Comic Con Trailer Reviews

Man, I've been absent for a few weeks. What can I say? I got busy with other shit.

First, a word of praise for Comic Con and MegaCon and other such things... it's amazing how large and viable geek culture has truly become. This is not going away like we thought. The things we grew up with, all the comics and movies and games, are an integral, powerful force for the culture we've crafted as adults. It's part escapism, sure, like anything – but it's also just the way we've let these characters and stories define us. Fiction can resonate long and wide in the human mind. And none more than that which we grew up with, that which we saw in the formative years.

So it's pretty fucking cool.

Here's some thoughts on the various Comic Con trailers, but not all of them, just the ones I cared about. I didn't bother watching the Kingsman 2 or the Thor Ragnarok ones because I've already seen other trailers for those films, and I also don't care about Star Trek or some of the various TV shows displayed. But there was some interesting stuff I saw...

JUSTICE LEAGUE

Who says there's no money in using millions of Hollywood dollars to recreate playing with your action figures as a kid? I guess this could maybe not totally suck. Hopefully? I dunno. If you had told me that “maybe it won't suck” was the highest aspiration I'd have for a fucking Justice League movie 10 years ago, I would have been extremely depressed. This still mostly just looks like a mish mash of too many random new characters to be good. If DC would quit trying to outpace and outmatch Marvel, maybe they'd make better films. It doesn't help that every line spouted in this sounds like an Ad Lib for action movie trailers. You could play this for a blindfolded person and they wouldn't know what movie it's for.

STRANGER THINGS: SEASON 2

Holy shit – now this looks good! I was unsure where they'd go after the first season. Apparently where they were going was even more awesome shit. I am loving the Halloween ambiance and the weird, Lovecraftian monsters and imagery. These characters and this story are some of the best original stuff on TV right now. If you were concerned about how good this Halloween season would be, well... be concerned no more.

THE WALKING DEAD SEASON 8

I love The Walking Dead like I love a child that sometimes screws up really badly and has to spend the night in the slammer for a DUI or public disturbance. This trailer for Season 8 looks pretty good, although it appears to be every inspirational Rick Grimes speech ever rolled into three minutes. And yeah, they have a weird shot at the end of Rick with a huge beard waking up in a hospital bed, like it was all a dream... yeah, I'm sure this long-running popular TV show is about to end this season with it all being a dream... sure.

READY PLAYER ONE

If our collective 80s nostalgia became some insane chimera, cobbled together with the forces of alchemy, it would probably look like this Ready Player One trailer. I haven't read the book, though I think I should, as this looks like a lot of fun. If anything, it will be very difficult to make anything else that is MORE nostalgic for old movies and games after this.

THE DEFENDERS

This looked pretty cool – basically exactly what I expected, full of highly well-produced action and lots of witty quips, but at least all of that looks very well done here. At least three of the Defenders, I'm really excited to see again. (Hint: the one I am not that excited about rhymes with Shmiron Shmist.)

And finally... the one everyone was waiting for...

AVENGERS: INFINITY WAR

What? How am I seeing this one, which was only a secret trailer not released to the general non-attending public? Surely nobody would ever break that cardinal rule and upload it to the internet...

It looks pretty fun. I don't know though. I am worried about the over-saturation of characters in these movies. As well made as it's likely to be, I'm just not sure it's good storytelling to cram so much shit into one movie. I guess if they can do it in a comic book, you can do it in a movie, too. But maybe sometimes less really is more. But that said, I am sure I'll end up seeing this and enjoying it for the batshit insane, colorful, jam packed spectacle it is along with everyone else; who am I kidding?

That Walking Dead Finale, Man

The season 6 finale of The Walking Dead, AMC's most popular show about undead shambling husks clinging to dear life and also about zombies, will no doubt have people talking. This season was supposed to introduce Negan, the next big bad character of the series who was infamous in the comics for reasons I don't need to spoil because you can find people talking about it on the shallowest surfaces of Google. It did that, but it also just created a whole new set of problems. Bad problems. Problems I'm going to talk about in here with SPOILERS attached!

