- Published on
Occasionally, I get lost in the weeds of contemplating just what audience for which a particular feature was intended.
For example, I’ve watched a solid handful of Horror pictures lately – I won’t name them as I don’t think that’s necessarily germane – that shockingly offer very few scares. Oh, there are a few clever bits – a splash of blood here, a look of abject fright there – but, all-in-all, I find myself perplexed when the screen goes black and the credits start to roll. These films might offer what I figure to be a Horror concept (or conceit), but in the final estimation their directors seem to have whipped themselves up into a frenzy crafting tales heavy on symbolism and subtext but light on true material. I don’t want to finish a film and then turn to the folks next to me and query what they thought the sequence involving three spotted gerbils marching across the kitchen table represented textually. I’d rather just know how much money we’re out with the purchase of these damn tickets.
Similarly, if you’re going to make a movie about the end of life as we know it – and you want to scare audiences to the point wherein they’d never want to have to survive through one – then why make it so docile? So uneventful? So porous? It’s almost like you didn’t really want fans of these End Times pictures to enjoy themselves vicariously. If that’s the case, then why not stick to shooting documentaries? Wouldn’t that be a better use of one’s time?
As Apocalypses go, 1986’s Land Of Doom is immeasurably tame. And ‘tame’ is a word that should never be used to describe any Armageddon.
(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 my 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 citation:
“Earth has been ravaged by a nuclear war, and a feminist warrior is forced to join up with a soldier of fortune in her journey to find a rumored ‘paradise’ as they battle gangs of rampaging bandits.”
Though it wasn’t a slog at its 87-minute runtime, there really isn’t all that much action in Land Of Doom.
Now, let me clarify that …
For example, I’ve watched a solid handful of Horror pictures lately – I won’t name them as I don’t think that’s necessarily germane – that shockingly offer very few scares. Oh, there are a few clever bits – a splash of blood here, a look of abject fright there – but, all-in-all, I find myself perplexed when the screen goes black and the credits start to roll. These films might offer what I figure to be a Horror concept (or conceit), but in the final estimation their directors seem to have whipped themselves up into a frenzy crafting tales heavy on symbolism and subtext but light on true material. I don’t want to finish a film and then turn to the folks next to me and query what they thought the sequence involving three spotted gerbils marching across the kitchen table represented textually. I’d rather just know how much money we’re out with the purchase of these damn tickets.
Similarly, if you’re going to make a movie about the end of life as we know it – and you want to scare audiences to the point wherein they’d never want to have to survive through one – then why make it so docile? So uneventful? So porous? It’s almost like you didn’t really want fans of these End Times pictures to enjoy themselves vicariously. If that’s the case, then why not stick to shooting documentaries? Wouldn’t that be a better use of one’s time?
As Apocalypses go, 1986’s Land Of Doom is immeasurably tame. And ‘tame’ is a word that should never be used to describe any Armageddon.
(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 my 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 citation:
“Earth has been ravaged by a nuclear war, and a feminist warrior is forced to join up with a soldier of fortune in her journey to find a rumored ‘paradise’ as they battle gangs of rampaging bandits.”
Though it wasn’t a slog at its 87-minute runtime, there really isn’t all that much action in Land Of Doom.
Now, let me clarify that …
There really isn’t all that much action that audiences and fans of this particular subset of Science Fiction and Fantasy films have come to expect.
When even your plot description promises ‘rampaging bandits,’ then shouldn’t there, minimally, be a good portion of them? I understand that – if the budget is tight – then perhaps you’ll have to find some economical means with which to present such lecherously-fueled hysteria, but managing the bedlam and mayhem is already part of being a motion picture director. As this Doom unspools, viewers are treated to some acts of carnage that are a bit too benign. Though the prime agitators are dressed like the usual suspects in such fare (angry biker gangs, black leather fanatics, sex dungeon workers, etc.), they’re documented ‘raping’ and ‘pillaging’ is far too … I don’t know … civilized? Why, there isn’t so much as a single breast bared amongst the forced conjugal acts, and the victimized ladies don’t even get their pants much less their briefs down … so isn’t this more ‘high schoolish’ assault than anything else? These bandits are acting more like fraternity-level pranksters than they are bandits, so let’s just be honest: that’s a huge disappointment.
But into this world of – ahem – polite anarchy a feminist rises … and her name was Harmony.
Sadly, actress Deborah Rennard (as the aforementioned Harmony) looks the part (maybe a bit too clean for a world that’s been previously destroyed), but she’s given so little to do in the flick’s preamble. While she’s clearly ready-to-rumble when the script calls for it, she’s otherwise uncharacteristically chaste, wanting to follow her male counterpart’s lead. Essentially, she’s on the run – kinda/sorta like ‘Mad Max’ but without the vehicle and driving skills. After rather easily avoiding these grizzled malcontents, she holes up in a cave already occupied by Anderson (played by Garrick Dowhen), an injured rebel fast on the draw (at least once) and with a heart of gold. Before long, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that these two wayward souls were destined to not only meet but eventually team-up in a bid to survive the holocaust, seek out and find the fabled Promised Land, and maybe – just maybe – find love along the way.
Sigh.
I’m not sure what market demographic director Peter Maris may’ve targeted for this Science Fiction release. At times, Doom feels like it might’ve been conceived as kid-friendly, even; but perhaps the natural evolution of shooting pushed the tale into darker territory. Though the script by Craig Rand (adapted from a novel by Peter Kotis) occasionally drops a lot of swear words (F-bombs included), the rest of the post-humanity tale is ridiculously PG. The action sequences have no discernible pace; the fight sequences are incredibly under-developed; and these characters are supplied with dialogue that might favorably be described as naive … so much so that I can’t help but wonder if these exchanges were merely conceived on the spot. Stranger things have happened … but rarely have they been rendered with so little sense of urgency. This is the Apocalypse, people: is it too much to ask that we look, at least, rattled?
When even your plot description promises ‘rampaging bandits,’ then shouldn’t there, minimally, be a good portion of them? I understand that – if the budget is tight – then perhaps you’ll have to find some economical means with which to present such lecherously-fueled hysteria, but managing the bedlam and mayhem is already part of being a motion picture director. As this Doom unspools, viewers are treated to some acts of carnage that are a bit too benign. Though the prime agitators are dressed like the usual suspects in such fare (angry biker gangs, black leather fanatics, sex dungeon workers, etc.), they’re documented ‘raping’ and ‘pillaging’ is far too … I don’t know … civilized? Why, there isn’t so much as a single breast bared amongst the forced conjugal acts, and the victimized ladies don’t even get their pants much less their briefs down … so isn’t this more ‘high schoolish’ assault than anything else? These bandits are acting more like fraternity-level pranksters than they are bandits, so let’s just be honest: that’s a huge disappointment.
But into this world of – ahem – polite anarchy a feminist rises … and her name was Harmony.
Sadly, actress Deborah Rennard (as the aforementioned Harmony) looks the part (maybe a bit too clean for a world that’s been previously destroyed), but she’s given so little to do in the flick’s preamble. While she’s clearly ready-to-rumble when the script calls for it, she’s otherwise uncharacteristically chaste, wanting to follow her male counterpart’s lead. Essentially, she’s on the run – kinda/sorta like ‘Mad Max’ but without the vehicle and driving skills. After rather easily avoiding these grizzled malcontents, she holes up in a cave already occupied by Anderson (played by Garrick Dowhen), an injured rebel fast on the draw (at least once) and with a heart of gold. Before long, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that these two wayward souls were destined to not only meet but eventually team-up in a bid to survive the holocaust, seek out and find the fabled Promised Land, and maybe – just maybe – find love along the way.
Sigh.
I’m not sure what market demographic director Peter Maris may’ve targeted for this Science Fiction release. At times, Doom feels like it might’ve been conceived as kid-friendly, even; but perhaps the natural evolution of shooting pushed the tale into darker territory. Though the script by Craig Rand (adapted from a novel by Peter Kotis) occasionally drops a lot of swear words (F-bombs included), the rest of the post-humanity tale is ridiculously PG. The action sequences have no discernible pace; the fight sequences are incredibly under-developed; and these characters are supplied with dialogue that might favorably be described as naive … so much so that I can’t help but wonder if these exchanges were merely conceived on the spot. Stranger things have happened … but rarely have they been rendered with so little sense of urgency. This is the Apocalypse, people: is it too much to ask that we look, at least, rattled?
As for the villains, Doom has no legitimate self-starters waiting in the wings. Unlike the George Miller directed outing (with Mel Gibson) that involved a lot of bulging muscles and weight training, this rogues’ gallery is most decidedly thin. (Probably a helluva lot more cardio!) Sparing no expense in the leather department, Maris decorated his band of would-be Hell’s Angels with the necessary layer of grit and grime to make it all believable; but then he seemingly allowed his actors to make up their accents as they went. At one point, one of the villagers had a French accent. They next time we heard from him, he spoke with an American Southern twang. This trend continued throughout the picture, and I ended up at one point thinking this had to be the worst ‘road picture’ ever.
But because I’ve made it my life’s pursuit to always find that diamond-in-the-rough, I’m thrilled to speak highly of Doom’s shooting locations. IMDB.com reports that the feature was shot in Turkey, and – despite the fact that there are more rough edges than needed to be there – Maris and his crew made very good use of that nation’s natural terrain. Like any good disaster picture, he captures shot after shot in the bleak countryside, not quite as desolate and blighted as Star Wars’ fabled planet Tatooine but a pretty reasonable facsimile. Also, the production design utilized some caves and what appears to be some indigenous dwellings that give all of this a fabulous ‘back to the Stone Age’ feel, one that’s consistent from start-to-finish.
