- Published on
Dum, dum, duuuuum! It's Monday, gentle readers, and you know what that means: each of us are back in the battle!
Woop! Woop! Woop!
Well, well, well ...
Good morning, folks, and welcome back to the shuffle. I know, I know, I know. You'd rather be in bed or at the park or at the movies or anywhere else; but -- as they say -- it is what it is. And you'll be better off for keeping up the fight than you were rolling over in bed.
I'll tell you what. I'll let you in on a little secret. Technically ... technically ... I'm over 100 different trivia citations for the day. But because of the way I track certain items I'm keeping the headcount at 94 for the day, and I'll update it accordingly the next time around the sun. That way, next will look like I had a nice big bump. Plus, I've got a few more new items on tap that I'm intending to add over the course of the day. Woof!
Otherwise, it was a reasonably quiet weekend around the SciFiHistory.Net studios. I do try to squeeze in a few hours of blogwork on Saturday and Sunday, but I came up short this weekend. I'll even normally try to get an announcement on the MainPage, but I just couldn't get to that, either. Apologies, folks. Blogging ain't what it used to be. That and Weebly -- the company where I host the site -- had "issues" with its internal reportage, giving me absolutely zero site traffic reports for the weekend, so maybe it just wasn't meant to be.
Nonetheless, as there's an incredible near-100 different trivia citations awaiting your discover this morning, there's an awful lot that can keep your busy in your downtime. Please be sure to check it out -- like and share, if you please -- because genre truly has 'something for everyone' these days, and that's just one of the many reasons I try to celebrate it as much as I do on the site.
Here's the Yellow Brick Road you can follow ...
Woop! Woop! Woop!
Well, well, well ...
Good morning, folks, and welcome back to the shuffle. I know, I know, I know. You'd rather be in bed or at the park or at the movies or anywhere else; but -- as they say -- it is what it is. And you'll be better off for keeping up the fight than you were rolling over in bed.
I'll tell you what. I'll let you in on a little secret. Technically ... technically ... I'm over 100 different trivia citations for the day. But because of the way I track certain items I'm keeping the headcount at 94 for the day, and I'll update it accordingly the next time around the sun. That way, next will look like I had a nice big bump. Plus, I've got a few more new items on tap that I'm intending to add over the course of the day. Woof!
Otherwise, it was a reasonably quiet weekend around the SciFiHistory.Net studios. I do try to squeeze in a few hours of blogwork on Saturday and Sunday, but I came up short this weekend. I'll even normally try to get an announcement on the MainPage, but I just couldn't get to that, either. Apologies, folks. Blogging ain't what it used to be. That and Weebly -- the company where I host the site -- had "issues" with its internal reportage, giving me absolutely zero site traffic reports for the weekend, so maybe it just wasn't meant to be.
Nonetheless, as there's an incredible near-100 different trivia citations awaiting your discover this morning, there's an awful lot that can keep your busy in your downtime. Please be sure to check it out -- like and share, if you please -- because genre truly has 'something for everyone' these days, and that's just one of the many reasons I try to celebrate it as much as I do on the site.
Here's the Yellow Brick Road you can follow ...
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Good morning and Happy Friday, gentle readers! We've made it! We've made it yet again! It's Friday, and a good time should be had by all!
Well, well, well ...
Oh, it isn't like Friday finally getting here should come as any surprise to those of you following along. I think, culturally, we sometimes make too much of it; and maybe -- just maybe -- we should take a little bit of that special energy and put some into Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays. Who knows? Were we to do that, maybe the bulk of our weeks would be a bit more enjoyable ... don't you think?
Still, I will wish that each of you have something special on tap for the weekend. Yes, weekends are definitely for living; and here's hoping you've some event or happening that makes you giddy. Life is far too short to live it otherwise.
Well, well, well ...
Oh, it isn't like Friday finally getting here should come as any surprise to those of you following along. I think, culturally, we sometimes make too much of it; and maybe -- just maybe -- we should take a little bit of that special energy and put some into Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays. Who knows? Were we to do that, maybe the bulk of our weeks would be a bit more enjoyable ... don't you think?
Still, I will wish that each of you have something special on tap for the weekend. Yes, weekends are definitely for living; and here's hoping you've some event or happening that makes you giddy. Life is far too short to live it otherwise.
Sigh.
Oh, the trials and tribulations of our TV yesteryear ...
Irwin Allen certainly introduced a solid handful of genre properties to the wide, wide world of entertainment, but the one that's certainly endured far more than others remains Lost In Space. As the story goes (apologies if you haven't heard it), one television network had the opportunity to choose between this and Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek ... and, well, let's just say that they may not have chosen wisely. I don't mean that as a sleight in any regard because Lost In Space definitely holds some fond memories for those who experienced it back then and in syndication for years ... I just don't think its stories resonate as strongly as do the original Trek.
But I digress ...
Lost lasted for three fun-filled season on network television, and it even built up a roster of awards and nominations here and there. Hosted by an impressive cast, it still kinda/sorta because the show with that villainous doctor, the boy, and his robot; and that's largely how I remember it. Much like Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were Trek's 'trinity,' Dr. Smith and Will Robinson and the Robot functioned in the same capacity here, albeit with much more juvenile aspirations.
Also, I'd be remiss if I failed to point out that the I.P. has been rebooted on more than a single occasion, both on television and with a big screen adaptation ... so it arguably had the staying power to compete against the big league.
Happy Anniversary, Lost In Space! May you remain forever lost!
Oh, the trials and tribulations of our TV yesteryear ...
Irwin Allen certainly introduced a solid handful of genre properties to the wide, wide world of entertainment, but the one that's certainly endured far more than others remains Lost In Space. As the story goes (apologies if you haven't heard it), one television network had the opportunity to choose between this and Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek ... and, well, let's just say that they may not have chosen wisely. I don't mean that as a sleight in any regard because Lost In Space definitely holds some fond memories for those who experienced it back then and in syndication for years ... I just don't think its stories resonate as strongly as do the original Trek.
But I digress ...
Lost lasted for three fun-filled season on network television, and it even built up a roster of awards and nominations here and there. Hosted by an impressive cast, it still kinda/sorta because the show with that villainous doctor, the boy, and his robot; and that's largely how I remember it. Much like Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were Trek's 'trinity,' Dr. Smith and Will Robinson and the Robot functioned in the same capacity here, albeit with much more juvenile aspirations.
Also, I'd be remiss if I failed to point out that the I.P. has been rebooted on more than a single occasion, both on television and with a big screen adaptation ... so it arguably had the staying power to compete against the big league.
Happy Anniversary, Lost In Space! May you remain forever lost!
There are good episodes of the original Star Trek, and there are great episodes of Star Trek ... and one of the very, very, very best first aired on this day all the way back in 1967. "Amok Time" -- scripted by Gene Roddenberry and Theodore Sturgeon with direction from Joseph Pevney -- took audiences to Spock's homeworld of Vulcan where they learned that not only that Starfleet's best sciences officer was part of an arranged marriage but also that Vulcan biology really suffered from a great deal of down time.
It wasn't all that long back that some smaller television stations -- ones that would air the iconic show in syndication along with marathons on national holidays -- were smitten with the idea of polling audience members to vote for their favorite episodes: from what I can recall, "Amok" almost always scored in the Top 5, and I suspect this is because it's smartly written, features some solid world-building for the Trek universe, and showcases precisely why the Trek trinity of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were such a powerful trio. The script had meaty ideas and clever exchanges for each of them, and it's one of the franchise's highwater marks in mixing moral codes with personal drama.
Plus ... Kirk dies. And then he doesn't.
True story.
It wasn't all that long back that some smaller television stations -- ones that would air the iconic show in syndication along with marathons on national holidays -- were smitten with the idea of polling audience members to vote for their favorite episodes: from what I can recall, "Amok" almost always scored in the Top 5, and I suspect this is because it's smartly written, features some solid world-building for the Trek universe, and showcases precisely why the Trek trinity of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were such a powerful trio. The script had meaty ideas and clever exchanges for each of them, and it's one of the franchise's highwater marks in mixing moral codes with personal drama.
Plus ... Kirk dies. And then he doesn't.
True story.
That's all I have for the present, ladies and gentlemen and others. I am working diligently on a review for Star Trek: Picard's Third (and thankfully final) Season, but I'm not sure if I'll get it up today or not. Honestly, I've been tinkering on it for some time, and -- sigh -- the prose is just not cooperating as much as I'd like it to. Hopefully, I will have something hammered into place so that I can put that article to rest.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Now, I’m gonna let readers know right up front that this is not going to be one of my conventional reviews.
