Monday, December 27, 2021

It's time for a movie spree

 When I made a post about The Gentlemen in April I vaguely mentioned being afraid that the movie theaters might not open in the near future. As it turned out, my fears were unfounded and theaters opened back up around August and this time there were movies I wanted to watch. So. many. movies. 

So naturally, I went on a movie spree and am now officially back on my regular schedule. All with necessary safety precautions, of course. 

What follows now is a quick rundown of every movie I watched in order and with short impressions and ratings. Here we go:

The Green Knight

I have been looking forward to this one for ages and when I finally watched it, it fullfilled all my expectations. Wonderfully strange and dark folkloric-feeling tale of what honor even means. 5/5

The Suicide Squad

I've already given you my rundown on this one. Better than the first, brutal, bloody, a good time at the movies. 4/5


Promising Young Woman

I really believe the movie was advertised wrong. It's not the fun revenge story some trailers and quotes made it seem and is instead a heavy compelling portrait of a woman eaten alive by grief and rage and guilt. 4/5

Dune

Epic sci-fi, perfectly understandable even for people who have next to no prior knowledge of the book(s). Gorgeous visuals, gorgeous music, a story that slowly unfolds and stays open for the next one. 5/5

James Bond: No Time to Die

As customary for Craig Bonds, very serious, very driven. Personally I enjoyed the complexity and human aspects they have given Bond and thought overall the story was well crafted. 3.5/5

Eternals

As I've said to a friend, this movie suffered from having to be part of the MCU. There was much there that could've been truly great but was hindered by having to adhere to MCU standards. However, the movie succeeded in humanizing its immortal characters insofar that I could sympathize with their struggles, which is quite a feat. 3/5

House of Gucci

Watched ths one in a Ladies' First preview with a friend and liked it quite a bit despite the fact that this is not my ususal genre at all. Great acting, great writing, great story development. Great movie as long as you don't mind that every character is deeply terrible. 4.5/5


I really wanted to watch Gunpowder Milkshake but our movie theater had a heating misshap and thus I missed the last showing. Eh, I'll just have to wait.

Satori over and out

Thursday, December 16, 2021

Reviews of Christmas classics I have never watched before: A Nightmare before Christmas

There are some movies widely considered Christmas classics that I have never watched before. Not for any particular reason mostly, they just haven't come up in my watchlist ever. Most of these are so ingrained in popculture that I sometimes feel like I DID watch them after all by virtue of knowing the major plot points and having seen snippets here and there. 

Still, I do like to do little post series on this blog and I'll pick up the new tradition to to a Christmas-themed post series from last year, so that's what I'll do. I'll watch Christmas movies and give my opinion on them.

First up, The Nightmare before Christmas.


 

In contrast to the other movies on this list, I have always meant to watch The Nightmare before Christmas. But every year I missed my chance to watch it either on Halloween or on Christmas. This is the year I finally sat down to watch it and I can definitely see what the fuss is all about. It is at its core a simple story about taking over what you don't understand and it failing miserably. It is animated gorgeously and the character design is so very creative. No wonder the visuals are and remain staples of weird kid culture until today. The songs are cool, I've had 'this is Halloween' stuck in my head for the past few days even though it doesn't fit at all right now. By the way, this is a Christmas movie.

Friday, December 10, 2021

"Bad" movies I enjoy 3 - The Covenant

The Covenant
(Ratings: 4/62)

The remarkable thing about this rating is that its audience score is over 50 but its critical score is the lowest on the list. It’s lower than Catwoman if you can believe that, meaning this movie has fans and the fans are dedicated enough to drag the score all the way up to 62, which is better than almost every single movie on this list except for King Arthur.

The Covenant is a story about four male teenage witches that get attacked by a fifth witch who wants to steal their powers. This fifth witch is played by Sebastian Stan who would go on to be a fan favorite in the MCU. In that world magic is addictive and it’s all well and good until you ascend on your 18th birthday and reach your full potential, because the more magic you use afterwards, the faster you age and eventually die, which is why Sebastian Stan witch wants to kill the first of the group to turn 18 and steal his power. He doesn’t realize that he will still die but he also doesn’t much care.