Also, I’d be remiss if I didn’t give Rennard a bit of praise. It’s an imperfect outing, but she makes it work nicely in a few places. As the film’s centerpiece, she’s definitely an attractive character to watch. Though the script never quite successfully capitalizes on Harmony having a bit of an ‘Indiana Jones in-the-making’ quality to her, it’s clear that there’s more than meets the eye at work. Had the first film established a workable franchise (FYI: it ends with the promise of being open to a sequel), then I’m left wondering what direction the next creative team could’ve taken with a leading actress who’s proven she’ll beat a deserving thug to a bloody pulp with a rock if he captures her undivided attention. I don’t think even Mad Max did that.
Land Of Doom (1986) was produced by Matterhorn.
Mildly recommended.
For the record, Land Of Doom isn’t a perfect mess. I’ve seen worse days of reckoning, and even I’ve lived to tell about them. What the Peter Maris-directed picture truly lacks is the required rhythm that propels a story about survival from its opening moments to its big climax. Instead, it kinda bobs and weaves its way through the wastelands, introducing one more contingent of the ‘foul-mouthed bikers of the Apocalypse’ when that trope had already become out-of-style with audiences. I laughed more than I should’ve because there just was no driving motivation behind so much of this. Instead, viewers are treated to yet one more boy-meets-girl fish story. Without the fish. And without the story.
-- EZ
But because I’ve made it my life’s pursuit to always find that diamond-in-the-rough, I’m thrilled to speak highly of Doom’s shooting locations. IMDB.com reports that the feature was shot in Turkey, and – despite the fact that there are more rough edges than needed to be there – Maris and his crew made very good use of that nation’s natural terrain. Like any good disaster picture, he captures shot after shot in the bleak countryside, not quite as desolate and blighted as Star Wars’ fabled planet Tatooine but a pretty reasonable facsimile. Also, the production design utilized some caves and what appears to be some indigenous dwellings that give all of this a fabulous ‘back to the Stone Age’ feel, one that’s consistent from start-to-finish.
Also, I’d be remiss if I didn’t give Rennard a bit of praise. It’s an imperfect outing, but she makes it work nicely in a few places. As the film’s centerpiece, she’s definitely an attractive character to watch. Though the script never quite successfully capitalizes on Harmony having a bit of an ‘Indiana Jones in-the-making’ quality to her, it’s clear that there’s more than meets the eye at work. Had the first film established a workable franchise (FYI: it ends with the promise of being open to a sequel), then I’m left wondering what direction the next creative team could’ve taken with a leading actress who’s proven she’ll beat a deserving thug to a bloody pulp with a rock if he captures her undivided attention. I don’t think even Mad Max did that.
Land Of Doom (1986) was produced by Matterhorn.
Mildly recommended.
For the record, Land Of Doom isn’t a perfect mess. I’ve seen worse days of reckoning, and even I’ve lived to tell about them. What the Peter Maris-directed picture truly lacks is the required rhythm that propels a story about survival from its opening moments to its big climax. Instead, it kinda bobs and weaves its way through the wastelands, introducing one more contingent of the ‘foul-mouthed bikers of the Apocalypse’ when that trope had already become out-of-style with audiences. I laughed more than I should’ve because there just was no driving motivation behind so much of this. Instead, viewers are treated to yet one more boy-meets-girl fish story. Without the fish. And without the story.
-- EZ
- Published on
Well, one thing’s for sure: HBO’s House Of The Dragon isn’t letting any moss grow under its feet! In the scope of three episodes, this show has covered what’s sounding like about four years in the personal history of this single ruling family, along with its extended circle of friends and fans. That, my friends, is an awful lot of mileage chucked into a meager 180 minutes … and, superficially, I thought “Second Of His Name” started to show a few cracks in its proverbial armor.
Might I simply start out with saying: “Poor Viserys!”
Though Mel Brooks many moons ago wooed movie audiences to leadership’s various blessings with the phrase “It’s good to be king,” methinks the current state of affairs for the Dragon house’s lord would prove otherwise. In the scope of three episodes, this Westeros leader has lost his wife, his nearly born son, his brother has deserted him, and allies are presently either fleeing or in conflict. So why not take a holiday with what’s left of the fragile family, slay a deer (with heavy assistance), get drunk, and pledge the throne to his two-year-old son … the same throne he’s already promised to Rhaenyra, who is proving to be more than he can handle as a father anyway. Why, it’s enough to drive a man bonkers … and that certainly seems to be the direction this weary, white-haired chief is heading.
Sadly, with this third installment, this Game Of Thrones prequel is already showing its age.
Now, I’m well aware that there’s a bit of a history with mental illness in the Targaryen family. Lest I be accused of being insensitive by readers, let me remind you that these are fictional characters; and, thus, I feel free to say what I may about them and their collective malady. Certainly, Daenerys had her emotional hang-ups – ones that led to the near-torching of an entire city in Thrones’ big finale. As I mentioned in my review of “The Rogue Prince,” Rhaenyra isn’t coming off as what I’d call ‘psychologically grounded,’ either; and I’m guessing that apple – at this point – might be the whole tree. We’ll just have to see what develops.
However, there are plenty of weaknesses inherent in covering too much too fast, not the least of which requires the audience to pay more attention than is typically required of any serialized drama. If the passage of time isn’t shown amongst the key players in some fashion, then a program runs the risk of confusing the audience even further. While these years have most decidedly been unkind to the king, Rhaenyra’s overall look hasn’t shifted in the slightest; and I’m finding the visual aesthetics between the father and daughter a bit jarring as of late. (He’s aged, she’s not. Granted, she’s much younger, but it’s still distracting.) The supporting players might be sporting a bit more gray or white (it’s hard to say given the preponderance of light-colored wigs). Still, this aging process could’ve been handled better with greater demonstration from the make-up and costumes department. Every little bit helps.
Might I simply start out with saying: “Poor Viserys!”
Though Mel Brooks many moons ago wooed movie audiences to leadership’s various blessings with the phrase “It’s good to be king,” methinks the current state of affairs for the Dragon house’s lord would prove otherwise. In the scope of three episodes, this Westeros leader has lost his wife, his nearly born son, his brother has deserted him, and allies are presently either fleeing or in conflict. So why not take a holiday with what’s left of the fragile family, slay a deer (with heavy assistance), get drunk, and pledge the throne to his two-year-old son … the same throne he’s already promised to Rhaenyra, who is proving to be more than he can handle as a father anyway. Why, it’s enough to drive a man bonkers … and that certainly seems to be the direction this weary, white-haired chief is heading.
Sadly, with this third installment, this Game Of Thrones prequel is already showing its age.
Now, I’m well aware that there’s a bit of a history with mental illness in the Targaryen family. Lest I be accused of being insensitive by readers, let me remind you that these are fictional characters; and, thus, I feel free to say what I may about them and their collective malady. Certainly, Daenerys had her emotional hang-ups – ones that led to the near-torching of an entire city in Thrones’ big finale. As I mentioned in my review of “The Rogue Prince,” Rhaenyra isn’t coming off as what I’d call ‘psychologically grounded,’ either; and I’m guessing that apple – at this point – might be the whole tree. We’ll just have to see what develops.
However, there are plenty of weaknesses inherent in covering too much too fast, not the least of which requires the audience to pay more attention than is typically required of any serialized drama. If the passage of time isn’t shown amongst the key players in some fashion, then a program runs the risk of confusing the audience even further. While these years have most decidedly been unkind to the king, Rhaenyra’s overall look hasn’t shifted in the slightest; and I’m finding the visual aesthetics between the father and daughter a bit jarring as of late. (He’s aged, she’s not. Granted, she’s much younger, but it’s still distracting.) The supporting players might be sporting a bit more gray or white (it’s hard to say given the preponderance of light-colored wigs). Still, this aging process could’ve been handled better with greater demonstration from the make-up and costumes department. Every little bit helps.
Still – in true Thrones’ fashion – the narrative focus still borders on trying to figure out which is more important: the substance of this evolving story or the spectacle of how it’s being told.
That said, Daemon’s character takes a huge leap forward in “Second Of His Name,” a development that bodes well for his prospects to retake the Iron Throne.
The first episode essentially painted the man as a bit of a braggard and a bully, showing audiences even a bit of thuggery as he and his troops went about the business of whipping Westeros into shape. We saw thieves lose their hands. We saw rapists lose their … well … you guessed it. And we were treated to other such excesses of magisterial might meant to scare the residents into following the law or else. Again, this was accomplished with troops, so not all of the dirty deeds were directly performed by the king’s brother, though it was clearly implied as to who was calling the shots.
But “Second Of His Name” finally gave viewers a portrait of how ruthless this young lord could be: seeking an end to hostilities between these Westeros rebels and the rising Triarchy, Corlys Valeryon coaxes Daemon to make a final stand against the Crabfeeder and his armies. Strategically, Daemon’s ‘sacrifice’ on the field of battle will serve as a distraction to draw their enemies out of the caves where they’ve found shelter against the storm. It’s a daring gambit, but leave it to a Valeryon to know good and well that a Targaryen might just be crazy enough to both accept the challenge and make it work. Thankfully, it does work, giving Daemon the opportunity to truly show viewers what he’s physically capable of without the intervention of his trained men … no doubt serving as an inspiration for what’s yet to come in all of the Seven Kingdoms.