First off, I bought this DVD with my own money. (Well, it was the wifey’s money.) I’m not a subscriber to Paramount+ nor has the company responded to my requests for either products or streaming in exchange for media coverage on SciFiHistory.Net. As such, I just don’t feel all that compelled to say a whole lot about the effort.
Second, I’ve long been of the opinion that Trek – in general – has really evolved past the point of being … erm … authentically Trekish for fans such as myself who’ve been around for decades. The powers that be – for whatever reason – decided that the property needed to be (let’s say) something different than it’s been before. I get it: some myths must evolve in order to survive, and so be it.
Lastly, I’ve stated my position on countless occasions that I don’t believe Trek belongs behind a pay wall. (Yes, yes, and yes: I know you’ve heard it before, but I’m stating it because it kinda/sorta offends me.) I think that there are stories that deserve to be embraced and enjoyed by the widest community possible – especially those that preach (cough cough) social change – so limiting a franchise that’s been a huge part of our culture for so long seems – frankly – idiotic.
Ok.
I’m good now.
Let’s talk about Picard.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
Here’s the season’s plot summary as provided by our friends at Wikipedia.org:
“The third and final season of the American television series Star Trek: Picard features the character Jean-Luc Picard in the year 2401 as he reunites with the former command crew of the USS Enterprise (Geordi La Forge, Worf, William Riker, Beverly Crusher, Deanna Troi, and Data) while facing a mysterious enemy who is hunting Picard’s son.”
At around the midpoint of our making our way through watching Picard: Season 3, the wifey asked me what I thought of the program. We debated the whole premise for a bit – I’ve not been a fan of the Picard “franchise” in general because I don’t think it even remotely fits philosophically within the construct as envisioned by Roddenberry – and about the best we could come up with positively was this phrase: “Well, it’s fun to see the characters again.”
And that was about it.
In reflection after finishing the ten episodes, I asked, “But … did we see our beloved crew again?”
First off, I bought this DVD with my own money. (Well, it was the wifey’s money.) I’m not a subscriber to Paramount+ nor has the company responded to my requests for either products or streaming in exchange for media coverage on SciFiHistory.Net. As such, I just don’t feel all that compelled to say a whole lot about the effort.
Second, I’ve long been of the opinion that Trek – in general – has really evolved past the point of being … erm … authentically Trekish for fans such as myself who’ve been around for decades. The powers that be – for whatever reason – decided that the property needed to be (let’s say) something different than it’s been before. I get it: some myths must evolve in order to survive, and so be it.
Lastly, I’ve stated my position on countless occasions that I don’t believe Trek belongs behind a pay wall. (Yes, yes, and yes: I know you’ve heard it before, but I’m stating it because it kinda/sorta offends me.) I think that there are stories that deserve to be embraced and enjoyed by the widest community possible – especially those that preach (cough cough) social change – so limiting a franchise that’s been a huge part of our culture for so long seems – frankly – idiotic.
Ok.
I’m good now.
Let’s talk about Picard.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
Here’s the season’s plot summary as provided by our friends at Wikipedia.org:
“The third and final season of the American television series Star Trek: Picard features the character Jean-Luc Picard in the year 2401 as he reunites with the former command crew of the USS Enterprise (Geordi La Forge, Worf, William Riker, Beverly Crusher, Deanna Troi, and Data) while facing a mysterious enemy who is hunting Picard’s son.”
At around the midpoint of our making our way through watching Picard: Season 3, the wifey asked me what I thought of the program. We debated the whole premise for a bit – I’ve not been a fan of the Picard “franchise” in general because I don’t think it even remotely fits philosophically within the construct as envisioned by Roddenberry – and about the best we could come up with positively was this phrase: “Well, it’s fun to see the characters again.”
And that was about it.
In reflection after finishing the ten episodes, I asked, “But … did we see our beloved crew again?”
Frankly, the only one who seemed remotely familiar was Will Riker, and – in some respects – that’s probably because he’s the only player who ever really had a definite core. The consummate bridge officer, he always remained committed to delivering the best he had to give even in the direst circumstances. Hell, he even had a predictable level of unpredictability back in the days of The Next Generation’s original broadcast, so – as a first officer – he was relatable. He was authentic. His was a mindset you could wrap your head around and – if nothing else – appreciate. He wasn’t here for the ‘hero’s quest;’ he was about command and/or command decisions. You either liked him, or you didn’t. Consequently, I don’t think he had a great deal of what I’d call stand-out episodes: as an actor and a character, he always gave you what he had to give, and you accepted it.
But … as for the rest of the cast?
Well, Picard – for those of us following closely – is and isn’t the Picard we knew. For one thing, he’s now technically Robo-Picard, having died and had his consciousness uploaded into a cybernetic creation at the end of Season 1. (I completely avoided Season 2 as anyone whose opinion I trust have labeled it unmitigated garbage.) Watching him try to work his magic as the venerable captain is a bit of a mixed bag for me because I know he’s not ‘Picard’ as I knew him. I set that sentiment aside when I can, but then each and every episode of Season 3 had moments that showed the character’s mental faculties weren’t quite at the level they were decades earlier. In fact, many times I thought this crop of episodes turned him into a doddering old man, a hero who was well past his leading man prime and perhaps best left to retirement.
Beverly? Well … even within the structure of the show, it’s quite clear that Dr. Crusher has spent the last twenty years of her life kinda/sorta ‘on the run’ (for circumstances that, quite frankly, never really make much sense). This isn’t the same character in the slightest. In the series’ opener, she’s seen running around almost Ellen Ripley style with phaser rifle she cocks like a shotgun (???) and blasts her enemies into atoms. Apparently, that physician’s oath for ‘first do no harm’ no longer applies, so – again – I’m not seeing this swashbuckler as anything like the one I grew up with.
Deanna? Well … I guess it’s good to know that even decades later Marina Sirtis has still never learned to act …
You see what I mean?
Star Trek: Picard Season 3 never felt like Star Trek to me. It may've looked like it, but it never felt like it.
But … as for the rest of the cast?
Well, Picard – for those of us following closely – is and isn’t the Picard we knew. For one thing, he’s now technically Robo-Picard, having died and had his consciousness uploaded into a cybernetic creation at the end of Season 1. (I completely avoided Season 2 as anyone whose opinion I trust have labeled it unmitigated garbage.) Watching him try to work his magic as the venerable captain is a bit of a mixed bag for me because I know he’s not ‘Picard’ as I knew him. I set that sentiment aside when I can, but then each and every episode of Season 3 had moments that showed the character’s mental faculties weren’t quite at the level they were decades earlier. In fact, many times I thought this crop of episodes turned him into a doddering old man, a hero who was well past his leading man prime and perhaps best left to retirement.
Beverly? Well … even within the structure of the show, it’s quite clear that Dr. Crusher has spent the last twenty years of her life kinda/sorta ‘on the run’ (for circumstances that, quite frankly, never really make much sense). This isn’t the same character in the slightest. In the series’ opener, she’s seen running around almost Ellen Ripley style with phaser rifle she cocks like a shotgun (???) and blasts her enemies into atoms. Apparently, that physician’s oath for ‘first do no harm’ no longer applies, so – again – I’m not seeing this swashbuckler as anything like the one I grew up with.
Deanna? Well … I guess it’s good to know that even decades later Marina Sirtis has still never learned to act …
You see what I mean?
Star Trek: Picard Season 3 never felt like Star Trek to me. It may've looked like it, but it never felt like it.
Oh, it had those familiar characters, yes. It had the aesthetic not all that different from TNG’s glory days. It even occasionally managed to tug at one’s heartstrings – for good and for bad – but even in its most logical moments never quite mustered the authenticity that ran through the program’s seven seasons in syndication. All it could do here and there was pluck some event or some face or some past circumstances and revisit it, hoping that the nostalgia might gloss over plot holes and/or inconsistencies that made for … well … bloated fan fiction.
I had a great many people reach out to me online during the show’s airing on Paramount+ to ask what I thought of it. I explained – as I did above – that I’m not a subscriber and that I’ll pick up the DVDs and say something about it later. All of them were wonderfully enthusiastic about the program, saying it was finally a return-to-form for a franchise that a great deal feel has lost its way. Having completed the experience, I can certainly understand why fans might’ve looked at Picard and come away feeling reinvigorated. These are icons many grew up with, and – like the wifey and I agreed – it was great to see them back in action.
Still, there’s no escaping the reality that Picard’s ten episodes probably has little more than maybe four hours of legitimate storytelling. The first half of the season is basically wasted with the starship and crew running in and out of a nebula, hiding and/or fleeing from a laughably overacted and cartoonish villain (played by Amanda Plummer). What interesting ideas introduced into the season – the fact that the Borg may’ve coopted the Changelings for their own purposes as well as some exploration of how Picard’s Borgified DNA may’ve been passed on to his offspring – are really given so little screen time they occasionally feel more like plot twists than they do authentic premises. As often happens with even bad movies, there are some nuggets of gold in here; the problem is that they’re handled so poorly that they vanish without making the impact they truly could’ve in this universe.
