Adventures in Reddit

A little over a year ago, I was introduced to the news aggregator site Reddit, and it has slowly but surely become the website that has taken over most of my browsing time on the Internet. Oh, it looks harmless enough at first, with its no-frills design and alien logos. All the content is user-submitted or linked to with the appropriate crediting, each item displayed in an order determined by "upvotes" and "downvotes" from Redditors. The high prevalence of cute animal pictures and image memes mixed in with the hard news make it seem like they would get old quickly. Then you discover the comments, where the users share insights and can have incredibly involved conversations, also displayed according to "upvotes" and "downvotes," so that the most interesting and relevant comments rise to the top. Click on a funny picture of a swan, and the comments might provide a dozen more funny swan pictures and stories, bird experts explaining the behavior being pictured, and a raging debate over local ordinances related to waterfowl.

It's the users that make Reddit such a fascinating timesink. Some of the best features, like the "AskReddit" posts where people can solicit advice or share stories, and the "AMA," short for "Ask me Anything" posts where users bombard scheduled celebrities and other mortals of distinction in no-holds-barred Q&As, are totally driven by user participation. I have literally spent hours on single "AskReddit" posts, reading dozens of personal stories shared in response to innocuous questions like, "What's the worst date you ever had?" and "What's the best practical joke you ever pulled off?" There are so many Redditors from all over the world, there's a high chance that somebody will have a new and interesting take on even the moldiest old subject, and those are the responses that tend to be upvoted to the top. Because everyone's using a pseudonym and there's no censoring except by other users, the stories are often refreshingly raw and unfiltered.

Occasionally all this collective Reddit power can be directed to altruistic purposes like raising money and political activism - see the anti-PIPA/SOPA campaigns. When major catastrophes happen, like the Aurora shootings, local Redditors will often be able to provide information and updates faster than traditional news sources - which can be viewed as both a positive or a negative. The system isn't perfect, and there have been plenty of hoaxes and fraudsters in the mix, but it's also encouraging how many of them get caught. The Reddit system has proved incredibly versatile and adaptable to a variety of different situations. In addition to the main Reddit site, there are thousands of "subreddits" devoted to specific topics like technology, cute animal pictures, the NBC sitcom "Community," and UC Berkely students. And of course, you have the attention-getters like the atheist, marijuana-enthusiast, and NC-17 rated subreddits. You can also customize your Reddit account to only view content from particular subreddits, so Redditors' experiences with the site can be radically different.

Alas, this is where Reddit stumbles a bit for a movie nut like me. The subreddit populations are self-selected, and though there is a sizable and active Movie subreddit, the participants are largely teenage and twenty-something males who really, really love Quentin Tarantino and Christopher Nolan, and are always asking for movie recommendations, trying to figure out what movie the cool trailer they saw on Youtube was for, and waxing nostalgic about the 90s. This is fine, but it really limits the kind of conversations you can have. The more erudite and crusty movie fans tend to hang out in the TrueFilm subreddit, which is very slowly building up a pretty good community, but it's going to take time before it can match up to pace of the traditional movie forums that I like to frequent. I still hang out in both subreddits an awful lot though, because they both have lots of potential, and occasionally they'll come through for me. I've also had some luck with subreddits for individual TV shows.

My biggest problem with Reddit right now is really just time management. Lately I spend way too much time on the site, to the point where I'm checking it multiple times a day for new content. I comment a fair amount too, and can get a little too invested in which contributions are getting the most responses and upvotes. I got into an argument with someone yesterday about movie release date scheduling, of all things. What can I say? What makes Reddit work is the user participation, so if you're not participating, you're not getting the full experience of being a Redditor.

And finally, FYI, the really cool trailer you saw was probably for "The Raid: Redemption," "God Bless America," or "Tucker and Dale vs. Evil." They are all out on DVD now.
---

Read More

"Project Runway" and Product Placement

I was catching up on this season of Project Runway on Lifetime's website, and couldn't help marveling that the network, which is pay cable, would allow one of their most popular shows to be streamed online for free. Most other cable networks, with the exception of Comedy Central, are extremely protective of their new content. You don't see current season episodes of shows like "Burn Notice" or "Breaking Bad" on Hulu Plus. One of the reasons I've fallen so far behind on "Top Chef," is because Bravo doesn't make it easy to watch them online. So I felt pretty good about Lifetime, until I was about halfway through last week's episode and I remembered what was offsetting any lost revenue - the product placement.