It was a big and cinematic moment – one that tipped the balance back in favor of spectacle over substance – but we’ll have to see where this journey ultimately takes us in order to know whether or not it pays off for audiences.
-- EZ
That said, Daemon’s character takes a huge leap forward in “Second Of His Name,” a development that bodes well for his prospects to retake the Iron Throne.
The first episode essentially painted the man as a bit of a braggard and a bully, showing audiences even a bit of thuggery as he and his troops went about the business of whipping Westeros into shape. We saw thieves lose their hands. We saw rapists lose their … well … you guessed it. And we were treated to other such excesses of magisterial might meant to scare the residents into following the law or else. Again, this was accomplished with troops, so not all of the dirty deeds were directly performed by the king’s brother, though it was clearly implied as to who was calling the shots.
But “Second Of His Name” finally gave viewers a portrait of how ruthless this young lord could be: seeking an end to hostilities between these Westeros rebels and the rising Triarchy, Corlys Valeryon coaxes Daemon to make a final stand against the Crabfeeder and his armies. Strategically, Daemon’s ‘sacrifice’ on the field of battle will serve as a distraction to draw their enemies out of the caves where they’ve found shelter against the storm. It’s a daring gambit, but leave it to a Valeryon to know good and well that a Targaryen might just be crazy enough to both accept the challenge and make it work. Thankfully, it does work, giving Daemon the opportunity to truly show viewers what he’s physically capable of without the intervention of his trained men … no doubt serving as an inspiration for what’s yet to come in all of the Seven Kingdoms.
It was a big and cinematic moment – one that tipped the balance back in favor of spectacle over substance – but we’ll have to see where this journey ultimately takes us in order to know whether or not it pays off for audiences.
-- EZ
- Published on
As I've said before, one of the great pleasures of serving as SciFiHistory.Net's editor-in-chief is having the opportunity to pass along some news and announcements about projects just set to be released to the masses-at-large. Like Forrest Gump once said, "you never know what you're going to get," but I've found folks willing to look at just about anything so long as the potential to be truly entertained is there. That's always a good thing.
When it comes to defining Horror, it's a genre that has a whole lot of sub-sets. Many of them can be considered a bit conventional -- slashers, driller killers, etc. -- but even some of those try to dabble in creating their own core mythology, something that elevates the storytelling game to the next level. The Saw franchise is a good example of this: though it often gets dismissed as little more than 'torture porn' by many in the business of watching and reviewing films, I've found them to stick tried-and-true to their founding formula. Whether that formula is to your particular taste is besides the point: you have to respect a storyteller and a company for continuing to service the brand in pursuit of maximum profitability. It's how any business works.
Also -- because Horror has some many different types -- I think that's why a little something something set to release next month shows promise: The Unburied looks to tap both into the reality of the present juxtaposed with the haunts of the past with compelling visuals and interesting characters. I've received the announcement for its street date -- October 4th -- and I wanted to alert readers that it's coming out on both Video-On-Demand streaming platforms as well as physical media. Set your calendars appropriately. I'll be copying and pasting their materials below, along with the YouTube.com trailer, for posterity's sake.
You know what to do.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
When it comes to defining Horror, it's a genre that has a whole lot of sub-sets. Many of them can be considered a bit conventional -- slashers, driller killers, etc. -- but even some of those try to dabble in creating their own core mythology, something that elevates the storytelling game to the next level. The Saw franchise is a good example of this: though it often gets dismissed as little more than 'torture porn' by many in the business of watching and reviewing films, I've found them to stick tried-and-true to their founding formula. Whether that formula is to your particular taste is besides the point: you have to respect a storyteller and a company for continuing to service the brand in pursuit of maximum profitability. It's how any business works.
Also -- because Horror has some many different types -- I think that's why a little something something set to release next month shows promise: The Unburied looks to tap both into the reality of the present juxtaposed with the haunts of the past with compelling visuals and interesting characters. I've received the announcement for its street date -- October 4th -- and I wanted to alert readers that it's coming out on both Video-On-Demand streaming platforms as well as physical media. Set your calendars appropriately. I'll be copying and pasting their materials below, along with the YouTube.com trailer, for posterity's sake.
You know what to do.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
The Horror Collective
To Release Argentinian Horror
The Unburied on October 4
To Release Argentinian Horror
The Unburied on October 4
[September 7, 2022, Los Angeles, CA] As announced earlier today on Screen Anarchy, The Horror Collective will release the award-winning Argentinian horror THE UNBURIED in North America, Australia and New Zealand on October 4. The film will be released on-demand on home video.
Log-line: After the death of his father, a young man returns home to settle his inheritance. Forced to participate in an occult ritual, he discovers a terrifying family secret.
Written and directed by Alejandro Cohen Arazi, The Unburied won several awards on the festival circuit including Best Film at the Philadelphia Unnamed Film Festival and Best Makeup FX at the San Cugat Fantastic in Spain. It also played FrightFest (UK), Dublin Horrorthon (Ireland), Feratum (Mexico) and Rojo Sangre (Argentina).
Originally titled El Cadáver Insepulto (The Unburied Corpse), the film stars Demián Salomón (Terrified), Héctor Alba, Mirta Busnelli and Juan Pablo Cestaro. Produced by Alejandro Cohen Arazi and executive produced by Javier Diment (The Rotten Link) and Vanesa Pagani. International sales by Jinga Films (The House at the End of Time).
The Horror Collective is the genre label of Entertainment Squad -- a production and distribution company founded by veteran producer Shaked Berenson (TURBO KID, TALES OF HALLOWEEN). The labels’ latest productions include the killer-pants cult classic SLAXX (Shudder Original) and the critically acclaimed action-horror-comedy BLOODY HELL. Both titles are currently available on Shudder.
Log-line: After the death of his father, a young man returns home to settle his inheritance. Forced to participate in an occult ritual, he discovers a terrifying family secret.
Written and directed by Alejandro Cohen Arazi, The Unburied won several awards on the festival circuit including Best Film at the Philadelphia Unnamed Film Festival and Best Makeup FX at the San Cugat Fantastic in Spain. It also played FrightFest (UK), Dublin Horrorthon (Ireland), Feratum (Mexico) and Rojo Sangre (Argentina).
Originally titled El Cadáver Insepulto (The Unburied Corpse), the film stars Demián Salomón (Terrified), Héctor Alba, Mirta Busnelli and Juan Pablo Cestaro. Produced by Alejandro Cohen Arazi and executive produced by Javier Diment (The Rotten Link) and Vanesa Pagani. International sales by Jinga Films (The House at the End of Time).
The Horror Collective is the genre label of Entertainment Squad -- a production and distribution company founded by veteran producer Shaked Berenson (TURBO KID, TALES OF HALLOWEEN). The labels’ latest productions include the killer-pants cult classic SLAXX (Shudder Original) and the critically acclaimed action-horror-comedy BLOODY HELL. Both titles are currently available on Shudder.
- Published on
Mark my words: you can tell an awful lot about how a program might develop based on its second episode, perhaps even far more than you can its pilot.
Why?
Well, here’s the dirty little secret: a helluva lot of attention goes into that first hour. A helluva lot. Showrunners, screenwriters, actors, studio heads, network executives, etc. are all prone to want to weigh in on how it might be best to introduce a new program. Anyone who has an opinion is likely going to express it one way or another, and we’ve all read how dramas get retooled based on test screenings and the like. Once the premiere is out of the way, then this creative focus tends to shift just a bit into developing the secondary plots and characters who help (or will help) inevitably take the audience on this journey; and this is exactly why I think second installments are often more important and intricate than the first.
House Of The Dragon’s “The Rogue Prince” might be more aptly (and humorously) titled “Egg Hunt” … but I don’t want to get ahead of myself. After a stellar premiere performance that arguably proved there was sufficient reason to bring viewers back into the fold of the Seven Kingdoms (this is a spin-off of Game Of Thrones, after all), I didn’t feel Rogue upped the ante so much as it put a few more important bricks into this show’s foundation. Prince Daemon Targaryen’s estrangement took on a life of its own – now that he’s been away some time – and young Princess Rhaenyra Targaryen acquired her first taste of power, an event that tonally served to reveal just how quickly and easily a young mind might crave expressing one’s opinion even when its culturally inappropriate. King Viserys Targaryen realized his responsibility to the kingdom might be remarrying (after the tragic loss of his queen), and he finds himself nearly painted into the proverbial corner with an ally’s suggestion to wed a young child. There’s a bit more but I’ll leave it at that as I think the developments certainly prove that this House is not without its troubles, and – as a viewer – I’m excited to see where these showrunners might weave all of this threads.
As I wrote in my review of the program’s first hour (review is here), Game Of Thrones’ biggest narrative misstep – in my humble opinion – was the fact that as the Fantasy/Drama wore on the episodes seemed to be more about ‘spectacle’ than they were ‘substance.’ Some of this is logically owed to the fact that ‘winter’ was no longer coming but had fully arrived, positioning that adventure’s key players in the midst of a survival for their world. Still, I’d argue that those of us drawn to that show because of its characters had good reason to feel some betrayals over the way their respective conclusions played out … though I’ll caution once again anyone expecting a ‘happy ending’ must’ve been watching a different program than I was. Thrones was always going to end as a bit of a downer – with a few upbeat flourishes for those most deserving – and that’s just my take: dare I suggest that House Of The Dragon feels as though it’s ringing that dour bell right out of the gate?
Why?