My bottom line is honestly that if all of this had been retooled and, say, crafted into a six-episode run – not all that dissimilar from what The Walking Dead is currently doing with their spin-offs – then Picard Season 3 may’ve both worked and resonated with me. (I can only speak for me, folks.) As it instead spent an inordinate amount of time with events that didn’t quite matter, I’m at a loss to have more positive to say about it.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to no one for penning this review of Star Trek: Picard (Season 3) as I purchased the DVD all on my own. Take that, Paramount+.
-- EZ
I had a great many people reach out to me online during the show’s airing on Paramount+ to ask what I thought of it. I explained – as I did above – that I’m not a subscriber and that I’ll pick up the DVDs and say something about it later. All of them were wonderfully enthusiastic about the program, saying it was finally a return-to-form for a franchise that a great deal feel has lost its way. Having completed the experience, I can certainly understand why fans might’ve looked at Picard and come away feeling reinvigorated. These are icons many grew up with, and – like the wifey and I agreed – it was great to see them back in action.
Still, there’s no escaping the reality that Picard’s ten episodes probably has little more than maybe four hours of legitimate storytelling. The first half of the season is basically wasted with the starship and crew running in and out of a nebula, hiding and/or fleeing from a laughably overacted and cartoonish villain (played by Amanda Plummer). What interesting ideas introduced into the season – the fact that the Borg may’ve coopted the Changelings for their own purposes as well as some exploration of how Picard’s Borgified DNA may’ve been passed on to his offspring – are really given so little screen time they occasionally feel more like plot twists than they do authentic premises. As often happens with even bad movies, there are some nuggets of gold in here; the problem is that they’re handled so poorly that they vanish without making the impact they truly could’ve in this universe.
My bottom line is honestly that if all of this had been retooled and, say, crafted into a six-episode run – not all that dissimilar from what The Walking Dead is currently doing with their spin-offs – then Picard Season 3 may’ve both worked and resonated with me. (I can only speak for me, folks.) As it instead spent an inordinate amount of time with events that didn’t quite matter, I’m at a loss to have more positive to say about it.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to no one for penning this review of Star Trek: Picard (Season 3) as I purchased the DVD all on my own. Take that, Paramount+.
-- EZ
- Published on
Good morning, and Happy Thursday, faithful readers!
It looks like this week is starting to wind down -- well, so far as the work week is concerned -- and that means that the weekend is quickly coming into reach, my friends. Hang in there. You've almost made it.
For those of you who may've missed yesterday's MainPage posts, please allow me to do a quick recap:
My thoughts on the fifth, fateful episode of Star Wars: Ahsoka -- pronounced 'meh-soka' around here -- are up for anyone interested. You can find the review right here.
Also, my thoughts on a Blumhouse chiller -- Unhuman (2022) -- entered the MainPage, and interested readers can find those right here.
I've been told that (cough cough) I need to engage in a bit more "promotion" around my critical opinion. (Well, maybe not "told" so much as "recommended.") So from time-to-time you might see me shucking such wares in these Daily announcements. Don't be offended. I know that regulars are well aware of where to find it and how to navigate the site. Still, a bit of extra attention and extra advertising occasionally isn't a bad thing. New readers are showing up damn near daily, and I suspect that may not be up on all of the ins-and-outs to this place. So there!
It looks like this week is starting to wind down -- well, so far as the work week is concerned -- and that means that the weekend is quickly coming into reach, my friends. Hang in there. You've almost made it.
For those of you who may've missed yesterday's MainPage posts, please allow me to do a quick recap:
My thoughts on the fifth, fateful episode of Star Wars: Ahsoka -- pronounced 'meh-soka' around here -- are up for anyone interested. You can find the review right here.
Also, my thoughts on a Blumhouse chiller -- Unhuman (2022) -- entered the MainPage, and interested readers can find those right here.
I've been told that (cough cough) I need to engage in a bit more "promotion" around my critical opinion. (Well, maybe not "told" so much as "recommended.") So from time-to-time you might see me shucking such wares in these Daily announcements. Don't be offended. I know that regulars are well aware of where to find it and how to navigate the site. Still, a bit of extra attention and extra advertising occasionally isn't a bad thing. New readers are showing up damn near daily, and I suspect that may not be up on all of the ins-and-outs to this place. So there!
All the way back in the year 1951 on this day, the good people of London, England were treated to the silver screen premiere of one of the more memorable Science Fiction yarns to emerge from the 50's: When Worlds Collide was produced by genre master George Pal, and it depicted our planet's last ditch attempt at survival in the face of certain destruction. Though I could be wrong on this point, I believe it probably was one of the screen's earliest incarnations of certain planetary gloom -- better known these days as an 'Extinction Level Event' (ELE) -- and I remember reading that it served as the inspiration behind the Steven Spielberg-produced Deep Impact (1998).
IMDB.com reports that Pal had intended a follow-up to this seminal film. Authors Edwin Balmer and Philip Wylie penned the 1933 novel that served as the foundation for the story; and they also scripted a 1934 sequel titled "After Worlds Collide." The central idea surrounding the follow-up -- so far as I can recall -- was that the Earthly survivors find that the world they rocketed to was actually already inhabited by another civilization; naturally, they now have to go about the business of diplomacy as this new world, too, is facing some dire circumstances, and various other countries from our world have also rocketed here, meaning former enemies might have to become allies in order to win the day. While it does sound a bit groundbreaking -- at least as much as the original -- the project just never came to fruition.
I've seen When Worlds Collide, and I like it, but it is a bit weighed down by the typical melodrama of features from the era. If you haven't had the opportunity and are a fan of 50's era stuff, then I encourage you to give it a look. Stylistically, it's very impressive.
IMDB.com reports that Pal had intended a follow-up to this seminal film. Authors Edwin Balmer and Philip Wylie penned the 1933 novel that served as the foundation for the story; and they also scripted a 1934 sequel titled "After Worlds Collide." The central idea surrounding the follow-up -- so far as I can recall -- was that the Earthly survivors find that the world they rocketed to was actually already inhabited by another civilization; naturally, they now have to go about the business of diplomacy as this new world, too, is facing some dire circumstances, and various other countries from our world have also rocketed here, meaning former enemies might have to become allies in order to win the day. While it does sound a bit groundbreaking -- at least as much as the original -- the project just never came to fruition.
I've seen When Worlds Collide, and I like it, but it is a bit weighed down by the typical melodrama of features from the era. If you haven't had the opportunity and are a fan of 50's era stuff, then I encourage you to give it a look. Stylistically, it's very impressive.
1990's Hardware -- for what it's worth -- remains a relatively divisive film. I've encounter folks online who unabashedly love it for what it is, and I've also come across an incredible number of viewers who think it's one of the screen's worst flicks ever. Because I've seen many, many, many Science Fiction and Fantasy films in this lifetime, I can assure you that -- no -- Hardware is far from the lowest of the low; but I, too, understand how its kinda/sorta cut-and-paste Horror premise, political representation, and (cough cough) cultural messaging might not be everyone's cup of tea. I'll happily admit that I like it quite a bit -- frankly, I think it's a very impressive B-Movie that deserves a bit of examination -- but as I always say "to each his own."
I do think that the biggest problem many have with it is the depiction of violence -- it does get gratutitous in a few spots -- but, again, I've seen far worse. And I have read that one of the problems that has always kept it from being viewed by a wider audiences is a rights issue I believe persists even to this day. Lastly, I know that (cough cough) the notorious Hollywood-heavyweight and sexual deviant Harvey Weinstein's association to the picture (he served as one of the producers) probably hasn't aged well in certain corners of our culture, and that may also keep some from searching it out. It is an idea that we've seen countless times before -- man versus machine -- and, yet, I'm still smitten with certain elements of the yarn. Dark, vicious, and a bit deviant, it makes for a curious experience.
I do think that the biggest problem many have with it is the depiction of violence -- it does get gratutitous in a few spots -- but, again, I've seen far worse. And I have read that one of the problems that has always kept it from being viewed by a wider audiences is a rights issue I believe persists even to this day. Lastly, I know that (cough cough) the notorious Hollywood-heavyweight and sexual deviant Harvey Weinstein's association to the picture (he served as one of the producers) probably hasn't aged well in certain corners of our culture, and that may also keep some from searching it out. It is an idea that we've seen countless times before -- man versus machine -- and, yet, I'm still smitten with certain elements of the yarn. Dark, vicious, and a bit deviant, it makes for a curious experience.