There’s no need to sugarcoat it, this movie is bad. Rife with cheap effects, baffling writing, actors clearly in their 20s playing teenagers, and that good early 2000s sexism. Yet if you asked me what I would change to make this movie better, or good even, I’d have to tell you: nothing. This movie is perfect as it is.

Should you watch it? - Yes! It’s bad but in a way that’s enjoyable to watch. The dudes are also shirtless and sweaty quite a bit, if that’s a selling point for you.

Thursday, September 2, 2021

Stuff I liked as a child/teen 2: Heroes

 

I got into Heroes after I bought the steelbook edition of the second half of season one at a yard sale. Despite me missing the whole premise and character introduction I was immediately hooked. Slowly but surely I bought the rest of the show (in steelbook editions, naturally, and second hand). And while the show had a troubled production and wildly varied in quality, it has a place in my heart until today.

Heroes ran from 2006 to 2010. Although I did not watch it when it first came out. I guess I was about 14 when I first saw it and when I first fell in love with their varied characters with their varied stories and powers.

The premise of Heroes is that some people discover they have latent superpowers and navigate what that means for them. They also have to stop a murderous superpowered serial killer, keep New York from exploding, save a cheerleader, evade a shady government agency and prevent a couple of disastrous futures. Among other things.

My favorite character by far was kind and gentle nurse Peter Petrelli (Milo Ventimiglia), who adopts the powers of every superpowered being he comes across but cannot control them in the least. He is so continuously good and selfless, which is something I love. My other favorite is Hiro Nakamura (Masi Oka), a comics nerd from Japan, whose time and space travel powers are among the strongest in the show but who just wants to be a hero. Another thing I loved was when the Indian scientist Mohinder Suresh (Sendhil Ramamurthy) and the ex-cop Matt Parkman (Greg Grunberg) just lived together in an apartment in New York and parented a child, whose parents were murdered. Extremely random but very cute. Heroes also put Zachary Quinto on the map. He played a superpowered serial killer, was a dark mirror and foil to Peter and so popular with fans that he eventually got a redemption arc.

Friday, August 27, 2021

Notes on The Suicide Squad

aka no badder bad guy than the US government


I watched The Suicide Squad this week and I ejoyed it quite a bit. It’s silly, it’s brutal, it doesn’t pretend to be anything that it isn't and it has surprising heart. Better than the other one by far. 

In her review Youtuber Amanda the Jedi elaborates a bit more on that surprising heart than I will do here. Suffice to say, this movie makes you care about the characters more than the other one ever did. They feel like people and their relationships feel genuine. 

Another aspect I liked about this movie is that despite being shock-full of ‘bad guys’ the story makes it clear at every turn that the baddest bad guy is and remains the US government.

I called this post ‘notes’ because it will be quite short since the points I am making are more or less obvious and not much analysis will go into this. It’s more a rehashing of elements of the movie that prove my argument.


Spoilers from here on out!

Almost everyone in this movie is some type of ‘bad guy’. (The only exception being the freedom fighters they meet on the island nation where their mission takes place.) The squad itself are criminals (with a varying degree of severity), the targets of their mission are brutal military dictators, their contact is a cruel mad scientist, the monster they fight in the end kills humans by the hundreds. And yet the US government, represented in the movie by Amanda Waller, the leader of the taskforce, (played by the brilliant Viola Davis) and - to a lesser degree - Peacemaker (John Cena) comes away arguably the worst.

Let’s go through the movie mostly chronologically (and in a list):