Well, here’s the dirty little secret: a helluva lot of attention goes into that first hour. A helluva lot. Showrunners, screenwriters, actors, studio heads, network executives, etc. are all prone to want to weigh in on how it might be best to introduce a new program. Anyone who has an opinion is likely going to express it one way or another, and we’ve all read how dramas get retooled based on test screenings and the like. Once the premiere is out of the way, then this creative focus tends to shift just a bit into developing the secondary plots and characters who help (or will help) inevitably take the audience on this journey; and this is exactly why I think second installments are often more important and intricate than the first.
House Of The Dragon’s “The Rogue Prince” might be more aptly (and humorously) titled “Egg Hunt” … but I don’t want to get ahead of myself. After a stellar premiere performance that arguably proved there was sufficient reason to bring viewers back into the fold of the Seven Kingdoms (this is a spin-off of Game Of Thrones, after all), I didn’t feel Rogue upped the ante so much as it put a few more important bricks into this show’s foundation. Prince Daemon Targaryen’s estrangement took on a life of its own – now that he’s been away some time – and young Princess Rhaenyra Targaryen acquired her first taste of power, an event that tonally served to reveal just how quickly and easily a young mind might crave expressing one’s opinion even when its culturally inappropriate. King Viserys Targaryen realized his responsibility to the kingdom might be remarrying (after the tragic loss of his queen), and he finds himself nearly painted into the proverbial corner with an ally’s suggestion to wed a young child. There’s a bit more but I’ll leave it at that as I think the developments certainly prove that this House is not without its troubles, and – as a viewer – I’m excited to see where these showrunners might weave all of this threads.
As I wrote in my review of the program’s first hour (review is here), Game Of Thrones’ biggest narrative misstep – in my humble opinion – was the fact that as the Fantasy/Drama wore on the episodes seemed to be more about ‘spectacle’ than they were ‘substance.’ Some of this is logically owed to the fact that ‘winter’ was no longer coming but had fully arrived, positioning that adventure’s key players in the midst of a survival for their world. Still, I’d argue that those of us drawn to that show because of its characters had good reason to feel some betrayals over the way their respective conclusions played out … though I’ll caution once again anyone expecting a ‘happy ending’ must’ve been watching a different program than I was. Thrones was always going to end as a bit of a downer – with a few upbeat flourishes for those most deserving – and that’s just my take: dare I suggest that House Of The Dragon feels as though it’s ringing that dour bell right out of the gate?
Perhaps the most telling expansion was Daemon’s theft of a dragon egg, one he intended to use consistent with his family’s heritage. (Newborn heirs, in their infancy, sleep with a dragon’s egg in the crib.) Given the fact that Daemon no longer retains a legitimate claim to the throne, he’s staked out full rebel territory with such an act of defiance to the crown; and his actions nearly put the kingdom on course for war as a small contingent of his and King Viserys’ supporters nearly come to blows on the bridge outside Dragonstone. Indeed, it is only Princess Rhaenyra’s ‘unlawful’ intervention that prevents the spilling of blood, though she full well challenged her uncle to cut her down where she stood. It was a terrific scene, handled with some surprisingly poor CGI for a franchise that’s built its bona fides on special effects.
As I eluded above, that egg wasn’t the only one discussed at length: the good king himself has finally decided to put his past behind him in pursuit of siring a new wife. (Snicker snicker) It is the hope of Viserys’ advisors that such a new egg might produce a male heir, thereby putting the crown back into the hands of a male heir and giving the council the opportunity to dismiss Rhaenyra’s right of succession. Clearly she won’t go quietly into the night, and she’ll likely double down on her claim as she learned that her new mother is none other than her childhood friend: Alicent Hightower.
Gasp!
This is the stuff that good drama is culled from, and “Rogue Prince” continues to mine territory that should distinguish it both from its predecessor as well as competing Fantasy shows that seem to be popping up all over the streaming place. (Not that I’m complaining …) Though I’ve yet to really warm to Paddy Considine’s royal reign nor any in his immediate council – nor am I all that enamored with Matt Smith as the program’s central villain – this second episode felt like a very organic follow-up to where the pilot left off. I am a bit surprised we’ve been treated to so much ‘dragon action’ so soon in the evolution of the franchise, but as long as the showrunners avoid their overuse I think we’re in a good position.
-- EZ
As I eluded above, that egg wasn’t the only one discussed at length: the good king himself has finally decided to put his past behind him in pursuit of siring a new wife. (Snicker snicker) It is the hope of Viserys’ advisors that such a new egg might produce a male heir, thereby putting the crown back into the hands of a male heir and giving the council the opportunity to dismiss Rhaenyra’s right of succession. Clearly she won’t go quietly into the night, and she’ll likely double down on her claim as she learned that her new mother is none other than her childhood friend: Alicent Hightower.
Gasp!
This is the stuff that good drama is culled from, and “Rogue Prince” continues to mine territory that should distinguish it both from its predecessor as well as competing Fantasy shows that seem to be popping up all over the streaming place. (Not that I’m complaining …) Though I’ve yet to really warm to Paddy Considine’s royal reign nor any in his immediate council – nor am I all that enamored with Matt Smith as the program’s central villain – this second episode felt like a very organic follow-up to where the pilot left off. I am a bit surprised we’ve been treated to so much ‘dragon action’ so soon in the evolution of the franchise, but as long as the showrunners avoid their overuse I think we’re in a good position.
-- EZ
- Published on
In a recent interview with Express – a press outlet in the United Kingdom – one of the guest stars to TV’s Tales Of The Walking Dead clarified that the whole premise behind this all-new incarnation of the wider Walking Dead universe was to weave yarns in a world viewers are already familiar with but with new characters, new situations, and maybe even new emphasis on what life might be like in the zombie apocalypse. Indeed, even AMC has described this manifestation (per The Hollywood Reporter) of the show as an anthology that can both explore standalone stories for established characters or all-new arcs for survivors we’re just being introduced to now.
While I’ll freely admit to being reasonably underwhelmed with the program’s first two episodes (reviewed here and here), I’m pleased to announce that its third outing – titled simply “Dee” – was actually a welcome surprise, though it bowed out with a curious final moment.
As I’ve occasionally opined in this space when critiquing zombie properties, storytellers do have some narrative brick walls that create challenges in keeping any franchise – ahem – fresh. The dirty little secret is that zombies don’t evolve, per se, so the avenues to ramp up the tension might be a zero-sum game. Audiences, I think, have kinda/sorta grown a bit tired with TWD universe not because the writers aren’t crafting interesting new characters, but – after so many seasons and two spin-offs – the focus has understandably shifted to less and less conflict with zombies and more and more headbutting with our fellow man. As I think it was U.S. President Abraham Lincoln once noted, established unions have more to fear from internal enemies than we might from abroad … and “Dee” returns with a vengeance.
This installment brought back award-winning actress Samantha Morton who, rather famously, introduced ‘Alpha’ and ‘The Whisperers’ to the TV franchise back in its ninth season. Though she eventually met her maker at the hands of ‘Negan’ (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), show creator and Tales Of The Walking Dead screenwriter Channing Powell resurrected the lady with a look into her earlier days as Dee, a survivor whose most definitely looked down upon by the well-to-do clan who befriend the woman and her daughter Lydia whom they welcome onto their riverboat sanctuary. What we learn – to a degree – viewers already knew: Dee definitely doesn’t play well with others, especially when they might have eyes set on adopting Lydia into the elite of what remains of society while relegating the ‘mother hen’ to the outskirts, where she’s treated just a step-up from the dearly (and hungry) departed.
Still, the episode earns high marks for its focus on Dee’s ever-fragile psychology.
With her time spent on The Walking Dead, Alpha/Dee was established as a master manipulator, one whose ruthlessness truly knew no bounds in achieving what she demanded of those she commanded as well as others she came into conflict with. Speaking in a Southern drawl barely above a whisper (what foreshadowing and characterization the writers employed there!), she’d layer on a ‘bag of sugar’ before pulling off the figurative band-aid and unleashing just the right measure of pain to maintain control of those within her grasp. But the Dee we’re treated to in her signature hour is only just discovering her true persona: it’s a fascinating look at an individual in transition – one longtime viewers know is destined to become as treacherous and reviled as a herd of zombies by lacks the mastery we’ve seen before. Because she’s emotionally and psychologically in transition – because we don’t quite know how she’s going to react to these current circumstances – this spin-off finally delivered an hour (hour+) that demonstrates the potential of revisiting old haunts with a new freshness.
The downside?
Well, Dee finds herself in a predicament that, alas, we’ve kinda/sorta seen all too often in the wider Walking Dead universe (as I opined above). While we haven’t seen one situated on a riverboat, we’ve have seen these circumstances, and I think that reality might continue to plague writers of this incarnation as they continue trying to find ‘that new car smell’ in the ever-expanding used car lot. Kudos to all involved with sticking with it; I just hope that – as this version develops – they keep striving for something audiences legitimately haven’t seen before.
-- EZ
While I’ll freely admit to being reasonably underwhelmed with the program’s first two episodes (reviewed here and here), I’m pleased to announce that its third outing – titled simply “Dee” – was actually a welcome surprise, though it bowed out with a curious final moment.