A franchise is born! On this day in all the way back in 2008 (according to some published accounts), the very first novel within the wider universe that became The Hunger Games was published. Suzanne Collin's tale of a dystopian future definitely created a sensation here and abroad, so much so that the rights were snatched up, and not one but a trilogy (and more) of big screen films were put on the drawing board. Having never the book -- though it has been recommended to me by a few folks -- I can't speak to it, but as a huge, huge, huge proponent of literacy (hence, I write, even in this space) I give kudos to any effort that puts a reader and a good book together. Well done, milady!
I won't bother you with my thoughts on the film franchise or the book series, but I will say that when it was first told to me I pointed out that it sounded incredibly like Koushun Takami's Battle Royale (1999) which also was made into a blockbuster flick in 2000. (Yes, yes, yes: I'm aware many in fandom have made that observation, so sue me.) However, I believe I'd heard that Collins was asked about that connection, and she insisted that she'd never heard of it. Stranger things have happened ...
Well, those are today's big hitters ... but I won't let you escape without this final link ...
I won't bother you with my thoughts on the film franchise or the book series, but I will say that when it was first told to me I pointed out that it sounded incredibly like Koushun Takami's Battle Royale (1999) which also was made into a blockbuster flick in 2000. (Yes, yes, yes: I'm aware many in fandom have made that observation, so sue me.) However, I believe I'd heard that Collins was asked about that connection, and she insisted that she'd never heard of it. Stranger things have happened ...
Well, those are today's big hitters ... but I won't let you escape without this final link ...
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
From my experience, it’s become clear that there are a good deal of folks who traffic in fandom’s welcoming circles who believe their sole existence is to dump water on the works, ideas, and reflections of others … and, by others, I mean “fans.”
No, no, and no: I’m not gonna give you a rant about toxic fandom, and that’s because I don’t think such a message is fundamentally productive. While there might be some benefits from reaching across the aisle for common ground, I’ve always believed that was never the purpose of an authentic critic – meaning one who both thinks and writes about film and television as an art form. Instead, I insist that it’s my job to only express my own opinions: if I’m as thorough and proficient as I should be, then, minimally, you’ll have something to think about after I’m done, and that’s my only purpose here. Critics don’t exist – or shouldn’t exist – to make you like a property; instead, they try to serve a wider discourse, one encouraging watchers, writers, readers, and all of fandom to reflect on the merits and disadvantages of any art form. That’s criticism in a nutshell, folks. Call it Criticism 101. At least, that’s the case as it applies to being a fan.
Still, the downside is that there’s an audience that waits patiently on the Information Superhighway with no other purpose than to rise up, gather pitchforks, light the torches, and dub those who disagree with them to be ‘witches’ in some (cough cough) cultural ‘call to action’ that they believe (cough cough) better serves fandom. Most of these heretics – if not lunatics – probably never built a blog, a website, a vlog, or a reasonably compelling argument and yet still insist that their judgment is superior, perhaps because he or she feels that the “safety in numbers” outweighs anything the Devil’s Advocate might have to say. Much like Captain Kirk famously told Captain Spock that reality probably lies somewhere in between, fandom would do well to consider such wisdom; stop hating on those who disagree because – someday – you, too, might feel otherwise … and you might feel oppressed if that crowd you once stood shoulder-to-shoulder with comes calling for your scalp.
Yes, yes, and yes: fandom requires and instills passion.
But never forget to take a calming breath before you speak … and/or think.
Star Wars fandom, in particular, would do well to just dial it back when trying to discuss the Disney+ streaming property that is Star Wars: Ahsoka. Its fifth episode – “Shadow Warrior” both aired last night on the platform as well as played in select theaters nationally, a theatrical event that kinda/sorta has the feel of desperation so far as this reviewer is concerned. If the ratings are so positive (and I don’t think they are, but I’m not out to prove anything here), then why the need for an event in theaters? Is this … wishful thinking? Are you trying to convince audiences of something otherwise? Or is this an honest expression of goodwill, giving diehard enthusiasts the chance to bask in the silver screen glow of something so mind-blowing that it deserves such exposure?
Well … much like the Ahsoka story, I’m just not following what’s honestly happening.
Shadow Warrior apparently was little more than a fever dream, a kinda/sorta out-of-body experience the lead character endured with ‘fall’ at the hands of ‘dark Jedi’ Baylan Skoll in Part 4. Instead of clarifying the who’s, where’s, and what’s of Ahsoka coming face-to-face with her former mentor Anakin Skywalker (reprised in the episode by Hayden Christensen), audiences were instead treated to more of the same, that being more of the nebulousness and ambiguity of just where is our Togrutan hero. Is she dead? Is she in-between? Is this Heaven? Is this Hell? Why does it look so much like the World Between Worlds? Instead of giving us answers we could wrap our head around, writer/director Dave Filoni pretty much played with our emotions with pullbacks to experiences that may or may not have put Ahsoka on her present path … or was it all about finding peace with knowing she was trained by the Jedi who, basically, both destroyed the galaxy and yet put the Force in balance?
No, no, and no: I’m not gonna give you a rant about toxic fandom, and that’s because I don’t think such a message is fundamentally productive. While there might be some benefits from reaching across the aisle for common ground, I’ve always believed that was never the purpose of an authentic critic – meaning one who both thinks and writes about film and television as an art form. Instead, I insist that it’s my job to only express my own opinions: if I’m as thorough and proficient as I should be, then, minimally, you’ll have something to think about after I’m done, and that’s my only purpose here. Critics don’t exist – or shouldn’t exist – to make you like a property; instead, they try to serve a wider discourse, one encouraging watchers, writers, readers, and all of fandom to reflect on the merits and disadvantages of any art form. That’s criticism in a nutshell, folks. Call it Criticism 101. At least, that’s the case as it applies to being a fan.
Still, the downside is that there’s an audience that waits patiently on the Information Superhighway with no other purpose than to rise up, gather pitchforks, light the torches, and dub those who disagree with them to be ‘witches’ in some (cough cough) cultural ‘call to action’ that they believe (cough cough) better serves fandom. Most of these heretics – if not lunatics – probably never built a blog, a website, a vlog, or a reasonably compelling argument and yet still insist that their judgment is superior, perhaps because he or she feels that the “safety in numbers” outweighs anything the Devil’s Advocate might have to say. Much like Captain Kirk famously told Captain Spock that reality probably lies somewhere in between, fandom would do well to consider such wisdom; stop hating on those who disagree because – someday – you, too, might feel otherwise … and you might feel oppressed if that crowd you once stood shoulder-to-shoulder with comes calling for your scalp.
Yes, yes, and yes: fandom requires and instills passion.
But never forget to take a calming breath before you speak … and/or think.
Star Wars fandom, in particular, would do well to just dial it back when trying to discuss the Disney+ streaming property that is Star Wars: Ahsoka. Its fifth episode – “Shadow Warrior” both aired last night on the platform as well as played in select theaters nationally, a theatrical event that kinda/sorta has the feel of desperation so far as this reviewer is concerned. If the ratings are so positive (and I don’t think they are, but I’m not out to prove anything here), then why the need for an event in theaters? Is this … wishful thinking? Are you trying to convince audiences of something otherwise? Or is this an honest expression of goodwill, giving diehard enthusiasts the chance to bask in the silver screen glow of something so mind-blowing that it deserves such exposure?
Well … much like the Ahsoka story, I’m just not following what’s honestly happening.
Shadow Warrior apparently was little more than a fever dream, a kinda/sorta out-of-body experience the lead character endured with ‘fall’ at the hands of ‘dark Jedi’ Baylan Skoll in Part 4. Instead of clarifying the who’s, where’s, and what’s of Ahsoka coming face-to-face with her former mentor Anakin Skywalker (reprised in the episode by Hayden Christensen), audiences were instead treated to more of the same, that being more of the nebulousness and ambiguity of just where is our Togrutan hero. Is she dead? Is she in-between? Is this Heaven? Is this Hell? Why does it look so much like the World Between Worlds? Instead of giving us answers we could wrap our head around, writer/director Dave Filoni pretty much played with our emotions with pullbacks to experiences that may or may not have put Ahsoka on her present path … or was it all about finding peace with knowing she was trained by the Jedi who, basically, both destroyed the galaxy and yet put the Force in balance?
That’s the problem when you strive for mythic and/or epic proportions: if the circumstances are not clearly spelled out, then you risk losing the audience with half-steps and/or half-truths. Come the end of the near hour of programming, I still had no idea where Ahsoka was and whether or not any of it was true, but I do know without question that – in Filoni’s mind – there hasn’t been a character as central to the Star Wars galaxy as is the creation he’s fondest of, that being this little snippy alien. In her dream state, she even outsmarts Anakin, choosing not to fight him despite his constant taunting, deciding that ‘living’ is the better course of action.