...

Okay. Are they all gone yet? Did the people who don't want spoilers leave the website yet? They did? Sweet.

Basically what happens is, Negan shows up after this frankly pretty good finale full of tension and suspense, and the audience is shitting their pants with fear. The atmosphere and anticipation of what's about to happen was really through the roof, and Jeffrey Dean Morgan did a pretty good job overall. This character has been hyped for a while and everyone wanted to see what he would do. So he shows up, talks for a bit, makes everyone fucking sweat, and he raises a bat and kills... someone. We don't see who. It's a total cliffhanger. For the finale of this whole thing, a cliffhanger, and now we have to wait like five months to see that they no doubt killed off a character who won't affect the story in any major way for more than two episodes.

It especially sucks because I liked a lot of this season up until now better than anything this show has done in years. A ton of the episodes this time around were awesomely action packed, suspenseful and cool. I really was hyped for this finale, as I figured they could finally keep the momentum going. But instead the finale makes me see the show as that really cool friend that you liked, who came to your birthday parties early and bought you an extra drink at happy hour when you were down, but then you find out that he posted a status on Facebook asking why can't HE use the "N word" if rappers can do it, while you were asleep. It's a buzzkill.

It's just such cheap hack work writing. What the hell am I supposed to say? It reeks of social media pandering and bullshit hash tags and planned, calculated and focus-tested art. They've basically been given a license to keep pulling this shit over and over again – more cliffhangers dangling the prospect of death in front of you, more tricks and gimmicks to get their social media team something to do. It's bullshit. The idea of AMC putting up stupid polls asking who we think got killed and the hash tags and the fake suspense is nauseating, because you know they've probably already started by the time this blog post is up. It's anti-storytelling. Drama sucked out with a liposuction and replaced with corporate marketing. It couldn't be more transparent about that if we were talking about Casper the Friendly Ghost.

The Walking Dead just feels desperate with how often it does these ridiculous cliffhangers and drawn out “suspense” parts with disappointing returns. We should've seen the writing on the wall way back in early season 5 when they kept splitting up the narrative between Beth's hospital story and the rest of the gang – it was evident back then. They did it twice this season with Glenn's dumpster hiding extravaganza and then with Daryl getting shot in the previous episode – a complete non-story now, since he barely showed up in the finale. It's like we've all been enabling a drug addict, just going okay, he's not too bad, he was lucid at dinner last night so let's just not say a word. But then he steals Mom's jewelry she inherited from her dead aunt to pawn off for another ounce, and we look like fools all the more for it. And I know it's ridiculously hyperbolic to compare a TV show ending I didn't care for to a drug addict, but come on, it's the Internet and that is what we do here.

This really is the final nail in the coffin of network TV. It's done. That battle's over and Netflix's “put everything up at once” model has clearly emerged the winner if shows as big as TWD are resorting to desperate pandering garbage like this. It just shows how little integrity the show has left. They needed a way to compete with Netflix's juggernaut shows that come out all at once and are usually pretty fucking amazing. Since they have to wait another six months for another season while Netflix just pops out shows like the Octomom, well, we get cliffhangers and gimmicks to keep the audience abuzz on social media. A good story would have done the same, but when has that ever been in style? Someone is having a very good day at AMC's media marketing relations department, seeing the stats go up and up. I guess I'm not helping in that regard.

If it seems rather dramatic that I'm ranting about this, well, it's because I like the show when it isn't pulling dumb shit like this. When it doesn't fall back on the goofy cliffhangers and the ludicrous drawn-out parts, the show has a lot of good stuff going for it – strong acting, good characters, some good drama here and there and some good action. It's well worth watching, or it has been in the past anyway. But it sucks that the people running it are more interested in gimmickry and fake-outs than in real storytelling. The Walking Dead will remain successful, I have no doubt about that, but I think the illusion is over and we're kind of beyond the pale now – people will see the difference between this and really great TV.