"Project Runway" is probably the perfect product placement show. Sure, there are some sponsors that are shoehorned into episodes with a notable lack of tact - the Lexus challenge where the designers were required to use the color of one of the new models in their designs was pretty ham handed - but others are so deeply ingrained into the format of the show itself, it's hard to imagine "Runway" without them. Any "Runway" fan will tell you that the workrooms are located at the Parsons School of Design in New York, and the one season when they tried to move shop to a new location was not a good one. The designers stay in the Atlas apartments for the duration of the competition. They get their fabric from Mood, home of a shop dog named Swatch. They sketch designs on HP tablets and use Brother sewing machines. The accessory wall has been stocked by various companies, including Bluefly and Piperlime. This season it's Lord and Taylor. And then there's the hairstyling segment of every show, where just before the models are sent out to the runway, they get a quick consultation from stylists wielding Garnier products, never mentioning prior sponsor Tresemme.

Challenges are often built around major retailers trying to appeal to different kinds of customers, or celebrities preparing for specific events. Then you have the judges. Michael Kors is a big designer with his own stores. Nina Garcia is an editor of Marie Claire magazine. Even Tim Gunn, who started out as a teacher and dean at Parsons, went and joined Liz Claiborne a few seasons back, and is always introduced as their man now. Everybody's selling something, and there's nothing wrong with that in this context. The fashion industry is all about marketing yourself, making your name into a recognizable brand that will fuel the sales of your products. So in an environment that is naturally obsessed with branding, the high amount of product placement is actually very appropriate. The producers have been good about picking their partnerships, and ensuring that while the promotions are obvious, they're also pretty well integrated. I mean, if you're going to have a whole challenge based on making clothing out of candy, why not get the candy from Dylan's Candy Bar in Times Square? On the other hand, they're not always successful. Again, the Lexus challenge.

I know all the arguments against product placement, that it's more insidious and blurs the boundaries between content and marketing in unwanted ways, but honestly I prefer advertising like this to the more intrusive commercials and the screen-obliterating pop-ups that are the blight of many network and cable programs. Especially in the reality shows, it feels odd when you don't see branded products everywhere, because brands are everywhere in real life. Blurring out logos actually draws more attention in some cases than if they were left alone. However, product placement has to be handled carefully, especially for the scripted shows. For every charming visit to a period Howard Johnson's in "Mad Men," or the Subway sandwiches that became a running joke on "Chuck," there are the more poorly considered ones. For instance, the infamous "Modern Family" iPad debacle, which read like too-obvious product placement even though Apple didn't actually pay to have anything promoted. Or Peter Parker's use of the Bing search engine in this summer's "Amazing Spider-man" movie, which was mocked from all sides.

There is a not-so-subtle art to this, and it'll be interesting to see how strategies and campaigns develop as more and more product placement is introduced into our content to make up for the waning effectiveness of more traditional forms of marketing. There is definitely a danger of some shows turning into extended commercials, but then, this is not a new problem. Keep in mind that television shows specifically created to shill products have been around for ages, and in the past they were often much less subtle about it than anything we see today. Look up the old "Mr. and Mrs. TV Show" episode of "I Love Lucy," for an eye-opening spoof, if you have the chance.

For now, the aggressive product placement on "Project Runway" isn't hurting the show much. Sure, some of the constant repetition of brands is annoying, but it's much less annoying than the high volume commercials for related products I used to have to sit through. And they don't interfere with the most dramatic moments of the competition - the judging, the eliminations, and the meltdowns. If the price of getting the show free online is more emphasis on all this product placement, so far I think it's been a good tradeoff.
---

Read More

800 Words on the Aurora Shootings

It's been a couple weeks since the Aurora shootings, and I think it's okay now to add my two cents. I don't want to talk about the tragedy itself in any detail, because I'm not qualified in any way for that. Instead, I want to try to sort out some thoughts and ponder the question that's been on my mind since I heard about what happened in Aurora - what does it mean?