As I’ve occasionally opined in this space when critiquing zombie properties, storytellers do have some narrative brick walls that create challenges in keeping any franchise – ahem – fresh. The dirty little secret is that zombies don’t evolve, per se, so the avenues to ramp up the tension might be a zero-sum game. Audiences, I think, have kinda/sorta grown a bit tired with TWD universe not because the writers aren’t crafting interesting new characters, but – after so many seasons and two spin-offs – the focus has understandably shifted to less and less conflict with zombies and more and more headbutting with our fellow man. As I think it was U.S. President Abraham Lincoln once noted, established unions have more to fear from internal enemies than we might from abroad … and “Dee” returns with a vengeance.
This installment brought back award-winning actress Samantha Morton who, rather famously, introduced ‘Alpha’ and ‘The Whisperers’ to the TV franchise back in its ninth season. Though she eventually met her maker at the hands of ‘Negan’ (Jeffrey Dean Morgan), show creator and Tales Of The Walking Dead screenwriter Channing Powell resurrected the lady with a look into her earlier days as Dee, a survivor whose most definitely looked down upon by the well-to-do clan who befriend the woman and her daughter Lydia whom they welcome onto their riverboat sanctuary. What we learn – to a degree – viewers already knew: Dee definitely doesn’t play well with others, especially when they might have eyes set on adopting Lydia into the elite of what remains of society while relegating the ‘mother hen’ to the outskirts, where she’s treated just a step-up from the dearly (and hungry) departed.
Still, the episode earns high marks for its focus on Dee’s ever-fragile psychology.
With her time spent on The Walking Dead, Alpha/Dee was established as a master manipulator, one whose ruthlessness truly knew no bounds in achieving what she demanded of those she commanded as well as others she came into conflict with. Speaking in a Southern drawl barely above a whisper (what foreshadowing and characterization the writers employed there!), she’d layer on a ‘bag of sugar’ before pulling off the figurative band-aid and unleashing just the right measure of pain to maintain control of those within her grasp. But the Dee we’re treated to in her signature hour is only just discovering her true persona: it’s a fascinating look at an individual in transition – one longtime viewers know is destined to become as treacherous and reviled as a herd of zombies by lacks the mastery we’ve seen before. Because she’s emotionally and psychologically in transition – because we don’t quite know how she’s going to react to these current circumstances – this spin-off finally delivered an hour (hour+) that demonstrates the potential of revisiting old haunts with a new freshness.
The downside?
Well, Dee finds herself in a predicament that, alas, we’ve kinda/sorta seen all too often in the wider Walking Dead universe (as I opined above). While we haven’t seen one situated on a riverboat, we’ve have seen these circumstances, and I think that reality might continue to plague writers of this incarnation as they continue trying to find ‘that new car smell’ in the ever-expanding used car lot. Kudos to all involved with sticking with it; I just hope that – as this version develops – they keep striving for something audiences legitimately haven’t seen before.
-- EZ
- Published on
What the AMC overlords promised with Fear The Walking Dead – the first of The Walking Dead spin-offs – was interesting: storytellers wanted to go back to the earlier moments of the growing zombie phenomenon to re-examine what transpired during the Apocalypse’s infancy.
At least, that’s what they promised …
Sigh.
Honestly, it didn’t take all that long before FTWD started to feel like TWD’s little brother, one that didn’t quite have a level of originality to feel all that different. Its early seasons were punctuated by moments wherein it occasionally felt like all involved wanted to the program to be distinct in some way, shape, or form; and perhaps it just lacked the managerial wherewithal (behind-the-scenes) to really break out and be something other than … well … TWD’s little brother. In fact, after only a few seasons in, showrunners opted to bring in an audience favorite from TWD – Morgan (as played by the great Lennie James) – to both bolster the show’s ratings as well as give fans a proven commodity worth following.
Sigh. Again.
Then – based on some logic that honestly escapes me – the powerbrokers at AMC and TWD decided The Walking Dead: Worlds Beyond was needed. This incarnation’s hook was that the show was structured to be a ‘limited run’ outing (though I recall hearing it would be expanded if audience demand was there), limited to only two seasons and would creatively focus on the youth of the Apocalypse. Why? Well, as I understood the argument, the creators felt that young people who’d only known a world with zombies might open up doors for stories they hadn’t yet explored … but then the show spent a fair amount of time with characters who knew an Earth without the Dead, and it ended after two mostly uninteresting seasons.
Sigh. Three-fold.
Now with Tales Of The Walking Dead, AMC is hoping to find a use to keep the Dead alive, it would seem, as stories have ranged from the comedically experimental to a dark and grim re-exploration of another fan favorite’s unseen origins. While I have very little good to say about the first two episodes, the adventure titled “Dee” was quite good, though I’ll admit it ended about the time it was truly getting interesting. With their latest entry – “Amy / Dr. Everett” – the creators have kinda/sorta bridged the gap between the old and the new, introducing an all-new scientist who might be engaging in research which shows that, in fact, these zombies are evolving …
Gasp!
At least, that’s what they promised …
Sigh.
Honestly, it didn’t take all that long before FTWD started to feel like TWD’s little brother, one that didn’t quite have a level of originality to feel all that different. Its early seasons were punctuated by moments wherein it occasionally felt like all involved wanted to the program to be distinct in some way, shape, or form; and perhaps it just lacked the managerial wherewithal (behind-the-scenes) to really break out and be something other than … well … TWD’s little brother. In fact, after only a few seasons in, showrunners opted to bring in an audience favorite from TWD – Morgan (as played by the great Lennie James) – to both bolster the show’s ratings as well as give fans a proven commodity worth following.
Sigh. Again.
Then – based on some logic that honestly escapes me – the powerbrokers at AMC and TWD decided The Walking Dead: Worlds Beyond was needed. This incarnation’s hook was that the show was structured to be a ‘limited run’ outing (though I recall hearing it would be expanded if audience demand was there), limited to only two seasons and would creatively focus on the youth of the Apocalypse. Why? Well, as I understood the argument, the creators felt that young people who’d only known a world with zombies might open up doors for stories they hadn’t yet explored … but then the show spent a fair amount of time with characters who knew an Earth without the Dead, and it ended after two mostly uninteresting seasons.
Sigh. Three-fold.
Now with Tales Of The Walking Dead, AMC is hoping to find a use to keep the Dead alive, it would seem, as stories have ranged from the comedically experimental to a dark and grim re-exploration of another fan favorite’s unseen origins. While I have very little good to say about the first two episodes, the adventure titled “Dee” was quite good, though I’ll admit it ended about the time it was truly getting interesting. With their latest entry – “Amy / Dr. Everett” – the creators have kinda/sorta bridged the gap between the old and the new, introducing an all-new scientist who might be engaging in research which shows that, in fact, these zombies are evolving …
Gasp!
I don’t wanna climb up on a soapbox for good or ill intent here, but I will suggest that this installment might even serve to give greater hope for some life to come out of the undead. The premise might not be as fresh as it could be, but its foundation suggests that there may be more to nature – and its constant evolution – than any of TWD programs have elected to explore before. Dare I even suggest it’s a risky proposition, introducing a load of what could be some dry, erudite science to a franchise that has long turned up its nose at such things, but one that could pay off if handled properly? Is this – as they say – the start of something good?
Somewhere, I’d read in the entertainment trades that TWD wanted to investigate the idea of how the walkers might be evolving. The Apocalypse has certainly worn out its welcome; and – if there were some changes coming to this particular ‘species’ of man, might it be worth pointing out and expanding upon it? Depending upon what might be in store for the future, I would hope that these reveals could be spaced out realistically but equally compellingly for audiences who might still be watching. If you have these cards up your sleeve, showrunners, then it might be time to start playing them, instead of keeping it all so close to your chest.
Again, I think the strength of any Walking Dead spin-off lies in that properties ability to not so much re-invent the franchise but to find a means with which to tell some stories with a measure of freshness. Audiences have been claiming for some time now – not unironically, in fact – that the televised universe is just damn near dead. Every stone has been unturned. Every corner has had a bit of light shone upon it. The characters – while new – don’t resonate because they’re only mild variations of things that have come before. But in the hands of a proven talent like Anthony Edwards, even some of the more mundane moments of “Amy / Dr. Everett” had enough spark to propel the hour, though perhaps not enough juice for a repeat engagement. Sadly, the hour’s closing moments resorted to a predictable reveal, and I think Edwards deserved better … unless there’s more in the pipeline for his character should this show return for another season.
Were I you – and I’m not – I’d find some way to make the science angle work. It just might save all of our lives.
-- EZ
Somewhere, I’d read in the entertainment trades that TWD wanted to investigate the idea of how the walkers might be evolving. The Apocalypse has certainly worn out its welcome; and – if there were some changes coming to this particular ‘species’ of man, might it be worth pointing out and expanding upon it? Depending upon what might be in store for the future, I would hope that these reveals could be spaced out realistically but equally compellingly for audiences who might still be watching. If you have these cards up your sleeve, showrunners, then it might be time to start playing them, instead of keeping it all so close to your chest.
Again, I think the strength of any Walking Dead spin-off lies in that properties ability to not so much re-invent the franchise but to find a means with which to tell some stories with a measure of freshness. Audiences have been claiming for some time now – not unironically, in fact – that the televised universe is just damn near dead. Every stone has been unturned. Every corner has had a bit of light shone upon it. The characters – while new – don’t resonate because they’re only mild variations of things that have come before. But in the hands of a proven talent like Anthony Edwards, even some of the more mundane moments of “Amy / Dr. Everett” had enough spark to propel the hour, though perhaps not enough juice for a repeat engagement. Sadly, the hour’s closing moments resorted to a predictable reveal, and I think Edwards deserved better … unless there’s more in the pipeline for his character should this show return for another season.