  • That Amanda Waller is ruthless and does not care about anything but the missions she is tasked with - least of all the lives of the squad members - was already obvious in the other movie. This one hammers it home on multiple occasions. She lets a team walk into an ambush as a distraction, threatens to have the 16-year-old daughter of a squad member killed should he not agree to the mission, and orders the indiscriminate killing of locals among other things.
  • The US government’s involvement in regime changes in middle and South America is both alluded to and outright stated as well as supported by the fact that the squad’s involvement is at no point meant to help the people of the country but secure the US government’s self interest, because while the previous regime was also brutal, it was favorable to the US and, therefore, didn’t warrant intervention.
  • Later they find out that the actual goal of the mission has been to destroy records of the US government’s involvement in human experiments conducted on the island with an alien starfish US astronauts had picked up decades ago. The experiments were conducted on the island on purpose, so the government could keep them quiet. The previous regime used the alien and the experiments to get rid of their enemies and the US government supported them.
  • Squad leader Rick Flag (Joel Kinnaman) is appalled by this and wants to instead let the world know what happened. Since he is US military and not a bad guy, Amanda Waller cannot threaten to kill him instantly to ensure his cooperation and has instead made sure that Peacemaker would kill everyone necessary to keep the secret for her, which he does.
  • Peacemaker as a character in general exemplifies some of the negative qualities of US foreign intervention. In a pointed line he says “I am committed to peace, no matter how many men, women, and children I have to kill for it”*. He is, nominally, following vague ideals of freedom and peace while at the same time committing atrocious acts in the name of these ideals.
  • Through mishaps the starfish is released instead of killed and it has grown considerably in 30 years. The first thing it does is declare the city his and possess what is left of the military. Amanda Waller orders the squad to leave as she believes the records to be destroyed (they are not). When the squad decides it’s time to be good guys and save the city and its people, she threatens to blow them up and would have done so, had she not been stopped by her assistants.
  • When Starro the giant starfish is defeated and dies, he says through one of the humans he possessed, "I was happy floating, staring at the stars”, underscoring the fact that Starro only became a monster threatening earth through the actions of the US government and making me feel sorry for him.

In the end, the protagonists might be villains (although, again, to differing degrees, Ratcatcher 2 just stole stuff) but the degree of their villainy and the amount of suffering they cause is always trumped by the US government.


Anyway. Movie was fun. Nanaue the shark person was my favorite. Loved the little rat. Sad about some deaths but what can you do.

Satori over and out

* Forgive me if that isn't the exact line, I watched the movie in German.

Saturday, June 26, 2021

Thoughts about things I saw: The Magicians (2)

Spoilers for The Magicians season 4.

Margo in focus from the chest up. She is in royal attire and has a sad expression.
Margo (Summer Bishil) in season 4

 I did not finish The Magicians. In fact, I would not have finished even season 4 if not for my drive to not abandon shows in the middle of a season. Season 4 really strained me, on the one hand because it showcases everything that frustrates me about the show and on the other hand - and probably more importantly - because it did not feature my favorite character much or at all.

Season 3 ends with a gang of misfit magic college students restoring magic to their - and all other - worlds. Even though they succeed, it all goes wrong anyway - as things are wont to do with them - and an unkillable god-monster takes possession of the body of my favorite character, Eliot (Hale Appleman).

Season 4 revolves mostly around finding a way to stop the god-monster, hopefully retrieving Eliot in the process, and getting magic evenly distributed again. Eliot being possessed by a god-monster tragically means we get nearly nothing from him and especially no interactions with the other characters. We do, however, get Hale Appleman giving a truly great performance as the god-monster and other characters saying and showing how important Eliot is to them.

One of these characters is Eliot’s best friend Margo (Summer Bishil). Their friendship is my uncontested favorite relationship in the show. When we first meet them, they are the breezy party people who take nothing seriously and live for life’s pleasures. As we get to know them better over the seasons and as they grow, they get depth and complexity and through it all remain each other’s most cherished person.

There is a time in season 4 where the characters falsely believe that Eliot is dead and the monster is just piloting his corpse. The fantasy world of not-Narnia where Eliot was king once and had a wife (long story) subsequently falls into a ritualistic grieving period and his wife, Fen, is inconsolable. Margo meanwhile is trying to stay on track, lead the kingdom and solve problems. She seems, for all intents and purposes, to ignore Eliot’s apparent death and coldly rebuffs Fen’s attempts to rope her into the grieving rituals. It gets to the point where Fen asks her why she isn’t crying, the clear implication being that that must mean Margo did not care about Eliot as much.

The scene that follows hit me like a gut punch. Margo stops in her tracks, turns around and says: “Fen, I’m only gonna say this once. Me joining your sad-face therapy party is dumb. Because I can’t cry out all the sadness ever. Because if I start, I’ll never stop, understand? I’ll be useless forever.”

Margo is generally presented as unaffected and nonchalant, which is why her admission here, that she grieves so deeply that if she let herself feel her grief, she’d never recover, is so devastating to me. Summer Bishil gives a fantastic performance, you can see her facade breaking and her emotions seeping through the cracks. I cried for her when I first watched this scene and it still gets me.