I think overall, it's telling that the most cynical part about the nihilistic zombie apocalypse show is not the malaise of the main characters, but instead the marketing team's chokehold over the narrative, strangling the life out of it with these trash tricks and tomfoolery. That's depressing.

So Let's Talk About The Walking Dead

The Walking Dead finished its midseason finale, "Start to Finish," and predictably, the Internet is full of a variety of colorful complaints. I've only really been watching this show for a year, but I've read all kinds of criticisms about it dating back to season 2 or so, and I think it's time to just sit down and talk candidly about this show. Can we do that? Let's give it a shot.

First, the midseason finale. SPOILERS if you haven't seen it, so don't read any further if that's not your bag.

The finale was mostly fine. It wasn't terrible or anything. Parts of it were quite blood pumping good - several cool action sequences and some solid tension between Carol and Morgan being the highlights for me. It moved along at a fairly brisk pace. But then it just kinda ended, way earlier than I thought it would. Maybe I was expecting a 90 minute episode or something - but even at the usual 45, they still could have resolved a few more of these plotlines. As is, it felt a bit like they just cut short before we got to a really climactic moment for any of the various storylines.

Like, really, we couldn't have had a cool climactic end to the situation between Carol, Morgan and the tied-up Wolf guy kidnapping Dr. Denise? We had to end Rick's story this year with him and the others just wandering out into the crowd of zombies? We know their deaths won't come from these things because that would have been the big emotional payoff, and that would have happened this year in this episode. The show obviously has something else planned. So what's the deal? It just feels like this was a placeholder, a stop-gap to move the show from one point to the next, utilitarian-style. Which is not a good way to do a show. The Carol and Morgan fight should have felt huge, and Rick getting to the armory should have been the climax of the episode, not some cliffhanger cut off in the middle.

Surely - predictably - they want to open up next February with a real bang in some new way. But why does the show have to sacrifice the midseason finale for that?

The show's real problem is inherently intertwined with its very nature. The show's intent isn't really to build toward some great epic climax or to have some big earth-shattering discovery for one character - it's to show the endless, droning life of a zombie apocalypse. That premise combined with the 'ooh, let's get a cliffhanger' nature of network TV inevitably leads to a lot of dead space in the show and a lot of diminished payoffs. I like the huge cast, but the number of characters inevitably leads to the show only developing them right when they're about to die in the same episode. That gets predictable fast.

Maybe it would have been better if it was an Orange is the New Black or House of Cards style show where every season is just released at once. Maybe a more out of the ordinary structure would have helped, one where all the episodes could focus on being self-contained and good, rather than several of them ending on dumb cliffhangers that end up taking weeks to resolve. The show often feels protracted to a fault, and while I like a lot of things about it, it seems like they could probably put more effort into some of the filler stuff in between 'big moments.'

Too much of the time now, The Walking Dead teases you with good build-ups and strong character acting, but then fails to deliver the real punchy moment, the zinger so to speak, until weeks later, when the moment is supposed to happen for the best ratings or some other evil reason. It'd be a better show if we could just get the good stuff quicker and keep the show rolling without losing the sense of pacing and build-up. The way it is, too many scenes and episodes feel like they came off a conveyor belt, as similar as they are to ones we've already seen before.

I do remember this show taking more risks in its earlier seasons. Things felt more dramatic, and there was a lot more blood pumping energetic action going on. The characters were livelier and showed more personality - though the show's way of showing how they adapt to the zombie apocalypse makes it fitting for them to seem so much grayer and quieter as the years go on. I don't mind the quiet moments in the show and I never have, though the dialogue could sometimes stand to be a bit more substantial and less hollow platitudes in the real sad moments. There have been a lot of critiques on dialogue in the show tending to mull incessantly over how life has changed in the apocalypse. I don't mind that aspect too much myself, as it's not like they can talk about fucking Gray's Anatomy or the newest issue of Sports Illustrated to pass the time. What do people expect?