Looking at the response to the tragedy, very little it seems. Security was briefly beefed up at theaters, but I don't think that's going to last. There was some discussion of gun control policies and mental health access, but most of the pieces I saw were cynical op/eds, predicting that nothing would actually change. There were also a few thoughtful ones about the terrible nature of the media coverage, and I generally agree with the theory that mass shootings are all about attention seeking, and no good can come of the media furor around the gunman involved. I got a look at a few minutes of the local news coverage of the shootings, where a hyperbolic reporter made reference to the fact that they were going to follow the story for days, weeks, and perhaps months and years to come. I stopped watching after that.

What about the impact on the movies themselves? Well, it was interesting to see how Hollywood responded. The "Gangster Squad" trailer was pulled, and the film itself delayed to January so that a potentially offending scene could be excised. Warner Brothers cancelled premieres and press, donated money, and did everything in their power to show their sensitivity to the victims, short of pulling "The Dark Knight Rises" from theaters. Box office tallies of the opening weekend of were not officially reported, a symbolic gesture since most of the usual bean counters got the estimates out to us anyway. The assumption is that the shooting played a part in the opening weekend grosses of "The Dark Knight Rises" falling below initial estimates, but nobody can say for sure. It's still a monster hit around the world, so any financial impact was limited.

The shooting in Aurora was a terrible tragedy, and in the immediate aftermath there were specters of all kinds of horrible fears, about movie theaters suddenly being less safe, about these highly anticipated blockbuster film premieres being a magnet for attention-seeking maniacs, about our whole film culture suddenly somehow being complicit. But after a few weeks and with the benefit of some distance, the more it feels like this was just another random act of violence perpetrated by a highly disturbed individual. It could have happened in a post office, a school, or any other public place where a crowd of people had gathered. I don't want to suggest that these mass killings are not deeply shocking and awful every times that they happen, and perhaps indicators of some deeper systemic problems, but they happen for reasons that are usually extremely personal and limited to the particular perpetrator involved.

So the shooting, in spite of the shooter's apparent obsession with Batman, has nothing to do with the movies. It reflects absolutely nothing about the Batman franchise, or superhero films, or onscreen violence or anything else you want to try and tie it to. The urge to do do, however, is a strong one. We want to find an easy explanation and we want the shooting to mean something. And it's too easy to speculate and draw conclusions that there really are no bases for. As much as we want them, there aren't ever going to be simple answers in cases like this. I've seen a couple of people try to blame the content, and predictably there's some yahoo trying to sue Warners for releasing the film, but it can't possibly stick. The shooter hadn't even seen the film, remember.

And related to that, it's very tempting to want to use the tragedy as a bludgeon for the moral or political issue of your choice. I caught myself wanting to tell off someone online for being enthusiastic about the Bobcat Goldthwait comedy "God Bless America" because it contains a scene where there's a shooting in a movie theater that's played for laughs. After Aurora, how could you champion a movie like that? But of course, that movie came out months ago and has nothing to do with Aurora. In light of recent events it was insensitive and unfunny, maybe, but that didn't somehow make the movie bad. "God Bless America" was rotten all by itself.

I'm glad that "Gangster Squad" was moved, because it is in very poor taste to evoke the shooting so close in time, even if the scheduling of the film was a coincidence. I think the film's fortunes have probably been irreparably damaged though. And I was relieved that "The Dark Knight Rises" had very little content in it that could be connected with what happened that would give any conspiracy theorists more ammunition.

It feels small and petty to feel protective of the films in this situation, but I am a media junkie after all, and the media is what I obsess over. I really enjoy Nolan's Batman films, and no matter how they're regarded in the future, it's sad that they're always going to be associated with this tragedy.
---

Read More

My Top Ten Comic Book Films

Note that the title of this post is not the top ten superhero films. In fact, I'll be leaving out the superheroes almost entirely, in order to focus on some of the more oddball, lesser known movies people might not have realized were based on comics. I also leave out the movies based on newspaper comic strip characters like the "Charlie Brown" movies and "The Addams Family." Here goes nothing:

A History of Violence - I wasn't keen on the film until I heard that David Cronenberg was directing and Viggo Mortensen was playing the lead. Few people realized that this smart, dark thriller about a seemingly average family man with a shady past was based on a 1997 graphic novel. Critics praised it for its unusually realistic portrayal of sex and violence, including shots of the unpleasant aftermath of fight scenes and gun play. It's a very adult film, both in content and in approach, though reportedly considerably toned down from the original comic.