Were I you – and I’m not – I’d find some way to make the science angle work. It just might save all of our lives.
-- EZ
- Published on
Yes, yes, and yes: it's so very easy -- in these modern times -- to live life with an awful lot of cynicism.
Honestly, when I do feel the strain of current events trying to put me down, I tend to retreat into the realm of the storyteller; and I'm inclined to toss in a good movie, something that was largely made in an era when flicks were always intended to be far more escapist than anything else. Oh, there may've been a message here or there, but films of an earlier era rarely banged the political drum the way these children writing both television and theatrical yarns do today. I don't fault them so much as I should -- a screenwriter's gotta eat, after all -- but, for what it's worth, I'll always prefer the crew of the original Starship Enterprise over any of their TV spin-offs, reboots, and revamps any day of the week. Nothing -- but nothing -- beats this crew. Nothing.
Like so many Trek enthusiasts, sure, I get a bit peeved from time-to-time when Paramount decides to dip back into that well for another release, especially ones that really pony up nothing new. It isn't as if there's some untapped vault somewhere with troves and troves of never-before-scene vignettes just waiting for discovery. Alas, the years since the original Trek films have begun to pile up; and I'd imagine that studio preservationists have likely searched everywhere for something yet unseen only to come up empty. The result? Well, "let's clean up the original print even more" and stick some $100 price tag on it for history's sake!
Sigh.
Still, I will say that I did take the opportunity to revisit Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) -- yes, the one we've all been told to hate -- when it made the rounds not all that long ago with this all-new 4K restoration. (Honestly, I still love the movie over four decades after seeing it in theaters.) I give you my word that I don't think it's ever looked better, and seeing the Director's Cut once again available for personal consumption means that I'll be taking a trip to my corner retailer sometime this week to snag myself a copy.
Why?
"Dear editor, if you're so opposed to the nickel-and-diming of Paramount, then why would you give them another two bits?"
As I said above, there's nothing that beats a trip into the Final Frontier with the original crew. When I'm feeling low, I'll even put on the original series as a pick-me-up; so 'another two bits' is a small price to pay when we're talking about keeping one's sanity, no?
In any event ...
I just wanted readers to know that these are hitting the shelves today. If you're so inclined, go out and pick yourself up a copy. Shatner's waiting. As is Nimoy. And Kelley. Along with the rest.
The human adventure is just beginning ...
-- EZ
Honestly, when I do feel the strain of current events trying to put me down, I tend to retreat into the realm of the storyteller; and I'm inclined to toss in a good movie, something that was largely made in an era when flicks were always intended to be far more escapist than anything else. Oh, there may've been a message here or there, but films of an earlier era rarely banged the political drum the way these children writing both television and theatrical yarns do today. I don't fault them so much as I should -- a screenwriter's gotta eat, after all -- but, for what it's worth, I'll always prefer the crew of the original Starship Enterprise over any of their TV spin-offs, reboots, and revamps any day of the week. Nothing -- but nothing -- beats this crew. Nothing.
Like so many Trek enthusiasts, sure, I get a bit peeved from time-to-time when Paramount decides to dip back into that well for another release, especially ones that really pony up nothing new. It isn't as if there's some untapped vault somewhere with troves and troves of never-before-scene vignettes just waiting for discovery. Alas, the years since the original Trek films have begun to pile up; and I'd imagine that studio preservationists have likely searched everywhere for something yet unseen only to come up empty. The result? Well, "let's clean up the original print even more" and stick some $100 price tag on it for history's sake!
Sigh.
Still, I will say that I did take the opportunity to revisit Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) -- yes, the one we've all been told to hate -- when it made the rounds not all that long ago with this all-new 4K restoration. (Honestly, I still love the movie over four decades after seeing it in theaters.) I give you my word that I don't think it's ever looked better, and seeing the Director's Cut once again available for personal consumption means that I'll be taking a trip to my corner retailer sometime this week to snag myself a copy.
Why?
"Dear editor, if you're so opposed to the nickel-and-diming of Paramount, then why would you give them another two bits?"
As I said above, there's nothing that beats a trip into the Final Frontier with the original crew. When I'm feeling low, I'll even put on the original series as a pick-me-up; so 'another two bits' is a small price to pay when we're talking about keeping one's sanity, no?
In any event ...
I just wanted readers to know that these are hitting the shelves today. If you're so inclined, go out and pick yourself up a copy. Shatner's waiting. As is Nimoy. And Kelley. Along with the rest.
The human adventure is just beginning ...
-- EZ
- Published on
The bottom line is this: artistically, we’ll never be able to discuss any possible spin-off to HBO’s Game Of Thrones – to any measurable degree – without clarifying our respective positions on the original.
This could mean an awful lot of things to an awful lot of people, but I’ll simplify: many were upset with the particulars of how Game Of Thrones reached its final destination. Its eighth season – the last – took audiences, indeed, to some curious places, and it goes without saying that how it all winded down was the source of some great controversy across all of – ahem – social media and beyond. I don’t want to belabor this point – my two cents is that it was a show destined to never have a happy ending for fans and characters – but I will say that, largely, I was fine with much of its wrap-up. There were a few characters I didn’t feel were put into precisely where they could’ve been – and maybe one or two who proved to be so insignificant that perhaps they weren’t needed – but those kinds of impressions are to be expected when you’re a participant and not the storyteller.
I know, I know, I know: “You know nothing, Jon Snow.”
Still, I left the original with enough closure that I wasn’t much interested with all of the talk involving spin-offs, sequels, and prequels. While I’d welcome a return visit to the Seven Kingdoms if it looked like Home Box Office had something interesting to offer, I didn’t feel the need to climb aboard any new incarnations.
Well, well, well …
House Of The Dragon recently landed on the pay cable network with the airing of its pilot episode, “The Heirs Of The Dragon.” This show is designed as a prequel, taking audiences two hundred years into the past, promising to detail the events surrounding the House Targaryen, their rise and inevitable fall. (Viewers ‘in the know’ are aware that much of Thrones’ political drama involved Daenerys Targaryen’s quest to bring not only her claim to the highest office in the land back into the fold – as well as a handful of needed dragons.) As I honestly found much of that queen’s plight to be a bit predictable, I wasn’t sure what I’d make of a look back at her ancestry; I’m glad I’ve finally tuned in as this first episode was quite good.
Again, I think it helps to understand what my issues with the original was as it helps to clarify why this Dragon soars in the first hour.
This could mean an awful lot of things to an awful lot of people, but I’ll simplify: many were upset with the particulars of how Game Of Thrones reached its final destination. Its eighth season – the last – took audiences, indeed, to some curious places, and it goes without saying that how it all winded down was the source of some great controversy across all of – ahem – social media and beyond. I don’t want to belabor this point – my two cents is that it was a show destined to never have a happy ending for fans and characters – but I will say that, largely, I was fine with much of its wrap-up. There were a few characters I didn’t feel were put into precisely where they could’ve been – and maybe one or two who proved to be so insignificant that perhaps they weren’t needed – but those kinds of impressions are to be expected when you’re a participant and not the storyteller.
I know, I know, I know: “You know nothing, Jon Snow.”
Still, I left the original with enough closure that I wasn’t much interested with all of the talk involving spin-offs, sequels, and prequels. While I’d welcome a return visit to the Seven Kingdoms if it looked like Home Box Office had something interesting to offer, I didn’t feel the need to climb aboard any new incarnations.
Well, well, well …
House Of The Dragon recently landed on the pay cable network with the airing of its pilot episode, “The Heirs Of The Dragon.” This show is designed as a prequel, taking audiences two hundred years into the past, promising to detail the events surrounding the House Targaryen, their rise and inevitable fall. (Viewers ‘in the know’ are aware that much of Thrones’ political drama involved Daenerys Targaryen’s quest to bring not only her claim to the highest office in the land back into the fold – as well as a handful of needed dragons.) As I honestly found much of that queen’s plight to be a bit predictable, I wasn’t sure what I’d make of a look back at her ancestry; I’m glad I’ve finally tuned in as this first episode was quite good.
Again, I think it helps to understand what my issues with the original was as it helps to clarify why this Dragon soars in the first hour.
Though it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when and where this happened, I thought Thrones kinda/sorta lost its narrative focus aesthetically: at some time, the show became more about the spectacle than the human drama at the heart of the ongoing George R.R. Martin fictional saga. While I’m willing to be ‘oohed’ and ‘aahed’ with big effects sequences like any hungry fan, there needs to be understandable and relatable characters at the core of the action … otherwise, I just don’t give a damn about the consequences they’ll face. Thrones – with its constant promising of bigger and bigger battles – shifted away from its core ensemble and started to be about putting cinematic duels together, each one a bit bloodier than the last. I’ll concede that a few of these managed to come full circle in the last act – as they should – but, for me, there just wasn’t enough to justify some of the program’s last second surprises.
It's the human drama that compels an audience to stay focused on any program, and “The Heirs” definitely gives audiences coming back to the Seven Kingdoms the promise of a return to form. A good handful are introduced, and their respective foundations clearly point in the direction of inevitable conflict. Some of these new faces are young – and likely to be with us for some time – and some are seasoned veterans … whose fate might end up being a bit more transitory if not downright expendable than others. However, it all feels like it’s structured to involve palace intrigue, something that I felt was sidelined (and a loss) in the HBO original series. Granted, we don’t spend much time outside of the House Targaryen in this first chapter; but there’s enough material to lay the foundation for where we might be headed, why this saga might be even stronger than the previous, and how it all may rise and fall looks damn delicious.