Erm … so where’s the ‘warrior’ of “Shadow Warrior?”
Despite what history revisionists will tell you, wars aren’t won by pacifists. No sit-in ever stopped Germany, and no amount of sign-waving deterred Japan from striking America first at Pearl Harbor. I do know – as Yoda proclaimed in The Empire Strikes Back – that in the galaxy far, far away that wars apparently do not make warriors great; but it’s this kind of moral opacity that sounds good on screen (and in management seminars) and ultimately is left up to the interpretation of the student. It means whatever you want it to mean, and – as a factivist – I’m not sure how much storytelling is actually positively served by trafficking in the gray areas. Darth Vader – her master – would have struck Ahsoka down if Ezra Bridger hadn’t ‘cheated’ time by pulling her out of the moment famously in Star Wars Rebels, and I think it’s this feel-good chicanery that is kinda/sorta miring this current series in a spot that – thematically – is going nowhere fast.
Now … don’t get me wrong. I’ve no major bones to pick with Ahsoka, Dave Filoni, and/or the current state of Star Wars. As I tried to convey above, that isn’t my job as a critic. I’m not here to convince you that X is good or bad; I can only reflect upon what I see in the adventure and maybe how it bodes within the broader mythology. In fact, I’ve always liked Ahsoka; but – as I’ve said – I just don’t quite understand why she’s changed as a person between Star Wars: The Clone Wars and Star Wars Rebels. She obviously reached a super-advanced level of maturity, and I’m at a loss as to understand perfectly well why. How did this happen? Why did this happen? I get that she evolved; I’m just missing the pieces to grasp and appreciate her evolution.
And, of course, it’s always great to see Star Wars, too, take some steps in different directions; and many of these new twists and turns have been engineered by Filoni himself. He’s definitely crafted some incredible arcs within The Clone Wars and Star Wars: The Bad Batch (I struggle with Rebels because I find some of it uneven), and he’s been blessed by even George Lucas with the task of deepening this universe in ways that merit some honest acclaim. But … we’ve never been told in Ahsoka why so much effort needs to be expended to find Ezra Bridger in the first place … in fact, so far as the audience has been told there’s no way to know whether even he and Grand Admiral Thrawn (except for plot leaks) are even alive out there wherever they are … and that’s a narrative weakness no matter what anyone argues.
Why?
Well, without such assurances, characters have been launched on this crusade either in hope … or fear.
As Star Wars fans, we know that the films and shows have warned us about doing anything out of fear because – dum dum dum – fear leads to the Dark Side. If that’s true, then why does it seem like the driving motivation behind so much of these activities rests firmly on the shoulders of alleviating one’s fears? Sabine Wren fears Ezra is lost. Hera Syndulla fears that the New Republic isn’t listening to her. Ahsoka fears that she let Anakin down. Why, even Huyang fears that Ahsoka and Sabine didn’t listen to her. And … every single one of them fears Thrawn’s return.
Huh.
But … hey! It was great to see those purrgil, am I right?
(All kidding aside, it was great to see the purrgil.)
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to no one to provide a review of Star Wars: Ahsoka streaming series as I’m presently a subscriber to Disney+ … which might be changing in the future as their programming has really gotten a bit stale.
-- EZ
Erm … so where’s the ‘warrior’ of “Shadow Warrior?”
Despite what history revisionists will tell you, wars aren’t won by pacifists. No sit-in ever stopped Germany, and no amount of sign-waving deterred Japan from striking America first at Pearl Harbor. I do know – as Yoda proclaimed in The Empire Strikes Back – that in the galaxy far, far away that wars apparently do not make warriors great; but it’s this kind of moral opacity that sounds good on screen (and in management seminars) and ultimately is left up to the interpretation of the student. It means whatever you want it to mean, and – as a factivist – I’m not sure how much storytelling is actually positively served by trafficking in the gray areas. Darth Vader – her master – would have struck Ahsoka down if Ezra Bridger hadn’t ‘cheated’ time by pulling her out of the moment famously in Star Wars Rebels, and I think it’s this feel-good chicanery that is kinda/sorta miring this current series in a spot that – thematically – is going nowhere fast.
Now … don’t get me wrong. I’ve no major bones to pick with Ahsoka, Dave Filoni, and/or the current state of Star Wars. As I tried to convey above, that isn’t my job as a critic. I’m not here to convince you that X is good or bad; I can only reflect upon what I see in the adventure and maybe how it bodes within the broader mythology. In fact, I’ve always liked Ahsoka; but – as I’ve said – I just don’t quite understand why she’s changed as a person between Star Wars: The Clone Wars and Star Wars Rebels. She obviously reached a super-advanced level of maturity, and I’m at a loss as to understand perfectly well why. How did this happen? Why did this happen? I get that she evolved; I’m just missing the pieces to grasp and appreciate her evolution.
And, of course, it’s always great to see Star Wars, too, take some steps in different directions; and many of these new twists and turns have been engineered by Filoni himself. He’s definitely crafted some incredible arcs within The Clone Wars and Star Wars: The Bad Batch (I struggle with Rebels because I find some of it uneven), and he’s been blessed by even George Lucas with the task of deepening this universe in ways that merit some honest acclaim. But … we’ve never been told in Ahsoka why so much effort needs to be expended to find Ezra Bridger in the first place … in fact, so far as the audience has been told there’s no way to know whether even he and Grand Admiral Thrawn (except for plot leaks) are even alive out there wherever they are … and that’s a narrative weakness no matter what anyone argues.
Why?
Well, without such assurances, characters have been launched on this crusade either in hope … or fear.
As Star Wars fans, we know that the films and shows have warned us about doing anything out of fear because – dum dum dum – fear leads to the Dark Side. If that’s true, then why does it seem like the driving motivation behind so much of these activities rests firmly on the shoulders of alleviating one’s fears? Sabine Wren fears Ezra is lost. Hera Syndulla fears that the New Republic isn’t listening to her. Ahsoka fears that she let Anakin down. Why, even Huyang fears that Ahsoka and Sabine didn’t listen to her. And … every single one of them fears Thrawn’s return.
Huh.
But … hey! It was great to see those purrgil, am I right?
(All kidding aside, it was great to see the purrgil.)
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to no one to provide a review of Star Wars: Ahsoka streaming series as I’m presently a subscriber to Disney+ … which might be changing in the future as their programming has really gotten a bit stale.
-- EZ
- Published on
I’d once heard it said that the problem with Horror is that there’s just too many of them.
When I inquired what this speaker meant, he assured me that because just about anyone with a camera and a cast could sling even the most low-budget attempt together the genre suffered from a lack of innovation. Instead, he felt that storytellers could churn out damn near anything, drape it with a copious amount of fake blood here and there, and – voila – screams could be heard. Indeed, there’s more than a bit of truth to such a position – I’ve made similar observations here and there – but such sentiments kinda/sorta overlook the fact that Horror – at the simplest level – is really only about producing frights and scares endemic to a particular story … and that could be it.
In the words of many a scriptwriter: “It ain’t exactly Shakespeare we’re crafting here.”
Still, I think audiences do expect a bit of respectability to go hand-in-hand with any feature they’ll spend time enjoying … but there’s sadly little to enjoy in Blumhouse’s Unhuman.
Essentially, it’s a zombie picture (but it’s not), a locked-box mystery (but it’s not), an Apocalypse thriller (but it’s not), and a teen-focused caper (but it’s not); writer/director Marcus Dunstan apparently never sought to have his little chiller amount to all that much more than just being one more attempt in the growing pantheon of teen-centric ideas with a pulse. In the end, it’s little more than filler before the next low-budget outing, doing a huge disservice to an otherwise interesting cast and crew who showed up seeking fortune and fame only to be rewarded with bad writing and misplaced MacGuffins.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A group of high school students whose school bus crashes on a field trip. Relationships are tested once they realize they are being stalked by an attacker who intends to drive them out and straight into a horrifying fright to survive.”
About every ten years or so, the Horror genre in particular gets gifted with a new phenomenon. Its storytellers find a new gimmick – a new hook – that doesn’t so much re-invent the field so much as it presents audiences with something that hasn’t quite been seen this way before. The result is a deserved freshness, one that inevitably inspires a series of inferior imitators who’ll stop at nothing to glean whatever life is left in the business of bloody death … until such a time as the next gizmo reinvigorates audiences once again.
When I inquired what this speaker meant, he assured me that because just about anyone with a camera and a cast could sling even the most low-budget attempt together the genre suffered from a lack of innovation. Instead, he felt that storytellers could churn out damn near anything, drape it with a copious amount of fake blood here and there, and – voila – screams could be heard. Indeed, there’s more than a bit of truth to such a position – I’ve made similar observations here and there – but such sentiments kinda/sorta overlook the fact that Horror – at the simplest level – is really only about producing frights and scares endemic to a particular story … and that could be it.