Akira - Many find the animated "Akira" film to be incoherent, and fans of the manga frequently suggest that if you want to know the real story of the famous Capsules motorcycle gang of Neo-Tokyo, you're better off reading Katsuhiro Otomo's multi-volume epic. I love the film version though, for being one of the creepiest, most visceral, most abundantly R-rated animated films ever made. The epic, horrific finale sequence alone makes this an anime classic. In fact, the film made such an impact and was so notorious in the 90s, for a lot of people it was anime, for good or bad.

American Splendor - Harvey Pekar candidly charted his unpredictable life and brushes with fame through a series of independent comics. The film adaptation, displaying a refreshing self-awareness and sense of fun, takes the unusual step of occasionally having the real Harvey and his wife Joyce appear in and comment on the dramatization of their lives, where Harvey is played by Paul Giamatti and Joyce by Hope Davis. The story, despite the fourth wall breaking, is about ordinary people trying to live ordinary lives, and it's wonderfully touching and strange.

Ghost World - I was tempted to include the Terry Zeigoff documentary about Robert Crumb on this list, but I'll have to settle for his adaptation of Daniel Clowes' "Ghost World," the tale of two cynical teenage girls. One of them, Enid (Thora Birch), becomes friends with a middle-aged man named Seymour (Steve Buscemi), which has unexpected consequences for both them both. "Ghost World" has no ghosts, but it is one of the better films about teenage alienation. It is especially recommend for too-smart girls of a certain age, like me when I first saw it.

Men in Black - I love "Men in Black." I love its silliness, its bizarreness, and its refusal to treat the human race as anything special. Nope, we're just another species in a galaxy that is overflowing with strange alien life forms. Planet Earth is in danger of destruction with alarming regularity, so thank goodness for the Men in Black organization. And thank goodness for Will Smith in his prime, landing every joke as he played off the wonderfully deadpan Tommy Lee Jones. And director Barry Sonnenfeld, for bringing the the visual spectacle and the satirical atmosphere.

Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind - The beloved anime director Hayao Miyazaki also wrote and drew manga. His most substantial work was "Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind," which became a celebrated 1984 animated film. Based on the first two volumes, "Nausicaa" is a post-apocalyptic adventure story with thoughtful environmental and anti-war messages. It was made just prior to the formation of Studio Ghibli, but has almost all the hallmarks of their productions, including gorgeous traditional animation, a strong heroine, and memorable creatures.

Oldboy - Yep, this was based on a manga too, though only loosely. Park Chan-woo took the bare bones of the story and characters, and created a far more violent and shocking tale of a man imprisoned for years for reasons unknown, who is then unleashed upon the world. It is the centerpiece of Park's Vengeance Trilogy, has become a cult favorite. Hollywood has been trying to remake it for some time now without success. It's hard to imagine that any mainstream director would be able to keep the taboo plot twists and jarring violence of the original intact.

Persepolis - Marjane Sartrapi wrote the original "Persepolis" graphic novels based on her own experiences, growing up during the Iranian Revolution, and her rough adjustment to living in the West. So it was fitting that she directed the animated version herself, with Vincent Paronnaud. As a result, the film is extremely faithful to its comic source. "Persepolis" is in black and white, traditionally animated, and very frank about religious and sexual matters to the point where the film has become the subject of controversy and censorship in Muslim countries.

Road to Perdition - Originally a graphic novel by Max Allan Collins, the film version directed by Sam Mendes is probably best remembered for its spectacular cinematography by Conrad Hall. Set during the Great Depression, it follows the journey of a father and his young son. The father, played by Tom Hanks, is an enforcer for the mob. His boss, played by Paul Newman in one of his final roles, has divided loyalties and perhaps cannot be trusted. "Road to Perdition" was a popular and critical success, but a few of the comic's fans were still upset about a slightly altered ending.