5 episodes later Margo is on a dangerous quest with the goal of getting Eliot back and Summer Bishil gives another incredible performance, digging deep into Margo as a character. If only for these scenes watching the season has been worth it. 

Satori over and out

P.S. I could write a whole post about how Quentin's end was supremely unsatisfying, not only from a narrative standpoint but especially considering his character and what he represents but I don't want to be so negative on this blog so I won't. 

Monday, May 10, 2021

"We love you, Joel" - Love and Monsters and the optimistic post-apocalypse

 Often the post-apocalypse as a genre is very dark and gritty and has a pessimistic view of humanity. Anyone to have survived the wasteland this long, goes the argument, is necessarily gruff and hardened at best and a sadistic monster at worst. The main character do not only have to fight whatever the post-apocalyse left them with but also - and often even primarily - other people who would want to harm them. Survival is for the strong in these cases, fearlessness and the willingness to do violence are valued. 

A post-apocalyptic movie like this does not have to be derivative or devoid of meaning. Mad Max: Fury Road, which presents us with just such a world, deals with the post-apocalyptic staples in a much more nuanced way and offers up a narrative that instead focuses on rediscovering kindness and remaking a tyrannical rule (see also the Hopepunk post). All I am saying is that often stories in this genre feel too pessimistic and hopeless.

Love and Monsters does not.

Movie poster of the film "Love and Monsters". It features an ensemble of characters as well as the title and the actor's name "Dylan O'Brien".
Spoilers for the movie!
 

In it, the world is plagued by giant reptiles, anarchids, insects, and amphibians that mutated from radiation after Earth successfully shot down a meteor about to destroy it. The humans that survive live in colonies in various bunkers and bunker-like structures, trying their hardest to make it. Joel (Dylan O'Brien), the main character, one day starts a journey of 140 miles to get to his girlfriend in another colony (Jessica Henwick) because he feels useless in his own. He is, to put it mildly, not really equipped to handle the trip and only makes it through sheer determination, dumb luck, and the help of strangers and a very good dog. 

There is a lot to like about the movie. For example, its creature design is extraordinary, the monsters look alive, otherworldly, scary and at times strangely endearing. Then, the 'love story' that is the catalyst for this whole movie is handled refreshingly realistic. While Joel hangs onto the idea of Amy and what they had five years ago, Amy moved on in the time when they did not hear from each other. She still cares for him and what they were but what they were is in the past for her. She, reasonably, never expects him to actually attempt the trip to her and when he arrives she is overjoyed to see him but she is a different person than she was before the apocalypse. And the movie does not treat her behavior as wrong or bad or condemnable at all, nor does it treat Joel's devotion and drive as silly. Both are valid reactions to dealing with the trauma of surviving the apocalypse. Both characters are sympathetic and right

What I want to elaborate on, however, is the fact that Love and Monsters is so beautifully optimistic in tone that it made me tear up. The emotional arc in this movie centers around Joel believing himself to be the fifth wheel in his colony so to speak. Everyone else is paired up and his contributions are weak at best. He surmises that it won't be a great loss to them if he leaves and decides to go. However, from even before he leaves, it is clear that his colony loves him, they tell him so and attempt to convince him to stay. Joel plays this off as them just trying to be nice until the point where he arrives in his sweetheart's colony and finds things different than he expected. He pulls out a map they gave him and discovers that they wrote encouraging and love-filled messages on the back, boiling down to 'we love you, stay safe, come back to us'. When he manages to reach them over radio, they are ecstatic to discover that he's alive and positively shower him in affection. Joel realizes that he is loved and that he has a family who believe he is worth it, no matter what he might think. It allows him to free himself from the past and look to the future and just makes me very emotional. 

Another aspect is that every person - barring three human antagonists at the end - is kind and helpful and welcoming. The strangers that save his life during his journey, travel with him, teach him how to shoot and what they know about the creatures, attempt to convince him to join them on their search for a safe place and give him gifts to help him survive. Amy's colony not only saves him when he is passed out from venom but is also immediately willing and ready to take him in. Even in the flashback scene detailing Joel's escape from his hometown when he is standing frozen on the street, people in a truck driving by, stop the car to pick him up. Yes, people can be bad and selfish but mostly people are kind and trustworthy and community-oriented. And that's just refreshing to see in a post-apocalypse.