In the words of many a scriptwriter: “It ain’t exactly Shakespeare we’re crafting here.”
Still, I think audiences do expect a bit of respectability to go hand-in-hand with any feature they’ll spend time enjoying … but there’s sadly little to enjoy in Blumhouse’s Unhuman.
Essentially, it’s a zombie picture (but it’s not), a locked-box mystery (but it’s not), an Apocalypse thriller (but it’s not), and a teen-focused caper (but it’s not); writer/director Marcus Dunstan apparently never sought to have his little chiller amount to all that much more than just being one more attempt in the growing pantheon of teen-centric ideas with a pulse. In the end, it’s little more than filler before the next low-budget outing, doing a huge disservice to an otherwise interesting cast and crew who showed up seeking fortune and fame only to be rewarded with bad writing and misplaced MacGuffins.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A group of high school students whose school bus crashes on a field trip. Relationships are tested once they realize they are being stalked by an attacker who intends to drive them out and straight into a horrifying fright to survive.”
About every ten years or so, the Horror genre in particular gets gifted with a new phenomenon. Its storytellers find a new gimmick – a new hook – that doesn’t so much re-invent the field so much as it presents audiences with something that hasn’t quite been seen this way before. The result is a deserved freshness, one that inevitably inspires a series of inferior imitators who’ll stop at nothing to glean whatever life is left in the business of bloody death … until such a time as the next gizmo reinvigorates audiences once again.
For example, the teen Horror prospect found big screen success in Friday The 13th (1980), the first in a franchise that truly milked the prospect of how much wrath one masked killer could unleash on unsuspecting youths. Then – in 1984 – Wes Craven’s A Nightmare On Elm Street glistened up the carnage by giving it a healthy dose of existential dread by hosting a murderer who could come at them in their dreams. Just over a decade later, 1996’s Scream put young folks back up on the Horror pedestal when they ultimately turned their blood lust on their own, pitting victims against those who saw their butchery as little more than a game worthy being played at the highest cost ever. See what I mean? The foundation remains the same, and yet the format – the construction – gets a makeover, one that puts a fresh spin on the delivery.
Alas, all Unhuman really manages to do for its young people is wrap them up in a somewhat confusing yarn that plucks a bit of everything from superior efforts that came before in hopes of delivering something original. It fails – and fails astoundingly – but that never stopped a cast and crew from trying.
And – in all fairness – it didn’t have to.
Many of the components for even a moderately interesting diversion were there. As Ever, actress Brianne Tju has a likeable degree of moxie – a spitfire who’ll go against the grain and the school’s class structure because she chooses to be an individual instead of one of the usual flock. Granted, her character never quite overcomes the level of predictability to Unhuman’s zombie set-up – and it would’ve been nice had she been less of a visual tomboy and more of an authentic scraper – but that’s small potatoes when compared to her screen counterparts. Peter Giles – as the film’s inappropriately screaming sole voice of author Mr. Lorenzo – produces a few laughs here and there, though his apparently dispatch too early in the movie truly hampers what could’ve been a better-rounded role had he lived and fought alongside those he so obviously despises. The comely Ali Gallo – while wasted with far too little to do here as the unassuming sidekick – makes for a convincingly unassured misfit paired with an almost girl-next-door vibe, and her short scenes elevate some of the otherwise mundane developments. Still, far too many of the remaining high school cast end up filling up roles carbon copied from other productions – the jock, the prima donna, the fat kid, the obnoxious know-it-all, etc. – never allowed Unhuman to appear, frankly, human in the final estimation.
Also, the film suffers – nearly falling apart, honestly – once the ruse is up, and the audience is brought in on the fact that all of this is little more than a hoax perpetrated to … well, it’s kinda/sorta unclear. We’re led to believe this was meant as a form of retribution and/or revenge against the school – if not society at large – on the part of those belittled as part of their adolescence experience. Audiences love to root for the underdog, but when the beast shows up with the propensity to infect others with a life-ending rabies such compassion gets tossed out the window rather quickly; and that’s the case here. However, the fact that some who’ve seemingly died get to come back to participate in the bloody mayhem despite perishing right in front of our eyes leaves me to wonder if something left on the cutting room floor might’ve had this one making a bit more sense than it did.
Laughs are solid in a few places, but logic needed greater attention if Unhuman was to emerge alive.
Sad fact: it doesn’t.
Unhuman (2022) was produced by Blumhouse Television. According to a quick Google.com search, the film is available via several streaming platforms. (In fact, I watched this one for free as part of my subscription to Amazon Prime.) As for the technical specifications? Well, Unhuman has the look and feel of about any teen-centric production; there are even some visual flourishes that work quite nicely. Clearly an attempt was made to assemble something that worked cogently … but the final cut here truly needed some more polish … if not a tighter script.
Not really recommended … except for die-hard Horror enthusiasts or Blumhouse aficionados …
Unhuman (2022) is the kind of thing that, alas, Horror production companies have been doing for years, so the film functions on its own internal efficiency, never trying to do anything fresh, new, or novel with any of its individual pieces. Though not a complete failure in any respect, the flick never quite congeals to the point where it makes perfect sense nor delivers a narrative greater than the sum of its parts. Though its low-hanging fruit might appeal to some, I’ll admit to requiring something a bit meatier in my diet.
-- EZ
Alas, all Unhuman really manages to do for its young people is wrap them up in a somewhat confusing yarn that plucks a bit of everything from superior efforts that came before in hopes of delivering something original. It fails – and fails astoundingly – but that never stopped a cast and crew from trying.
And – in all fairness – it didn’t have to.
Many of the components for even a moderately interesting diversion were there. As Ever, actress Brianne Tju has a likeable degree of moxie – a spitfire who’ll go against the grain and the school’s class structure because she chooses to be an individual instead of one of the usual flock. Granted, her character never quite overcomes the level of predictability to Unhuman’s zombie set-up – and it would’ve been nice had she been less of a visual tomboy and more of an authentic scraper – but that’s small potatoes when compared to her screen counterparts. Peter Giles – as the film’s inappropriately screaming sole voice of author Mr. Lorenzo – produces a few laughs here and there, though his apparently dispatch too early in the movie truly hampers what could’ve been a better-rounded role had he lived and fought alongside those he so obviously despises. The comely Ali Gallo – while wasted with far too little to do here as the unassuming sidekick – makes for a convincingly unassured misfit paired with an almost girl-next-door vibe, and her short scenes elevate some of the otherwise mundane developments. Still, far too many of the remaining high school cast end up filling up roles carbon copied from other productions – the jock, the prima donna, the fat kid, the obnoxious know-it-all, etc. – never allowed Unhuman to appear, frankly, human in the final estimation.
Also, the film suffers – nearly falling apart, honestly – once the ruse is up, and the audience is brought in on the fact that all of this is little more than a hoax perpetrated to … well, it’s kinda/sorta unclear. We’re led to believe this was meant as a form of retribution and/or revenge against the school – if not society at large – on the part of those belittled as part of their adolescence experience. Audiences love to root for the underdog, but when the beast shows up with the propensity to infect others with a life-ending rabies such compassion gets tossed out the window rather quickly; and that’s the case here. However, the fact that some who’ve seemingly died get to come back to participate in the bloody mayhem despite perishing right in front of our eyes leaves me to wonder if something left on the cutting room floor might’ve had this one making a bit more sense than it did.
Laughs are solid in a few places, but logic needed greater attention if Unhuman was to emerge alive.
Sad fact: it doesn’t.
Unhuman (2022) was produced by Blumhouse Television. According to a quick Google.com search, the film is available via several streaming platforms. (In fact, I watched this one for free as part of my subscription to Amazon Prime.) As for the technical specifications? Well, Unhuman has the look and feel of about any teen-centric production; there are even some visual flourishes that work quite nicely. Clearly an attempt was made to assemble something that worked cogently … but the final cut here truly needed some more polish … if not a tighter script.
Not really recommended … except for die-hard Horror enthusiasts or Blumhouse aficionados …
Unhuman (2022) is the kind of thing that, alas, Horror production companies have been doing for years, so the film functions on its own internal efficiency, never trying to do anything fresh, new, or novel with any of its individual pieces. Though not a complete failure in any respect, the flick never quite congeals to the point where it makes perfect sense nor delivers a narrative greater than the sum of its parts. Though its low-hanging fruit might appeal to some, I’ll admit to requiring something a bit meatier in my diet.
-- EZ
- Published on
Good morning, gentle readers ... and welcome to yet another Hump Day to add to your growing collection of midweeks! You've made it! You truly have! Congratulations! It's all downhill from here!
