seems that’s not the case. Erbland could have mentioned this alternative as a demonstration of how flawed the actual fairy tale was, but refrains from doing so.

In fact, that’s the second thing that’s frustrating. In addition to being mostly a synopsis of the film, which is not a review, there is a real lack of Erbland’s ideas about what a film should be in general. I know she has them. She’s written some excellent pieces in the past, but there’s a lack of expression of what her filmic sense really is in this review. There is a dearth of how she aesthetically interpreted the film. For example, she writes that the “Meander digital drawing system [used] to craft Wish,… often looks painterly and hand-made” in a complementary way. Painterly? How so and in what ways? Is it emulating the painterly look of oil? Watercolors?

Watercolor is what they were aiming for, but I think it looks more like oils.

How do I know they were aiming for watercolor? I’m basing that assertion on an older article written for an obscure website called IndieWire back in September. Erbland could have referenced that article directly in the review, which to be fair includes a global link to all past IndieWire articles on the topic. Heck, even the Polygon review that also uses the term “painterly” at least mentions the connection to attempting a watercolor look.

Painterly?

While it’s a real aesthetic/technical term, the constant reiteration of it seems more like it’s a phrase pulled from the marketing materials rather than an exhibition of aesthetic preference. While the term has come to be used to discuss how digital tools look more hand-drawn. An interesting digression that could be used here is how animation is historically a linear art medium where lines are distinct and how painterly elements in Wish shift that. It doesn’t have to be a full-on Christian Lindke Conceptual Cross-Trek^tm, but a sentence would be nice.

I mean, just looking at this image from the film I can see that it is in fact painterly in the traditional sense. Look at how muted the lines are around the prince. There is no clear distinction between him and the background. The same goes for the people in the background.

Okay, one last thing irritated me. Erbland used the phrase “leading to a truly psychedelic and mildly hallucinogenic song-and-dance” to describe one of the scenes. I’d argue that she meant “psychedelic and hallucinatory,” not hallucinogenic. I don’t imagine the film caused her to hallucinate, rather I think she is implying that it looked like a hallucination. Drugs are hallucinogenic, images are hallucinatory. That’s a minor editing error that could have been corrected, instead it is used as a part of the title of the article. Here I don’t blame Erbland at all. Sure, I critiqued the choice of words, but authors don’t always choose their headlines. I blame the editor here for “going Hippy.” It made me roll my eyes. It must have made Anne Thompson roll her eyes too, because she left out that clause when she shared the article on X-Twitter today.

Okay, I’ve complained a lot about this article and a particular kind of gatekeeping in general and I wanted to finish this on a positive note. The fact of the matter is that as flawed as I think Kate Erbland’s article is, and I think I’ve made it clear I think it is flawed, it did two things extremely well. First, it got me thinking so much about it that I had to write this just to get my thoughts out there. That means that even if it was primarily synopsis, it was compellingly written. Second, it made me really want to see this film. I was on the fence. My daughters are teens now, so we don’t see as many animated musicals as we used to. Not that I think they are things for the young, it’s just that as I’ve tried to make room to encounter things I overlooked in the past I’ve put animated musicals lower on my viewing priority list. Kids have ways of disrupting priority lists, having their own priorities.

I also want to state, because I have been pretty stern here, that I generally like reading Kate Erbland’s stuff. In fact, IndieWire is one of my favorite sites to read. Often because it makes me angry as the poster child for “The List,” but also because it hires some very talented people, and that list of talented people includes Erbland.

Her review made me think and being provocative is a key part of being a reviewer.

Weekly Luke Y Thompson and Courtney Howard Film Article Cavalcade

View from the Luke-verse

Speaking (writing?) of Wish, Luke Y Thompson’s review at SuperHeroHype gives the film a similar rating (3.5/5 is kind of a B-), but notice how his review examines a lot more than the plot of the film. His review also refrains from using painterly, rather it attempts to discuss what the film is doing visually and whether it pulls it off. He also touches on how, unlike many recent Disney films, Wish attempted to have a genuinely villainous antagonist.

Luke watches a lot of movies and the film criticism racket is very competitive, so critics don’t often get to write about everything they see. In response to this, Luke has recently started doing mini-reviews on TikTok including this review of Fast X. TikTok is a difficult medium to master, so it will be interesting seeing Luke adapting his style to it. It’s a difficult thing to thread the needle of natural spontaneous conversation and essay presentation that TikTok requires. Take a look at his videos and let him know what you think.