V for Vendetta - Yes, I'm well aware of the muddled ideology of the film that severely waters down the entire point of the Alan Moore graphic novel. But good grief, I enjoy the hell out of it nonetheless. I love the visuals, especially the wonderful use of the Guy Fawkes masks. I love so many individual sequences like Valerie's letter and the domino scene. I also think it has one of Natalie Portman's best performances, as Evey Hammond transforming from frightened victim to revolutionary. Yes, it's flawed and compromised, but it's also frequently an intriguing and entertaining piece of work.
---

Read More

"Batman: The Animated Series" Turns Twenty

Has it really been twenty years since "Batman: The Animated Series" premiered? Good grief, it's true. Time for a little nostalgia, boys and girls.

"Batman: The Animated Series" premiered on FOX Kids back on September 6, 1992, when I was young enough to still be genuinely frightened by some of the episodes. Before this, I only knew Batman from the campy 60s series with all the Bat puns, and a few glimpses of the Tim Burton's "Batman" movies that I wouldn't watch until I was older. It was my first introduction to characters like Poison Ivy, Scarecrow, Bane, Killer Croc, Ra's Al Ghul, Clayface, and Two-Face. And it was, I suppose, my first real exposure to the noir genre, through the wrenching tragic tales of villains like Harvey Dent and Mr. Freeze. Throughout the 90s I kept telling myself that I had to stop watching cartoons and grow up, but how was I supposed to give up a show that was telling me such dark and interesting stories, that it hardly seemed like a cartoon at all? I was glued to the television set every weekday at 4:30PM for years.

For most Batman fans of my generation, I think this is the version we're the most familiar with, and it's fitting that the show borrows from so many different sources in the Batman mythos and distills them down to their essence. Oh sure, the Penguin is clearly modeled after the Danny DeVito Penguin from "Batman Returns," but Batman himself has shades of every version that came before him, from the goofy Silver-Age Bat to the grim, Frank Miller Dark Knight of the 80s. It certainly had its own point of view as well, highlighting aspects of the character that others had not. This Batman was a detective first and a bruiser second, and his psychological wounds were far closer to the surface than I'd seen before. It was the psychoanalytical approach to many characters that I found the most interesting, and some of my favorite episodes were the various villain origin stories that traced how mental illnesses and personality problems became full-blown supervillainy.

There were plenty of bad and boring episodes. I own the first two box sets of the show, and on the last rewatch I was surprised at how many misfires I found. Everyone remembers "Heart of Ice" and "Harley and Ivy," but there was a "Moon of the Wolf" or a "I've Got Batman in My Basement" for each of the good ones. The animation ranged from the outstanding to the painfully mediocre, and one of the overseas animation studios that worked on the series was actually fired for not being able to perform up to standard. However, I'm still impressed by the show's ambition, particularly in the early going when they would do almost totally straight crime stories like "POV" and "Paging the Crime Doctor." I used to groan every time "Appointment in Crime Alley" aired during the initial broadcasts, because it was one of the least flashy stories and it seemed like they reran it so often, but now the episode is one of my favorites.

"Batman" became an important touchstone for all the action shows that followed. Many fans point to the series as the origin point of a new breed of serious American animation for grown-ups, though I think that claim is a little oversold. "Batman" was the beginning of the DC Animated Universe, which would include "Superman: the Animated Series," "Justice League," "Batman Beyond," and a handful of movie spin-offs. It would also influence series as wide-ranging as "Spawn," "Gargoyles," and "The Big O." However, the animated "Batman" was never really embraced by the mainstream. FOX tried airing it on prime time for a few months, but it couldn't hold on to adult viewers. It was the kids who grew up with it who still cherish it the most strongly, who it really had an impact on, far more than the Burton movies ultimately.

Subsequent shows, even the ones with the same creative team involved, never quite matched up to the 1992 "Batman" series. I chalk it up to none of the successors ever having anything quite as distinctive and visually appealing as the "Dark Deco" style, and that the period setting was largely dropped. The later Batman cartoons took place in the modern day, instead of that stylized 1940s midnight world that gave the show so much texture and atmosphere. I was disappointed that "Superman" actually took less from the style of the Fleischer "Superman" cartoons than "Batman" did.