But I get it. Is that really going to make for compelling TV season after season? Not if they don't introduce more interesting new characters. The show has had a lack of them for a while now. A few good ones here and there, but there are so many characters overall that they get lost in the shuffle, and none of them are really properly developed. And there hasn't been an awesome villain since The Governor died. But then, I hear this Negan character will be good. Here's hoping. This, I think, could really fix the show's problems.

In the end it's still a fine show for what it is. I like a lot of the main characters and there are enough good, dramatic moments going on for me to want to see what happens. But at this point, I just wonder if the show really has it in it to deliver something drastically more exciting and better. Can it really be better than it has been lately? I guess we'll see.

What Makes a Likable Character?

In a lot of my reviews – and a lot of reviews in general – there's a certain emphasis placed on whether or not a character is likable. As relating to a character is often extremely important in how much a certain movie or TV show resonates with you, the concept isn't exactly one that can be brushed over lightly. But what makes a character likable? What draws us back time and time again to characters that, in all actuality, are just figments of someone else's imagination?

Well, I think it's simply the level to which said characters acts like a real human being. This is a product of both the writing and the actor's performance – a sort of double-team that comes together and creates a great character. A great writer can shade and detail a character all day and night and overcome a weak acting performance. And vice versa – a mediocre writer may not craft the best character, but a great actor can really bring out the best. And in both scenarios it may not work out because of one or the others' shortcomings.

The real treat is when you get a great actor AND a great written character. That's the golden prize at the bottom of the proverbial cereal box.

Hmm, nope, there was no prize in this one...

I think a lot of people define a realistic, likable character with one that fits their own morals and values – one that is an upstanding person morally, socially, etc. who doesn't do anything wrong and doesn't make mistakes. Call it a Superman complex – they want a character with as few flaws as possible. After all, what is there NOT to like about an upstanding, nice person?

That's fine. I don't have a problem with that definition – after all, everyone's got different standards and qualities that appeal to them. However, it does sort of bother me when I see certain characters lambasted for their flaws as if those doing the lambasting have never made mistakes. I'm of course talking about Piper Chapman from Orange is the New Black and Skyler White from Breaking Bad.

I've just seen endless bitching and moaning about how unlikable and awful these characters are. I dunno, that's your prerogative – I find them both to be wonderful to watch and great additions to their shows.

Piper is a rich, preppy white girl. That's basically the core of her character. She's melodramatic, kind of selfish and often given to pretentious speeches and moralizing. That's her character. Haven't you known people like that in real life? I have. She may not be someone you want to date or hang out with, but I just don't think that's a prerequisite to a likable character. It's certainly not a prerequisite to a well-written one, I can tell you that much. I guess some people really just hate watching characters they find annoying, but I think it'd be boring if every character was someone I found completely in-line with my own views and personality.

While she has flaws and shortcomings, the difference between this and some lesser shows and movies is simple – the show actually accentuates those shortcomings and uses them for character development. There's a lot of playing around in Orange is the New Black with this – several characters will talk to each other about how awful she is and then the viewer sort of thinks “hey, they have a point; she WAS wrong there.” But the brilliance of the show is when they swing you back around to her side later. Nobody is fully wrong and nobody is fully right in every situation. I've spoken about this in another blog post in more detail, but I think the show does a great job at showing their characters' flaws in equal proportions.

Plus, the brilliant performance by Taylor Schilling just works on so many levels. She's a really great actress and communicates a kind of frailty combined with naivete that manages to bounce off the hardness of prison life quite well. Great, great stuff.

Breaking Bad is even more of a controversial one, as Skyler White received so much hate throughout almost all of this show. Actress Anna Gunn – who is brilliant and was a great asset to the show – actually received threats of physical violence over it, which is so insane that I don't even have words to describe how insane it is.