@lytrulesLYT quick review: Fast X #lyt #fast #fastandfurious #jasonmomoa #vindiesel #brielarson #lafca

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

Courtney’s Commentaries

Wish was also on Courtney Howard’s radar and she reviewed it for FreshFiction.tv. Her review is more positive than Kate’s or Luke’s and, while shorter than a typical Howard review and with fewer technical comments that usual, it manages to convey Howard’s aesthetic tastes amazingly well. Note how she mentions how the film included a Busby Berkeley inspired number. She demonstrates that she likes those older musicals and gives an immediate visual for anyone who’s ever seen them. I can imagine the scene without a great deal of description. Also, it’s a perfect Christian Lindke Conceptual Cross-Trek^tm.

If Courtney’s positive review of the Heather Graham and Brandy Norwood film Best. Christmas. Ever! is correct, it looks like Netflix might have finally found their rhythm on live action Christmas films for adults. They’ve been spot on in the kids department for some time, with Klaus and The Christmas Chronicles as standouts, but they hadn’t quite managed the mix of saccharine and sincerity required for a good Christmas film. Maybe they finally have. I’ll be checking it out.

Comic Book Recommendation

If you haven’t done so yet, do yourself a favor and check out the work Jim Zub is doing on Conan for the Heroic Signatures and Titan Comics run. The first storyline was quite excellent and it’s interesting to see a Conan book being published by the owners of the IP rather than a licensee doing it. While I might lament not being able to read the Conan “What If?” issues on my Marvel Unlimited account, I’m really loving what Jim Zub brings to the table as a writer, not to mention the fantastic artwork from Robert de la Torre and colors by José Villarrubia.

Oh, and Jim will be partnering with Max Von Fafner and Patrick Zircher (a name any Villains & Vigilantes gamer knows well) on a new Savage Sword of Conan book. That’s right, Conan is returning in black and white old school action, with added Solomon Kane.

Roleplaying Game Recommendation

I wrote a relatively long recommendation for D&D 4e Essentials earlier this year, so it should come as no surprise that I like the version of Gamma World that was based on the 4e mechanics. I think that this version of Gamma Worlds is nothing short of brilliant, and that it is one of the best super hero roleplaying games ever written. I’ll be posting a full review of the game next week as well as giving a couple of examples of characters for it. The combination of 4e mechanics with an easy random generation character creation system and a great setting make this game total win.

Classic Music Recommendation

Okay, this isn’t so much a classic music recommendation as much as it is a recommendation to examine how bands age and whether they age well. Blink 182 were a pop-punk band that focused on immaturity and fun. They, like a lot of pop-punk bands were poking fun at the world and trying to navigate their young 20s. They recently released a new song filled with nostalgia and maudlin. It doesn’t quite fit their vibe and I’m not sure how I feel about the “I was young and rebellious, but now I wish I’d paid attention” song. Maybe it’s because it’s something we’ve all lived through. I still think of my dear friend who committed suicide in his 20s and wonder what I could have done to tell him I loved him one more time.

Speaking of nostalgic, Better than Ezra released a similarly messaged song, Mystified, about 3 months ago. The thing is, I think a nostalgic tone is a better for them as a band than Blink 182. After all, songs like A Lifetime and King of New Orleans were already touching on similar themes. Ironically, where Blink 182 went more somber in melody, Better than Ezra opted for a poppier version which also clashes with their vibe. The more I look at these videos, even in the directorial style, the Blink 182 video looks like a Better than Ezra video and vice versa. The most recent Better than Ezra release, Contact High, is a little closer to what I would expect from the band, but I’m not sure what I think about it yet. We’ll see. Mystified is growing on me, and ironically so too is Blink’s One More Time, but I don’t know about Contact High.

Then again, I’m a nostalgic guy and view things through the lens of nostalgia.

Classic Film Recommendation

It is the season of saccharine films and I’m going to begin with one of the greatest Christmas films ever made. I was recommending it to a friend the other day and she said, “I’ve never seen that.” I almost passed out in shock, but when I recovered I proceeded to share a 90 minute treatise on why it was great. Since I already gave you a 90 minute treatise above on what I think a good review should be, I’ll refrain from that here and just say that Rosemary Clooney, Bing Crosby, Danny Kaye, and Vera-Ellen made one of the best movies of all time. It’s a good drama, a great romance, a fantastic musical, and it features one of the best dance numbers ever. I seem to remember Fred Astaire once saying that it was the women he got to dance with who made him look good.

Let’s just say that Vera-Ellen makes Danny Kaye look like one of the best dancers in Hollywood history in the “While You’re Dancing” number. It’s exquisite. The song is perfect, the choreography a delight, and we get to see them fall in love before our eyes. And the best part? They don’t even realize they’ve fallen deeply in love.