Folks, never stop learning. Never. Yesterday, I learned from some (cough cough) glorious TikTokker that using the phrase "well, well, well" (which I often do in this space) is considered R-A-C-I-S-T ... and I've never heard anything so stupid in, perhaps, all my life. But still it's a lesson learned ... and I'm not even remotely suggesting what it is you think I'm suggesting ... rather I'm saying that the level of stupidity some people are willing to parade online has reached astonishing levels. In some ways, that's scary, you know? In other ways, it's refreshing to know that, culturally, some among us are ever striving to lower the bar ... if, indeed, the bar can get any lower. Sigh.
(Now, I also sigh an awful lot. I'm guessing that's going to be found to be sexist next.)
Good grief.
(And that'll be termed ageist!)
Not to sound inspiraitonal this morning -- certainly not needed as I already pointed out that it's midweek -- but never let others stop you from being you. I realize that it can be a constant uphill battle to reach for the silver lining as it seems to be either out-of-reach or beyond one's limitations, and that, too, is just a never-ending part of the human experience. Be yourself. If you do something wrong, apologize for it; make whatever adjustments are necessary; and then get back to the business of being a better you. Don't let the online "culture warriors" win the war with words because -- if you do -- you'll forever be watching over your shoulder for the next buzzword or catchphrase they'll steal for their own nefarious purposes ... and, quite frankly, they don't deserve the attention unless it's to be laughed at.
So ... well, well, well ...
Folks, never stop learning. Never. Yesterday, I learned from some (cough cough) glorious TikTokker that using the phrase "well, well, well" (which I often do in this space) is considered R-A-C-I-S-T ... and I've never heard anything so stupid in, perhaps, all my life. But still it's a lesson learned ... and I'm not even remotely suggesting what it is you think I'm suggesting ... rather I'm saying that the level of stupidity some people are willing to parade online has reached astonishing levels. In some ways, that's scary, you know? In other ways, it's refreshing to know that, culturally, some among us are ever striving to lower the bar ... if, indeed, the bar can get any lower. Sigh.
(Now, I also sigh an awful lot. I'm guessing that's going to be found to be sexist next.)
Good grief.
(And that'll be termed ageist!)
Not to sound inspiraitonal this morning -- certainly not needed as I already pointed out that it's midweek -- but never let others stop you from being you. I realize that it can be a constant uphill battle to reach for the silver lining as it seems to be either out-of-reach or beyond one's limitations, and that, too, is just a never-ending part of the human experience. Be yourself. If you do something wrong, apologize for it; make whatever adjustments are necessary; and then get back to the business of being a better you. Don't let the online "culture warriors" win the war with words because -- if you do -- you'll forever be watching over your shoulder for the next buzzword or catchphrase they'll steal for their own nefarious purposes ... and, quite frankly, they don't deserve the attention unless it's to be laughed at.
So ... well, well, well ...
Oh, my goodness gracious ... can you believe it? TV's long-running Horror serial Supernatural turns an incredible, astonishing 18 years young today.
Full disclosure: Supernatural was a show that I didn't get into during its original broadcast run on television. In fact, the wifey and I discovered it well into its tenure by picking it up on DVD. We burned through the first five seasons, and -- while I thought the show had some basic weaknesses here and there when it got heavily into its own formula -- it was a great, entertaining diversion, the kind that we don't get all that much these days. Free of politics and crafted in such a way as to do little more than chase down the things that go bump in the night, Supernatural endured for an impressive fifteen seasons. Like any procedural that benefits from a long life on the Boob Tube, it had understandable highs and lows; but it almost magically stayed committed to its characters, and that's something other programs would do well to emulate. If you like the characters, then you'll hang through the good, the bad, and the ugly; if you don't, then you're apt to go elsewhere for your entertainment.
So, yes, it was imperfect ... but when it was perfect it was must-see-TV.
Thank you, Winchester family, for keeping us safe all of those years.
Full disclosure: Supernatural was a show that I didn't get into during its original broadcast run on television. In fact, the wifey and I discovered it well into its tenure by picking it up on DVD. We burned through the first five seasons, and -- while I thought the show had some basic weaknesses here and there when it got heavily into its own formula -- it was a great, entertaining diversion, the kind that we don't get all that much these days. Free of politics and crafted in such a way as to do little more than chase down the things that go bump in the night, Supernatural endured for an impressive fifteen seasons. Like any procedural that benefits from a long life on the Boob Tube, it had understandable highs and lows; but it almost magically stayed committed to its characters, and that's something other programs would do well to emulate. If you like the characters, then you'll hang through the good, the bad, and the ugly; if you don't, then you're apt to go elsewhere for your entertainment.
So, yes, it was imperfect ... but when it was perfect it was must-see-TV.
Thank you, Winchester family, for keeping us safe all of those years.
Another serial from the growing heap of 'shows gone by' that honestly deserves another look is the CBS Television incarnation of Planet Of The Apes. It first aired in the U.S. back in the 1974 television season, and -- somehow -- it's just been mostly forgotten, and that's a crying shame. While it only lasted a scant fourteen episodes (one of those half-season installments), the writing was generally very good -- reminiscent of the days of the original Star Trek -- and it, too, tried to stay as true to its characters and the central theme of the movie franchisie -- that being 'man vs ape' -- but in the weekly serial format.
In some ways, the show was likely doomed by the prospect that it came to be reasonably late in the overall Apes franchise history. The film series had started to lose its popularity, so what was the impetus to transform its potential by putting it on the Boob Tube, of all places? It certainly wouldn't have the budget to do what they could theatrically, nor would it have the commitment to big screen storytelling. But what it did have -- at least, I imagine this was the case -- would be access to everything the franchise had already conceived and made in its library of props and costumes; and that alone would give the series the authenticity it needed to compete on an admittedly smaller scale.
I watched it during its original run as a young'un, and -- a few years back -- I picked it up and rewatched it on home video. Like the original Star Trek, I thought it held up quite well.
So there it is, folks: if you needed a little 'something something' to be thankful for on this day, I've given you two entries ... and you'll find a helluva lot more by checking out September 13th's full page of citations by following the helpful link right here ...
In some ways, the show was likely doomed by the prospect that it came to be reasonably late in the overall Apes franchise history. The film series had started to lose its popularity, so what was the impetus to transform its potential by putting it on the Boob Tube, of all places? It certainly wouldn't have the budget to do what they could theatrically, nor would it have the commitment to big screen storytelling. But what it did have -- at least, I imagine this was the case -- would be access to everything the franchise had already conceived and made in its library of props and costumes; and that alone would give the series the authenticity it needed to compete on an admittedly smaller scale.
I watched it during its original run as a young'un, and -- a few years back -- I picked it up and rewatched it on home video. Like the original Star Trek, I thought it held up quite well.
So there it is, folks: if you needed a little 'something something' to be thankful for on this day, I've given you two entries ... and you'll find a helluva lot more by checking out September 13th's full page of citations by following the helpful link right here ...
As always, thank you for reading ... thank you for sharing ... thank you for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Good morning ... and Happy Tuesday, gentle readers!
Hey there, peeps! Sorry for the delay on The Daily Grindhouse announcement. I had one of those nights wherein -- for no particular reason that I'm aware of -- I just couldn't sleep. I'd wake up and drift off over and over again. Finally -- around 3 AM -- I just gave up and climbed outta bed, giving the day my full attention. I had a few errands I had to get to early anyway, so I did those, picking up a few items here and there, and then -- when I got back to the house -- I finally felt the pull of sleep again so I napped. I'm up now -- hopefully -- for the day. I'm good.
So ... what's going on in the world?
Well, I've watched the first episode of the new Daryl Dixon show. It was a lot of set-up, but I thought it was vastly more focused than was The Walking Dead: Dead City. Plus, it helps when you allow your signature character to actually do things and behave in a way that warrants a signature character. I'm thinking about penning a review, but it might be a day or two. I have a few other items on my plate that I'll likely get to first, but kudos to showrunners for assembling what looks to be an interesting variation on a theme for Apocalypse dramas.
As for today's trivia announcements?
There are a good number of significant birthdays in there, along with a few interesting motion pictures, so folks are encouraged to follow the link and take a serious gander at them. Seriously -- as I do sometimes say -- there's something in there for everyone, and I hope you like what you find.
Without further ado ...
Hey there, peeps! Sorry for the delay on The Daily Grindhouse announcement. I had one of those nights wherein -- for no particular reason that I'm aware of -- I just couldn't sleep. I'd wake up and drift off over and over again. Finally -- around 3 AM -- I just gave up and climbed outta bed, giving the day my full attention. I had a few errands I had to get to early anyway, so I did those, picking up a few items here and there, and then -- when I got back to the house -- I finally felt the pull of sleep again so I napped. I'm up now -- hopefully -- for the day. I'm good.