Needless to say, if you wanted to see Skyler act differently than she did on Breaking Bad, you missed the point of the show.

I'll fill in the basics for those who never saw it – basically she's protagonist Walt's wife, who remains oblivious at first about his illicit drug making activities. She figures it out fairly quickly, though, and then proceeds to try and get him out of her life for good, then later help him for her own financial gain and family necessity, and so on – the relationship is quite complex and multi-faceted. Which is why it's a shame when people boil it down to 'she's a nag who just doesn't understand what Walt is doing.'

It's bullshit, really. This is a show full of drug dealers, criminals and all other sorts of miscreants and crooks, and somehow the one most hated character is the main character's wife who reacts as any sane person would upon finding out their spouse was making drugs. Yes, he said he was doing it for his family – no, that wasn't the whole truth and no, that doesn't excuse what he was doing. You might say 'oh, well if MY husband or wife was doing that, I'D understand'...well, it's easy to say such things from an armchair when it isn't happening to you.

I guess I just don't get what people want from this character. Do they want her to act like a completely submissive wallflower of a wife, never questioning Walt's motives and never challenging him? Would that have added more drama instead of taking away from the show? I've thought about this more than I should have, and really I just can't come up with any alternatives. You don't like the character; okay. How should she have acted instead? What would you have written into the show differently? I'd actually really like to hear different opinions here that do more than just bash the character.

Everything she does is realistic. The character is portrayed as a scared housewife trying to protect her family. I guess people just find her mannerisms annoying or the way she talks, or something like that – but is that really a reason to hate a character so thoroughly? I don't know. Anna Gunn is a stellar actress and portrays the character as well as any of the others are portrayed. I wouldn't even dream of trading her role for anything else in the show.

Both of these characters are flawed, sure – nobody's saying they're perfect, and it wouldn't be realistic if they were. However, as I said – the difference is that they're written so that the story works with their flaws, rather than ignoring them. Certainly this is different from movies like Hollow Man, in which the main character just unrepentantly acts like a dick to people and, surprise, is the main villain and dies at the end. Where's the drama? It's exactly what you'd expect to happen to that character, and what you want to see happen. There's zero complexity.

It just comes down to the level of writing you put in, at the end of the day. If your script has a character acting in shitty, awful ways and the movie doesn't try and address that at all – whether condoning or satirizing or punishing them for it – then your script comes off as hackneyed and will turn people off.

You can have characters selling drugs, killing people or lying to their loved ones, and if you write it correctly, then the audience will still want to see what happens to them and may even root for them in some cases - see Walter White from the aforementioned Breaking Bad for the most popular recent example.

But if you just make them do horrible things for no reason, for no consequence or dramatic purpose? Well, nobody really wants to see that.

Hell, even a generic Superman-style boy-scout character can be good. Just look at Rick Grimes from the Walking Dead!

He's a good old country-boy sheriff from a small town thrust in the middle of a zombie apocalypse. As is expected in this kind of story, he becomes the leader. And he's another example of an unfairly maligned character. People went on and on back in the early seasons of the show about how bland and boring the guy was, but I don't see it. I think people as good-natured and somewhat naive as him can be realistic, and in a zombie apocalypse, his sort of old-world views contrasted brilliantly with the hard reality around him.

His constantly trying to help individual people and doing what he considered right, even when it seemed foolhardy to everyone around him, was a big part of the appeal of the early seasons. Watching him grow into the brutal, world-weary leader he is in the new season is the definition of character development. It's really well done.

So really, there are lots of ways to make likable characters. You'll make your own definition and maybe disagree with me on some of these points. And that's good – it's good to have that kind of discourse. Go free my children and discuss! Unless you don't agree with me, in which case I will simply ignore you.

Images copyright of their original owners; I own none of them.