In the end it's the little things pop out in my memory. Victor Fries and his snow globe. The Mark Hamill Joker laugh. Shirley Walker's glorious orchestral themes. The sheer terror at watching the robot sentry stalk Barbara Gordon in "Heart of Steel." Harley Quinn on holiday. Alfred flying the Batwing. Nerding out every time we got a Riddler episode, because he was my favorite villain from the old live-action series. Spotting the giant penny in the Batcave. The spectacular finale of the first Clayface story.

Happy 20th, "Batman: The Animated Series." To borrow the popular fannish turn of phrase, it'll always be my "Batman."
---

Read More

I Saw "Magic Mike"

"Magic Mike" is a male stripper movie. Just think about that for a minute. This is not a movie where the stripping is played for laughs. And it's not a movie about amateur wannabes, like "The Full Monty." This is film that is intimately concerned with the business and lifestyle of professional male exotic dancing, and presents an open invitation to ogle the masculine form for 110 minutes. To my knowledge, we've never had something like this before at the multiplex, at least nothing this high profile with so much marquee talent. In addition to Channing Tatum as the title character, we also have up-and-comers Alex Pettyfer and Matt Bomer, with a big assist by Matthew McConaughey, who nearly steals the whole show. There is no question that the film is aimed at women, not only because of the blatant objectification of the men, but because when you get down to brass tacks, "Magic Mike" is a traditional romantic melodrama.

Mike Lane (Channing Tatum) dreams of starting his own custom furniture business, and juggles a variety of different jobs and businesses to raise the money. This includes stripping at a Tampa night spot, under the stage name Magic Mike, in a show run by his friend Dallas (Matthew McConaughey). At one of his day jobs, Mike comes upon a down-on-his-luck youngster named Adam (Alex Pettyfer), befriends him, and soon Adam is also taking the stage as The Kid. Adam's older sister Brooke (Cody Horn) isn't thrilled with her brother's new profession or with Mike, but they slowly become more friendly. Mike promises to look out for The Kid, but the lifestyle is starting to wear on him. Dallas is planning to move the show to Miami, and Mike's usual partner in sexual misadventures, Joanna (Olivia Munn), isn't interested in being anything more. And all too soon, the Kid lands them both in serious trouble.

Let's get the warnings out of the way first. "Magic Mike" shows a lot of skin, both male and female, but it stops short of full frontal nudity. There's some sex, but not graphic sex, plus some drug use, mild drunkenness, occasional brawling, and profanity in abundance. There are a few topless women in the mix with impressive assets, but the focus remains firmly on the male cast, who have equally impressive assets. I saw nothing that an open-minded male viewer would be too uncomfortable with, but your mileage will certainly vary. The male stripteases were never portrayed as demeaning, but as fun and empowering, with a lot of side benefits. The seedier side of the business, though alluded to, is mostly kept offscreen. Instead, the trouble comes from getting too comfortable with a crowd that seems to be having an endless party, and getting mixed up with easy money, bad influences, and forgetting about the consequences.

The one name to keep in mind here is not any of the sexy leading men, but the guy behind the camera: Steven Sodebergh. Yes, it's the king of indie cinema who is responsible for "Magic Mike," and who ensures that it's more than just campy, weightless fluff, like "Burlesque" or "Showgirls." We get to see plenty of the strip show (and what a strip show!) but audiences might be surprised at the amount of time Soderbergh takes to introduce the characters, establish that they're average, everyday people, and chart the course of their relationships. These relationships are played absolutely straight, grounding all the excess of Mike's hard partying social life and the over-the-top nature of his antics on stage. "Magic Mike" isn't nearly as ambitious or expansive as something like "Boogie Nights," but it does take itself fairly seriously. The plot isn't just there to fill in time between the setpiece, and some of Soderbergh's typically gorgeous, intimate shots should turn the head of any pretentious cinema geek.

Tatum's perfectly cast as the lead, and of course he is - the film is based on his own stint as a stripper, and the character is perfectly tailored toward his own strengths as an actor and a dancer. He's phenomenal on the stage, and not bad at all when he's off it. I've heard a few complaints about Cody Horn as his "uptight" love interest, but she stuck me a s a very canny choice. Horn has a different energy than anyone else onscreen, and she 's a great match for Tatum, actually making him come across as more charismatic and articulate. Then there's Matthew McConaughey, who takes the role of emcee and carnival barker and just runs with it. He has more personality than everyone else in the cast put together, nails every line delivery, and when it's finally his turn to go out on stage, you wonder why he ever left.