Because it’s early, I may be proven wrong in my biggest complaint: former Doctor Who actor Matt Smith just feels miscast as the kinda/sorta villainous Prince Daemon Targaryen. It’s more impression at this point than anything else – he’s sharing a lot of screen time with others in this installment, so most of what I have at this point are only my feelings of his work here – and I’m hoping this’ll change as this prince comes face-to-face with the trials and tribulations owed to any member of the royal family … even its black sheep, for which he’s obviously destined. Alas, he’s going to need to fill some very big shoes to become the tragic center player methinks this script wants him to be.
Highly recommended.
As first episodes go, “The Heirs Of The Dragon” is very dynamic. It balances the player introductions and only hints at where the show could go … but I’d be a fool to look away at this point.
-- EZ
It's the human drama that compels an audience to stay focused on any program, and “The Heirs” definitely gives audiences coming back to the Seven Kingdoms the promise of a return to form. A good handful are introduced, and their respective foundations clearly point in the direction of inevitable conflict. Some of these new faces are young – and likely to be with us for some time – and some are seasoned veterans … whose fate might end up being a bit more transitory if not downright expendable than others. However, it all feels like it’s structured to involve palace intrigue, something that I felt was sidelined (and a loss) in the HBO original series. Granted, we don’t spend much time outside of the House Targaryen in this first chapter; but there’s enough material to lay the foundation for where we might be headed, why this saga might be even stronger than the previous, and how it all may rise and fall looks damn delicious.
Because it’s early, I may be proven wrong in my biggest complaint: former Doctor Who actor Matt Smith just feels miscast as the kinda/sorta villainous Prince Daemon Targaryen. It’s more impression at this point than anything else – he’s sharing a lot of screen time with others in this installment, so most of what I have at this point are only my feelings of his work here – and I’m hoping this’ll change as this prince comes face-to-face with the trials and tribulations owed to any member of the royal family … even its black sheep, for which he’s obviously destined. Alas, he’s going to need to fill some very big shoes to become the tragic center player methinks this script wants him to be.
Highly recommended.
As first episodes go, “The Heirs Of The Dragon” is very dynamic. It balances the player introductions and only hints at where the show could go … but I’d be a fool to look away at this point.
-- EZ
- Published on
Regular readers of SciFiHistory.Net know all too well of my penchant for laughing.
I do so very much love a good comedy. Sometimes it’s the high concept stuff – the kind of story that starts out with a humorous angle and then manages to work the laughs organically through every layer of the property. Other days, I can go for the low-hanging fruit just like anyone else can: I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve sat through Airplane, Hots Shots, or Scary Movie 3 when they’ve come up on cable, and years later they still brings me a modest bit of joy.
But I’ve often warned (have I not?) that mixing it together with other genres – especially Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror – is, at best, a risky proposition.
Why?
Well, the simplest explanation is that laughs just don’t always work, especially when the storytellers spend so much time dialing up the tension of a particular sequence or the dire circumstances that could befall an entire cast of characters in this fictional universe. It can be effective when used sparingly, true, as Seth Macfarlane and his band of space explorers have finally toned it down for Season 3 of The Orville: New Horizons: I found a lot of the yucks just tonally misplaced in that program’s Seasons 1 and 2, and I’m glad that they’re now just allowing it when and if it feels right.
Leave it to the creators of the latest spin-off of the once-bright star in the AMC crown – The Walking Dead – to muddy the waters long run red: Tales Of The Walking Dead – an anthology series promising to explore some stand-alone adventures in the ultimate land of TV zombies opened up its inaugural season with a bit of a predictable stinker simply titled “Evie/Joe.” Here’s the episode’s synopsis as provided by IMDB.com:
“In a road-trip story, a reclusive prepper abandons his bunker in search of a female prepper from his past; along the way, he meets an unlikely ally who is his polar opposite; they team up in an effort to find their lost loved ones.”
So it would seem that the folks behind this incarnation believe that what’s been truly missing from the wider Walking Dead universe is – ahem – romantic comedy. (In case you missed it, the Nielsen ratings for the original show now entering its last crop of episodes, haven’t been nearly as grand as the program’s glory days. I’m wondering if this spin-off is an attempt to switch gears just a bit … but … romantic comedy? Really? That’s what we’re banking our futures on?) While such things have proven successful on the silver screen – Shaun Of The Dead (2004) immediately comes to mind – I’m not convinced that these creatives know what they’re doing if Evie/Joe is any indication.
I do so very much love a good comedy. Sometimes it’s the high concept stuff – the kind of story that starts out with a humorous angle and then manages to work the laughs organically through every layer of the property. Other days, I can go for the low-hanging fruit just like anyone else can: I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve sat through Airplane, Hots Shots, or Scary Movie 3 when they’ve come up on cable, and years later they still brings me a modest bit of joy.
But I’ve often warned (have I not?) that mixing it together with other genres – especially Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror – is, at best, a risky proposition.
Why?
Well, the simplest explanation is that laughs just don’t always work, especially when the storytellers spend so much time dialing up the tension of a particular sequence or the dire circumstances that could befall an entire cast of characters in this fictional universe. It can be effective when used sparingly, true, as Seth Macfarlane and his band of space explorers have finally toned it down for Season 3 of The Orville: New Horizons: I found a lot of the yucks just tonally misplaced in that program’s Seasons 1 and 2, and I’m glad that they’re now just allowing it when and if it feels right.
Leave it to the creators of the latest spin-off of the once-bright star in the AMC crown – The Walking Dead – to muddy the waters long run red: Tales Of The Walking Dead – an anthology series promising to explore some stand-alone adventures in the ultimate land of TV zombies opened up its inaugural season with a bit of a predictable stinker simply titled “Evie/Joe.” Here’s the episode’s synopsis as provided by IMDB.com:
“In a road-trip story, a reclusive prepper abandons his bunker in search of a female prepper from his past; along the way, he meets an unlikely ally who is his polar opposite; they team up in an effort to find their lost loved ones.”
So it would seem that the folks behind this incarnation believe that what’s been truly missing from the wider Walking Dead universe is – ahem – romantic comedy. (In case you missed it, the Nielsen ratings for the original show now entering its last crop of episodes, haven’t been nearly as grand as the program’s glory days. I’m wondering if this spin-off is an attempt to switch gears just a bit … but … romantic comedy? Really? That’s what we’re banking our futures on?) While such things have proven successful on the silver screen – Shaun Of The Dead (2004) immediately comes to mind – I’m not convinced that these creatives know what they’re doing if Evie/Joe is any indication.
For starters, its central line-up: Terry Crews and Olivia Munn have absolutely zero chemistry together.
How can you deliver a romance without any chemistry?
While the script gives their slowly developing relationship a bit of life, methinks what’s missing from the equation are a pair of talents capable of elevating these written words to the next level. The script credited to Maya Goldsmith and Ben Sokolowski telegraphs much of this pair’s growing attachment to one another, so it’s good that neither player really needed to convey much nuance, especially since it would appear that they cannot. Crews – an athlete-turned-actor – has developed some nice comic chops when I’ve seen him elsewhere, and it’s easy to see how the showrunners thought his casting might be a good idea. Big, bulky, and brutish, he looks the part of a guy who just might survive the End Of Life As We Know It in a bunker.
But pairing him opposite Munn – someone I’ve often dubbed a ‘can’t-actress’ – really did the poor guy no favors, as she kills the momentum at seemingly every opportunity. How does she keep finding work, and can I get me some of that?
Part of the appeal in any romantic entanglement is that irrepressible yin and yang. The high and the low. The push and the pull. There should always be an undercurrent – one that suggests there’s more to these two people than meets the eye – and it’s this blossoming reality that serves to draw an audience in with each new development. As viewers, we want these two poor souls to get together – somehow – because that’s the way love inevitably works. Right? Sadly, that just doesn’t happen here because neither player made me believe they were authentically drawn to the other. Yes, they’re together in the closing moments, but was it because they legitimately fell for one another … or was it because that’s the way it was written? I’m inclined to say that’s the way it was plotted, so it came to pass.
Love by script’s convention is the saddest of them all.
Though the writing effectively dribbled a tidbit here and there and even occasionally flirted with some interesting ideas about finding love in the apocalypse, the whole affair ends up feeling formulaic … a huge, huge disappointment for a pilot episode.
Crews should’ve saved and stayed with his dog.
-- EZ
How can you deliver a romance without any chemistry?
While the script gives their slowly developing relationship a bit of life, methinks what’s missing from the equation are a pair of talents capable of elevating these written words to the next level. The script credited to Maya Goldsmith and Ben Sokolowski telegraphs much of this pair’s growing attachment to one another, so it’s good that neither player really needed to convey much nuance, especially since it would appear that they cannot. Crews – an athlete-turned-actor – has developed some nice comic chops when I’ve seen him elsewhere, and it’s easy to see how the showrunners thought his casting might be a good idea. Big, bulky, and brutish, he looks the part of a guy who just might survive the End Of Life As We Know It in a bunker.
But pairing him opposite Munn – someone I’ve often dubbed a ‘can’t-actress’ – really did the poor guy no favors, as she kills the momentum at seemingly every opportunity. How does she keep finding work, and can I get me some of that?