Lastly, I want to talk about the general tone of the movie. Because even though it is tense sometimes, its tone is generally light. The fact that Joel's drive is pure and he is friendly if naive, the people he meets are nice and in the one case where they aren't, at least the monster is. Joel grows during his journey, into himself and away from the past. While the colonies become less and less safe as time goes on, he discovers that it is not impossible to survive outside a bunker and he brings that message to desperate people. First on foot to Amy's colony and his own, then via radio to people sequestered all over the country, who start on their own journey. A journey that the movie presents through framing and score as perilous but hopeful. 

All in all, Love and Monsters is enjoyable and engaging, because it asks 'what if a post-apocalyptic world wasn't just all terror, gloom and desaturation?'. It looks at human behavior and decides that mostly, humans would help and love and support each other in the face of grave danger. It takes a genre widely known for its pessimissm and chooses differently.

It's on Netflix. Give it a watch!

Satori over and out

Monday, April 12, 2021

The last movie I ever saw in theater

I'm just being overdramatic (or I dearly hope I am). One day in the future the movie theaters are going to open again and then I am going to go on a movie spree and watch as many movies in a row as I can. 

But until that happens, The Gentlemen will remain the last movie I saw in theater about a year and two months ago (highly unusual for me, normally I go the theater twice a month), exactly one day before the theaters closed for the first lockdown. So let's talk about The Gentlemen.

Movie poster for The Gentlemen. The primary characters are posed together.

The easiest and fastest way to describe this movie is to tell people that it's a Guy Ritchie movie. Of course, that only works if people are familiar with Guy Ritchie movies and aware of his style and quirks. A Guy Ritchie movie is British, it's probably about gangsters or outlaws or just generally people with a flexible moral compass, people swear when they open their mouths, there is probably only one (1) major female character but obvious homoeroticism, stylish slow-motion action scenes and highly stylized sequences when characters e.g. are recounting a story or observing something.  It's kinda dumb but good fun.

Another way to describe this movie is as a mess of baffling narrative and cinematographic decisions that really shouldn't work but somehow do. The greater part of the movie, for example, is told by a shady journalist to the right-hand-man of a drug lord as an explanation of why he deserves 20 million pounds for not publishing the information he has. It begins, however, with the drug lord in question apparently being shot in a bar.  

I liked this movie because I am generally fond of Guy Ritchie's style of storytelling (as I just mentioned in the previous post). I was interested in all of these morally ambiguous characters who all held onto their own carefully-kempt facade of civility that is in danger of slipping always. Charlie Hunnam's second in command to Matthew McConaughey's drug lord (who loves power, prestige, and his wife), is the character I enjoy most, simply because of the calm menace he exudes and the fact that he needs things to be very particular and has to deal with Hugh Grant's shady journalist who absolutely does not care. (Hunnam's character and the drug lord were also an example in my 'crime lord and right-hand-man' post, so yeah.)

I probably have a higher regard for this movie than I would have had if it hadn't been the last movie I experienced in a theater on the last day before the first lockdown but here we are. I have since rewatched it and enjoyed it just as much, so maybe I just like it, you know, no excuses necessary.

 Satori over and out

P.S. If the gimmick rap song seems just a bit too good to just be a movie gimmick, it's because the one playing the rapper in the movie is a rapper in real life as well. Just a fun fact.

Friday, April 9, 2021

"Bad" movies I enjoy 2 - King Arthur

 

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword movie poster showing Charlie Hunnan as Arthur holding a sword

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (30/69)

Is this just an excuse to talk more about this movie? Maybe. The audience score for this one is pretty solid but critics weren’t as happy with it. Something about how there wasn't much of a story or how the characters were underdeveloped or how it had little to do with the King Arthur myth. Eh, who needs all that. I will forever be bitter that it underperformed and we will never get a sequel called "Knights of the Round Table" in which Arthur has to deal with nobility.