So ... what's going on in the world?
Well, I've watched the first episode of the new Daryl Dixon show. It was a lot of set-up, but I thought it was vastly more focused than was The Walking Dead: Dead City. Plus, it helps when you allow your signature character to actually do things and behave in a way that warrants a signature character. I'm thinking about penning a review, but it might be a day or two. I have a few other items on my plate that I'll likely get to first, but kudos to showrunners for assembling what looks to be an interesting variation on a theme for Apocalypse dramas.
As for today's trivia announcements?
There are a good number of significant birthdays in there, along with a few interesting motion pictures, so folks are encouraged to follow the link and take a serious gander at them. Seriously -- as I do sometimes say -- there's something in there for everyone, and I hope you like what you find.
Without further ado ...
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Good morning, gentle readers, and welcome to an all-new Monday!
Now, now, now: let's not get all riled up, okay? You knew it was coming. You probably new it was coming since yesterday, in fact. Can't do anything about it, so you may as well embrace the travesty, am I right?
Ugh.
Well, I, for one, am glad to be back at it. At least, for today. We'll see what tomorrow brings.
In any event ... welcome to it!
If you check out today's trivia citations, then you'll see that there's an interesting assortment of television programs that premiered on this day back when. The only one that truly stands out for me -- in the thick of memory -- was CBS's Saturday Morning SciFi excursion Ark II. It was a spiffy little show with this fabulous decked out RV (Recreational Vehicle) that went about rolling through what was left of our world after an Apocalypse of some sort brought about our demise. You know the formula? The crew would show up somewhere, the backwoods folk of the future would need help of some sort, and they'd do a good deed. It was pretty much like that for week-to-week ... but it was a solid Saturday morning diversion for young minds.
The day also showcases a few motion pictures that debuted on this day back when. 2009's Daybreakers was a sleeper hit, that I recall. I know I saw it in theaters during its run. What can I say? I've got a soft spot for vampire movies, and this nifty little caper tried to take the bloodsucking mythos into the future wherein the infected's food supply -- meaning us -- was starting to taper off. They were using science to create an alternative, and -- as you can imagine -- it wasn't exactly going swimmingly. If you haven't seen it, then check it out. It's actually very smartly made, though I can't recall the issue I had with its ending. Probably wasn't anything major.
So ... without further ado ...
Now, now, now: let's not get all riled up, okay? You knew it was coming. You probably new it was coming since yesterday, in fact. Can't do anything about it, so you may as well embrace the travesty, am I right?
Ugh.
Well, I, for one, am glad to be back at it. At least, for today. We'll see what tomorrow brings.
In any event ... welcome to it!
If you check out today's trivia citations, then you'll see that there's an interesting assortment of television programs that premiered on this day back when. The only one that truly stands out for me -- in the thick of memory -- was CBS's Saturday Morning SciFi excursion Ark II. It was a spiffy little show with this fabulous decked out RV (Recreational Vehicle) that went about rolling through what was left of our world after an Apocalypse of some sort brought about our demise. You know the formula? The crew would show up somewhere, the backwoods folk of the future would need help of some sort, and they'd do a good deed. It was pretty much like that for week-to-week ... but it was a solid Saturday morning diversion for young minds.
The day also showcases a few motion pictures that debuted on this day back when. 2009's Daybreakers was a sleeper hit, that I recall. I know I saw it in theaters during its run. What can I say? I've got a soft spot for vampire movies, and this nifty little caper tried to take the bloodsucking mythos into the future wherein the infected's food supply -- meaning us -- was starting to taper off. They were using science to create an alternative, and -- as you can imagine -- it wasn't exactly going swimmingly. If you haven't seen it, then check it out. It's actually very smartly made, though I can't recall the issue I had with its ending. Probably wasn't anything major.
So ... without further ado ...
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Good morning and Happy Sunday, faithful readers!
Folks ,it was on this day all the way back in 2017 -- not all that long ago, really -- that Seth MacFarlane showed home audiences that the tried-and-true formula behind so much of early Star Trek -- the very same formula that Paramount kinda/sorta kept insisting was pretty much dead on the Boob Tube -- was still legitimate for storytellers when he launched The Orville into outer space. Yes, many a critic basically dubbed it a comic version of the Gene Roddenberry property; and -- to a certain degree -- they weren't all that far off the mark. But over the course of two season on Fox and another one on Hulu (which magically appeared on Disney+ after some time), this fledgling franchise got its space legs, so much so that it's continued generate a spark of interest from a great many corners of the Information Superhighway. Presently, it kinda/sorta looks like MacFarlane has abandoned it for other pursuits, though he does pop up in interviews every now and then promising that more could be coming. Let's keep our fingers crossed.
And can you believe that Chris Carter's The X-Files turns an incredible 30 years young today? Yes, yes, and yes: I can still remember discovering this gem in its premiere airing; and the wifey and I hung on with this one for all of its TV seasons as well as its theatrical outings. While David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson appear to have moved along to other things, I personally believe that -- if done properly -- the franchise could return for more theatrical adventures. I know that many would want it to return for the Boob Tube for more, but -- sigh -- I'm just not sure what more they can accomplish in that setting. This isn't to say that it's worn out its welcome; rather, when you get that many episodes under your belt, it's hard to not start seriously repeating trips already taken and/or seriously doing anything fresh and vibrant with the same characters. I have heard that the Walt Disney Company (they purchased Fox a few years back) are tinkering with a reboot, but I've yet to see anything materialize. Let's keep our eyes peeled for that, as well.
On a personal note: that feline I've mentioned a few times in this space over the last few weeks? Sadly, she took a dire turn for the worst yesterday, and we had to make that horrible decision to let her go. Folks, it's heartbreaking to lose a pet -- I'm not saying that to disparage losing a flesh-and-blood human being -- because there's no way to functionally communicate a heartfelt goodbye between you and the furbaby. Though she'd been on the decline for a few months, I always held out hope for a miracle ... alas, none was coming. My heart is heavy even writing these few words; and I'll not be the same for some time ahead. That much is for sure. But if you have pets, give them a hug from me today. We don't deserve the level of unconditional love they afford us, and nothing fills the hole in our hearts when they cross over.
Here's the link for today's goodness:
Folks ,it was on this day all the way back in 2017 -- not all that long ago, really -- that Seth MacFarlane showed home audiences that the tried-and-true formula behind so much of early Star Trek -- the very same formula that Paramount kinda/sorta kept insisting was pretty much dead on the Boob Tube -- was still legitimate for storytellers when he launched The Orville into outer space. Yes, many a critic basically dubbed it a comic version of the Gene Roddenberry property; and -- to a certain degree -- they weren't all that far off the mark. But over the course of two season on Fox and another one on Hulu (which magically appeared on Disney+ after some time), this fledgling franchise got its space legs, so much so that it's continued generate a spark of interest from a great many corners of the Information Superhighway. Presently, it kinda/sorta looks like MacFarlane has abandoned it for other pursuits, though he does pop up in interviews every now and then promising that more could be coming. Let's keep our fingers crossed.
And can you believe that Chris Carter's The X-Files turns an incredible 30 years young today? Yes, yes, and yes: I can still remember discovering this gem in its premiere airing; and the wifey and I hung on with this one for all of its TV seasons as well as its theatrical outings. While David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson appear to have moved along to other things, I personally believe that -- if done properly -- the franchise could return for more theatrical adventures. I know that many would want it to return for the Boob Tube for more, but -- sigh -- I'm just not sure what more they can accomplish in that setting. This isn't to say that it's worn out its welcome; rather, when you get that many episodes under your belt, it's hard to not start seriously repeating trips already taken and/or seriously doing anything fresh and vibrant with the same characters. I have heard that the Walt Disney Company (they purchased Fox a few years back) are tinkering with a reboot, but I've yet to see anything materialize. Let's keep our eyes peeled for that, as well.
On a personal note: that feline I've mentioned a few times in this space over the last few weeks? Sadly, she took a dire turn for the worst yesterday, and we had to make that horrible decision to let her go. Folks, it's heartbreaking to lose a pet -- I'm not saying that to disparage losing a flesh-and-blood human being -- because there's no way to functionally communicate a heartfelt goodbye between you and the furbaby. Though she'd been on the decline for a few months, I always held out hope for a miracle ... alas, none was coming. My heart is heavy even writing these few words; and I'll not be the same for some time ahead. That much is for sure. But if you have pets, give them a hug from me today. We don't deserve the level of unconditional love they afford us, and nothing fills the hole in our hearts when they cross over.
Here's the link for today's goodness:
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