Part of the appeal in any romantic entanglement is that irrepressible yin and yang. The high and the low. The push and the pull. There should always be an undercurrent – one that suggests there’s more to these two people than meets the eye – and it’s this blossoming reality that serves to draw an audience in with each new development. As viewers, we want these two poor souls to get together – somehow – because that’s the way love inevitably works. Right? Sadly, that just doesn’t happen here because neither player made me believe they were authentically drawn to the other. Yes, they’re together in the closing moments, but was it because they legitimately fell for one another … or was it because that’s the way it was written? I’m inclined to say that’s the way it was plotted, so it came to pass.
Love by script’s convention is the saddest of them all.
Though the writing effectively dribbled a tidbit here and there and even occasionally flirted with some interesting ideas about finding love in the apocalypse, the whole affair ends up feeling formulaic … a huge, huge disappointment for a pilot episode.
Crews should’ve saved and stayed with his dog.
-- EZ
- Published on
There’s often a tendency later in an established program’s life to think outside the box when it comes to delivering stories.
Let’s face facts: it can get a bit dry when you’re saving life as we know it week in and week out. So I think that it’s only natural for screenwriters and showrunners to occasionally come together around the idea of doing something a bit different than what they’ve done before. Fox TV’s The X-Files rather famously toyed with switching around its narrative focus; and – on some rare occasions – they even delivered an hour-long installment involving government conspiracies with more than a few belly laughs. Granted, there may’ve been a nugget of joy that fans expected tied up somewhere in these diverting episodes: there is a brand to protect, after all, so it wouldn’t do to fully deconstruct the wider world as audiences had come to know it. That would be considered a bridge too far, and so it should.
So … I welcome Tales Of The Walking Dead kinda/sorta deciding to muck around just a bit with its formula. Show us a different corner of the Zombie Apocalypse. Introduce us to a roster of unestablished players with untried sources and methods of surviving their collective doom. Give us another layer to consider when it comes to trafficking in the Undead. And what better way to do that with an anthology format, one that has no hard ties to anything that’s come before … but only so long as it fits within this universe as defined.
But the second episode – the one titled “Blair/Gina” – was just plain awful for one very specific reason. I’m happy to explain.
Here’s the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
“In a fast-paced, reality-twisting buddy-action heist, a disgruntled receptionist and her overbearing boss are trapped together as the city of Atlanta collapses under the Walker Apocalypse, forcing them to work together in order to escape the city.”
I ask you to momentarily imagine the movie Groundhog Day (1993). For those of you who haven’t seen it, actor and comedian Bill Murray plays a television weatherman who finds himself reliving the same day over and over again in a contest to resolve his narcissistic ways as well as put the universe right again in order to escape. It’s a gem of film that works largely because (A) the comedy is relatable, meaning it can be grasped by all right up front; (B) Murray is – naturally – funny as hell; and (C) there’s a method to the madness that makes perfect sense given the world as defined by co-screenwriters Danny Rubin and the late Harold Ramis.
Let’s face facts: it can get a bit dry when you’re saving life as we know it week in and week out. So I think that it’s only natural for screenwriters and showrunners to occasionally come together around the idea of doing something a bit different than what they’ve done before. Fox TV’s The X-Files rather famously toyed with switching around its narrative focus; and – on some rare occasions – they even delivered an hour-long installment involving government conspiracies with more than a few belly laughs. Granted, there may’ve been a nugget of joy that fans expected tied up somewhere in these diverting episodes: there is a brand to protect, after all, so it wouldn’t do to fully deconstruct the wider world as audiences had come to know it. That would be considered a bridge too far, and so it should.
So … I welcome Tales Of The Walking Dead kinda/sorta deciding to muck around just a bit with its formula. Show us a different corner of the Zombie Apocalypse. Introduce us to a roster of unestablished players with untried sources and methods of surviving their collective doom. Give us another layer to consider when it comes to trafficking in the Undead. And what better way to do that with an anthology format, one that has no hard ties to anything that’s come before … but only so long as it fits within this universe as defined.
But the second episode – the one titled “Blair/Gina” – was just plain awful for one very specific reason. I’m happy to explain.
Here’s the plot summary as provided by our friends at IMDB.com:
“In a fast-paced, reality-twisting buddy-action heist, a disgruntled receptionist and her overbearing boss are trapped together as the city of Atlanta collapses under the Walker Apocalypse, forcing them to work together in order to escape the city.”
I ask you to momentarily imagine the movie Groundhog Day (1993). For those of you who haven’t seen it, actor and comedian Bill Murray plays a television weatherman who finds himself reliving the same day over and over again in a contest to resolve his narcissistic ways as well as put the universe right again in order to escape. It’s a gem of film that works largely because (A) the comedy is relatable, meaning it can be grasped by all right up front; (B) Murray is – naturally – funny as hell; and (C) there’s a method to the madness that makes perfect sense given the world as defined by co-screenwriters Danny Rubin and the late Harold Ramis.
Now, imagine Groundhog Day without all the humor but with all the narcissism. Imagine it without the inherent logic of righting the universe. And imagine it with zombies.
It’s cold.
It’s lifeless.
It’s damn near unwatchable.
Seriously, this is what director Michael E. Satrazemis achieves with the script credited to Kari Drake: the cast and crew have delivered an installment of – ahem – the Walking Dead universe that’s neither funny nor logical for a franchise that’s built on the fictional exploration of ‘End Times’ Horror. This story – pure Fantasy by any reasonable estimation – fits nowhere within this universe as viewers have come to know it. In fact, it’s a one-hour-plus slog that wastes two reasonably good comic performances (the reliable Parker Posey and an impressive Jillian Bell) in a flight-of-fancy that’s tonally out-of-sync with anything that AMC has been proud to put TWD’s name on.
Now, there’s nothing wrong with pure Fantasy for Fantasy’s sake.
As one who’s definitely taken in more than one lifetime’s share of movies that traffic on the fringes, I’m all in favor of something that comes along trying to push the boundaries out a bit. You know what I mean? Stretch the parameters out in such a way that storytellers can fit damn near any type of yarn into an established universe. Science Fiction shows, especially, have done this (typically later in their episodic run); and it can have an effect of ‘clearing the air’ or ‘cleansing the palate’ for viewers who have faithfully stayed on while others have left the farm for greener pastures. But – ahem – fairy tale nonsense has never had a place in the world of the undead, and this attempt at cosmic humor really felt like another franchise altogether.
Therein lies the problem: “Blair/Gina” is a fairy tale. In a franchise that’s predicated on depicting the grim and harsh and unfettered reality of death, these showrunners have now thrown a huge mythical monkey wrench, one that defies anything and everything that’s come before. This isn’t ‘different for different’s sake.’ This shouldn’t be here. This can’t happen. This couldn’t happen. This is a set of circumstances that cannot and should not exist anywhere in this universe … but yet now it does.
Granted, the upside to all of this is simple: because this takes place in TWD’s anthology, maybe it’ll never quite be considered as part and parcel of the wider existence. As I said above, I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with trying something different … but I do – as a viewer – draw the line at the nonsensical, of which this plot happens to be. I’m glad that the cast and crew have found a place wherein they feel comfortable enough with – ahem – narrative gibberish like this because – at the end of the day – it’s all fun and games, after all, right?
Well … what’s next?
Zombies who sing and dance?
Seriously, that can’t be far behind.
-- EZ
It’s cold.
It’s lifeless.
It’s damn near unwatchable.
Seriously, this is what director Michael E. Satrazemis achieves with the script credited to Kari Drake: the cast and crew have delivered an installment of – ahem – the Walking Dead universe that’s neither funny nor logical for a franchise that’s built on the fictional exploration of ‘End Times’ Horror. This story – pure Fantasy by any reasonable estimation – fits nowhere within this universe as viewers have come to know it. In fact, it’s a one-hour-plus slog that wastes two reasonably good comic performances (the reliable Parker Posey and an impressive Jillian Bell) in a flight-of-fancy that’s tonally out-of-sync with anything that AMC has been proud to put TWD’s name on.
Now, there’s nothing wrong with pure Fantasy for Fantasy’s sake.
As one who’s definitely taken in more than one lifetime’s share of movies that traffic on the fringes, I’m all in favor of something that comes along trying to push the boundaries out a bit. You know what I mean? Stretch the parameters out in such a way that storytellers can fit damn near any type of yarn into an established universe. Science Fiction shows, especially, have done this (typically later in their episodic run); and it can have an effect of ‘clearing the air’ or ‘cleansing the palate’ for viewers who have faithfully stayed on while others have left the farm for greener pastures. But – ahem – fairy tale nonsense has never had a place in the world of the undead, and this attempt at cosmic humor really felt like another franchise altogether.
Therein lies the problem: “Blair/Gina” is a fairy tale. In a franchise that’s predicated on depicting the grim and harsh and unfettered reality of death, these showrunners have now thrown a huge mythical monkey wrench, one that defies anything and everything that’s come before. This isn’t ‘different for different’s sake.’ This shouldn’t be here. This can’t happen. This couldn’t happen. This is a set of circumstances that cannot and should not exist anywhere in this universe … but yet now it does.
Granted, the upside to all of this is simple: because this takes place in TWD’s anthology, maybe it’ll never quite be considered as part and parcel of the wider existence. As I said above, I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with trying something different … but I do – as a viewer – draw the line at the nonsensical, of which this plot happens to be. I’m glad that the cast and crew have found a place wherein they feel comfortable enough with – ahem – narrative gibberish like this because – at the end of the day – it’s all fun and games, after all, right?
Well … what’s next?
Zombies who sing and dance?
Seriously, that can’t be far behind.
-- EZ