What is it that I like about this movie?
  • As I said in a previous post on this blog (nearly four years ago now wow) changing Arthur’s background, how he grew up, and who he is now as a person as a result is very interesting to me. Arthur is not a noble and instead grew up as an orphan in a brothel and on the streets of London. He vehemently resists becoming the chosen one and is instead interested in protecting those he considers his.
  • I am also in general fond of Guy Ritchie’s signature style of story-telling, full of highly stylized action-sequences.
  • I very much like the fact that there’s no romance sub-plot. The mage fulfills the role of guide not love interest, which is only fitting for this film.
  • I also enjoy that not everyone is white as is often the case in medieval fantasy.
  • The score is absolutely phenomenal. It is one of my favorite movie scores ever and I listen to it constantly.

Should you watch it? - Definitely! It is a good time at the movies if you're into fantasy.

 Satori over and out

(For my next "bad" movie, I should pick one with a low audience score to balance it out.)

Thursday, February 18, 2021

Character Dynamics: Crime Lord and Right-Hand Man aka the villainous King and Lionheart

“And as the world comes to an end
I'll be here to hold your hand
Cause you're my king and I'm your lionheart”
- King and Lionheart, Of Monsters and Men


RAY: “It’s out of your jurisdiction. There’s too many moving parts, parts that we can’t control.”
MICKEY: “That may be true, but you’re still doing it.”
RAY: “I accept that… But can’t you send Fraser instead?”
MICKEY: “No, I can’t send Fraser, you’re my best man. I want you.”
- The Gentlemen, dir. Guy Ritchie


I have not been able to find out where the term King and Lionheart originated or by whom it was popularized but to the best of my knowledge it gained traction in the last couple of years. King and Lionheart refers to a very specific character dynamic, namely, a hero tasked with great power and responsibility and a loyally devoted friend, who is their rock and protector. This relationship can, but definitely does not have to, be romantic. The classic example, of course, would be the trope’s implied namesakes, a king and their trusted knight, it can, however, also be understood metaphorically as any variation of leader of the group and second-in-command. It is important that the lionheart-character is faithful and devoted to the king-character and the king in return trusts the lionheart like no other.

Now, this dynamic is, of course, beautiful and I enjoy seeing it immensely. What interests me even more, however, is its villainous counterpart, which I will be calling Crime Lord and Right-Hand Man (I know it’s not quite as catchy, if someone has a better idea, let me know).

In its broad strokes it is equivalent to King and Lionheart. The crime lord is a leader tasked with great power, the right-hand man their loyal and devoted protector. The crime lord is maybe a gang leader, a tyrant, the head of a criminal enterprise or other, the right-hand man is maybe an assassin, maybe a second-in-command, maybe a mercenary, but whatever they are, they are, for whatever reason, fiercely loyal to their crime lord. The differences are where it gets interesting.

Where the dynamic differs strongly is at the level of equality and reciprocity that can be achieved in such a relationship. While technically kings do have some power over the lionheart, it is mostly rendered a moot point since the lionheart follows and protects the king voluntarily and the king’s respect puts them on their level. And even though I’d argue that the right-hand man’s agency in choosing - and choosing to stay with - their crime lord is crucially important (more on that later) and the trust and respect their crime lord has for them is vital, there is a certain power imbalance inherent in their dynamic. Because the implication is always that the crime lord would sacrifice their right-hand man if it came down to it, up until killing them themself if they had to. Furthermore, the crime lord is unquestionably in charge and gives out orders. The right-hand man might provide input or advice but ultimately the decision lies with the crime lord and only with them and the right-hand man is expected to shut up and comply.  

Of course, the right-hand man gets something out of that dynamic as well, and it’s not only money and second-hand power. No, a right-hand man is exactly where they want to be, one step behind and to the side of their crime lord. They either don’t have the taste for the duties necessary to sustain the criminal enterprise themself, are more chaotically inclined or obsessed with the crime lord. Their fierce devotion is necessary for this dynamic to function because loyalties in the world of the crime lord are usually tenuous at best. This devotion often reaches excessive heights - willing to torture, maim, murder, die - and puts the right-hand man in a special position no one else can occupy.