"Magic Mike" is a great time and a pretty decent movie too. I'm impressed with the way that it tackled the unlikely subject matter, and tackled it so wholeheartedly, without resorting to any of the usual clichés. I wouldn't be surprised if "Magic Mike" inspires a new subgenre, the male stripper rom-com. Alas, without Soderbergh, it'll probably be more beefcake than beef from here on out. Not that there's anything wrong with beefcake. Nothing wrong at all.

---

Read More

"Korra" Season Wrap-Up

I'm very behind on television posts. I know the first season of "The Legend of Korra" ended a while ago, but I just finished off the first season. Need to put down a few thoughts here. Spoilers ahead!

First, I'm a little disappointed that that new series doesn't quite operate independently from the previous series. You definitely don't get the full impact of the show unless you've watched "Avatar: the Last Airbender," and you're familiar with the old characters like Katara and Iroh, and you already understand concepts like the Avatar State. "Korra" is very plot-driven, and there often isn't time for the character development that the first series was so good at. So the creators wind up relying on a lot of ideas and relationships that were previously established. This makes "Korra" very much a sequel series that plays best to a slightly older audience that is familiar with the "Avatar" universe already.

This is not to say that "Korra" isn't a perfectly good watch. I think it's better than the first year of "Avatar" by a pretty wide margin, and it gets through much more complicated material more quickly. By the finale it's juggling a bigger cast of regular characters, including Korra, Mako, Bolin, Asami, Tenzin and his family, Lin Beifong, and the various animal sidekicks. I don't think that the villains are nearly as compelling as Zuko and Iroh, but Amon and Tarrlok certainly have their moments. The season's big conflict with Korra battling the Equalist movement was ambitious and intriguing, and it certainly did its job as an action series with a fast pace and lots of inventive combat. The animation and the soundtrack were superb throughout.

Where I think the show faltered a bit was with the characterization. The show moved way too fast in the romance department, before we really got to know the kids. I think the show really could have used a few episodes that centered on specific characters to get a little deeper into their backgrounds and their personal growth. Korra had several, but Mako and Bolin were definitely a shortchanged. The ad copy made a point of telling us that it was almost unheard of for siblings to have different bending powers, but nobody brings it up in the actual show. There are a few mentions of how the boys had a rough time growing up on the streets, but that's never expanded on either. Asami and her father, who are fairly minor characters, end up with a better arc than they do.

And then we have the appearance of General Iroh right before the big finale episodes. He's got Zuko's voice actor and is the namesake of one of the best characters from the first show, so he's surely someone important. If you didn't know any of this, the General is an odd blank, a new ally who wastes no time in getting in on the action, but he's more of a symbol of outside forces that haven't been dealt with yet, than anything else. On the other hand, there are characters who do get fleshed out nicely despite limited screen time - Lin Beifong, Tenzin, Pema and the kids, Tarrlok, and in a roundabout way Amon too. I was surprised at how well the characters were used, and there were a few good plot twists that I didn't see coming. Heck, nobody got the truth about Amon right!

And of course there's Korra. I've liked the character since the beginning, but her development's not as satisfying to follow as Aang's was. She's still the same brash, spirited, can-do young Avatar-in-training that she's always been. She's made some friends, fallen in love, and had to overcome some tough opponents and situations, but has she really grown or changed? Maybe. It's not so clear, because the show juggles so much, and Korra's spiritual awakening has been on the back burner for most of the season. And depending on how you interpret the ending of the last episode, her struggle isn't nearly as epic or arduous as Aang's. Then again, Korra is older, her story is very different, and the show itself is working with a different format and constraints.

"Korra" has set itself up very well for a second season, and a third if we're lucky. I may be hard on the show, but I'm very grateful for it. I love the "Avatar" mythology, the wonderful worldbuilding, the kickass characters, and I count myself lucky for the opportunity to spend more time in this universe. I think "Korra" could be better, but it's pretty damn spectacular already, and I can't wait for next year.
---

Read More