Due to their unique position the right-hand man is also potentially a unique liability for the crime lord, because no one knows their business, no one knows them, better than the right-hand man and a crime lord typically has a host of enemies who would just love to use the knowledge of the right-hand man against them. This is where the right-hand man’s agency comes in. It is absolutely necessary that they want to follow, support, and protect their crime lord, that their devotion is based on choice not on fear or practicality. They would never betray their crime lord not because they fear possible repercussions but because they don’t want to, no promise of money or power could sway them. 

And that’s what fascinates me. 

Birds of Prey


Examples of this include:
- Cesare Borgia and Micheletto (Showtime Borgia, the fictionalized characters specifically and not the real people that existed)
- Black Mask and Victor Zsasz (Birds of Prey, again, specifically their portrayal there)
- Mickey Pearson and Raymond Smith (The Gentlemen)
- Wilson Fisk and James Wesley (Daredevil Netflix show)

If you have more examples, please send them to me.

Satori over and out

P.S. I feel the need to clarify that I’m using “relationship” in this post in its most general sense meaning the connection between two or more people.

 P.P.S. Take this meme from tumblr that fits:


 


Thursday, January 28, 2021

Recommendation: 4 short stories of The Best American Science Fiction and Fantasy 2019

This time around it was even harder to just pick four stories, since I loved almost every single story in this collection. The 2019 collection edited by Carmen Maria Machado is definitely my favorite year so far. You know the drill by now. If you can, buy the book, if you can't, follow the links to the stories that can be found online. Enjoy!


1) While it was hard to pick the other three, choosing this one as number one was actually quite easy. Sister Rosetta Tharpe and Memphis Minnie Sing the Stumps Down Good by LaShawn M. Wanak is really quite something. From the premise to the setting to the characters and social commentary, this story is truly exquisite. There's an epidemic of so-called stumps, wood-like spore formations that can be lethal if breathed in. Some people have the ability to destroy these stumps with singing and these people are asked to work for an agency of questionable intent that does just that. Telling you more would spoil it, I fear and it is so much more than I can quickly summarize in a few sentences.

2) When Robot and Crow Saved East St. Louis  by Annalee Newitz is about a disease-tracking and epidemic-preventing robot who gets left alone when the funding for its program runs out (pointedly enough its human handler now works for Amazon Health). And still it follows its objective to keep the population of St. Louis safe. It is aided by a crow it befriended and by a child living in an occupied building. I like the optimistic tone despite the dismal state of that world and I greatly enjoy the robot learning crow language.

3) I love Martin Cahill's Godmeat  because it hints at every turn at a greater story, a larger world. A brilliant cook is tasked with preparing the meat from dead Old Gods for new vengeful gods to help them take on physical form. He does so because he is angry at the world and feels betrayed and he relishes the challenge. That the ascension of the new gods would almost certainly mean the end of the world is something he accepts, at least in the beginning. Despite the grandiose backdrop, it is actually a quite personal story about regret and redemption and letting go of resentment.

4) Nino Cipri's Dead Air is a subtle horror story told through transcripts of audio-recordings, which I greatly enjoyed. The manner of telling contributed to the uncanniness and uncertainty, because you couldn't be sure what was happening. An artist interviews her lovers for an art project and unexpectedly falls in love with one of them, a mysterious woman that cannot - but has to - go home to confront the things that haunt her. I really like the atmosphere created here through story-telling and the use of transcripts and the way the story haunted me. 

Okay, I can't restrain myself. I recommend two more stories:

Ada Hoffmann's Variations on a Theme from Turandot for a wonderful blend of fiction and reality that happens in a theater and the escape that lies in the malleability of stories.  

P. Djèlí Clark's The Secret Lives of the Nine Negro Teeth of George Washington  for episodic tales of magic and consequences and what it says on the tin. 


I truly enjoy these collections a lot. Maybe I should look into subscribing to one of these magazines the stories come from and get more stories more often. Anyway, enjoy these! They're brilliant!

Satori over and out

About Me

My photo
I am in my mid 20s and finished my university career. My areas of study included media analysis, literary and cultural studies, linguistics, and history. I like reading, drawing, writing, movies, TV, friends, traveling, dancing and all kinds of small things that make me happy. Just trying to spread some love.

Some of my favorite horror media 1

 I always used to say I don't like horror as a genre. That is not quite true, or it is not quite true anymore. Horror is such a varied ...