tag:brianbeise.svbtle.com,2014:/feedBrian Beise2013-08-26T09:14:00-07:00Brian Beisehttps://brianbeise.svbtle.combrianbeise@gmail.comSvbtle.comtag:brianbeise.svbtle.com,2014:Post/kickass-2-ebertcom-and-firstrate-intelligence2013-08-26T09:14:00-07:002013-08-26T09:14:00-07:00Superheroes and F. Scott Fitzgerald's Test of First-Rate Intelligence <p><img src="http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/culture_test/banner_fitzgeraldBP.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>While <a href="http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/kick-ass-2-2013">reviewing <em>Kick-Ass 2</em> for ebert.com</a>—the place I used to go for the late great’s wonderful writing—Mr. Ali Arikan made some sweeping statements about superhero films that not only insulted the genre and its fans, but also undermined the whole fabric of pop culture and criticism. So let’s try and put the pieces back together. </p>
<p>It’s important to note that I don’t care a thing about <em>Kick-Ass 2</em>. If Arikan found it “reprehensible,” it’s his duty as a critic to shout that warning from the rooftops of the interweb. The big missteps start in his second paragraph, where he digresses to bemoan the perils of reviewing this kind of movie. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>If a critic takes a superhero movie seriously and chastises it for its shortcomings, fans pounce with the age-old mantra: ‘It’s only a comic book film!’ But if the critic dismisses a superhero movie, the fans shout: “There is real meaning to this work, and you are biased.” As such, the critic can’t win.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><img src="http://inadawords.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Green-Lantern-Movie-Costume.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>First and foremost, Arikan’s complaint fails to acknowledge the great disparity in quality, when it comes to superhero movies. It’s true that if he were to chastise something like <em>Green Lantern</em>, some superfan unwilling to admit defeat would have no recourse but to fall back on “it’s only a comic book film.” It’s also true, though, that if he dismisses something like <em>The Dark Knight</em> as absurd (we’ll get to to that), we might be justified in suspecting the critic is biased against the genre.</p>
<p>But more crucially, does Arikan really believe that a critic wins if he manages to review a film without upsetting anyone? Is the ultimate goal of movie criticism to generate a comments section full of smiley faces and bereft of disagreement and fan-rage? Really, by this single complaint—that it’s hard to “win” when reviewing superhero movies—Arikan disqualifies himself as a suitable critic for this kind of pop. Still, let’s read on. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The superheroes present a very simple solution to the complexities of the modern world. The various shades of grey that line the surface of apparently ‘deeper’ superhero films, such as Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, are mere distractions from the utter ridiculousness of the core concept: a man in a costume fighting crime! </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Though he only means to skewer superheroes here, Arikan unwittingly punctures the balloon that keeps elevated most popular stories. In one way or another, just about any story that ends properly offers “a simple solution to the complexities of the modern world.” Stories can’t go on for eighty years the way life does, so storytellers find ways to tie up the plot threads, allowing us all to get home at a decent hour. These are basics. Comedies end in beautiful weddings, tragedies end in somehow eloquent or cathartic deaths. If presenting simple solutions is sufficient grounds to condemn an entire genre, we can do away with horror films, romantic comedies, kids movies, and musicals. Resolution is not a sign of absurdity in a movie. </p>
<p>Perhaps he means that these movies present vigilantism as a viable option to its audience. If so, it’s a cheap shot, insinuating that superhero fans can’t filter fantasy out of reality. Do musicals present dancing through traffic as an effective means of mediating romantic conflict? They do not, though it’s true that I might try it if Gene Kelly made the recommendation.</p>
<p><img src="http://digboston.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/ampar9.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>Before getting back to the movie he’s actually there to review, Arikan makes another sweeping judgment, saying that “superheroes overpower their opponents with brute force, and as such are the most hideous display of power-worship.” </p>
<p>Let’s skip over correcting his usage of the phrase <a href="http://bkmarcus.com/2008/04/08/as-such-does-not-mean-therefore/">“as such”</a> and deal with the blanket statement. Arikan has now implied, swipe by swipe, that <em>The Dark Knight</em> is a film about power worship that presents violence as a simple solution to the complexities of the modern world. I fear Arikan didn’t actually watch that movie, skipped the last half, or is just morally opposed to any story with even a hint of traditional heroism. </p>
<p><img src="http://www.thetapestryhouse.com/media/transfer/img/ac075.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>It’s perfectly alright if he is offended by King Arthur, Superman, Indiana Jones, Batman, Sherlock Holmes, and Tin Tin, but perhaps this further disqualifies him as a judge of superhero movies. </p>
<p>“As such,” Arikan writes, again misusing that phrase, “taking superhero fare seriously amplifies both its absurdity and fascist overtones.” </p>
<p>Now I’m running out of space, so I’m going to skip right over the fascist thing. F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote that “the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.” </p>
<p>To really enjoy and effectively discuss pop art like superhero movies, musicals, and video games, it seems you need that double-minded ability. Even at a young age, normally-functioning kids know that the toy they’re holding is made of plastic, but also that if that toy doesn’t fly ten laps around the bedroom in as many seconds, the world will explode. Likewise, when we watch Gene Kelly sing in the rain, most of us can entertain the thought <em>this scene is absurd</em>, while at the same time thinking <em>this scene illustrates our human ability to project our emotions onto our environment, which might be a key to how we ever feel safe and happy on this impersonal planet</em>.</p>
<p>At the risk of sounding sanctimonious, I have to say it’s a shame that Roger Ebert’s reviews have been replaced by this breed of heavy-handed, narrow-minded, badly-worded sanctimony. If taking superhero fare seriously only amplifies its absurdity to you, it’s possible you’re watching a bad superhero movie, but it’s also possible you’ve flunked Fitzgerald’s test. </p>
tag:brianbeise.svbtle.com,2014:Post/why-ben-affleck-for-batman-12013-08-23T04:57:05-07:002013-08-23T04:57:05-07:00Why They Cast Ben Affleck as Batman<p><img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_FVXCQBs2iUU/TIBybFRj9hI/AAAAAAAAEYw/-cdM-64s_Ow/s320/Batman.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>Batman’s been cast for the <em>Man of Steel</em> sequel, and it feels like armageddon (get it?) for the caped crusader’s cinematic streak. It’s not that I can’t see Ben Affleck as the dark knight; I can see it with jaw-clenching, sideways-smiling, Gigli clarity. But I’m not writing to complain; I’m writing to figure out why. </p>
<p>It’s true lots of people doubted Michael Keaton when he was cast as Batman, but no one had seen him really do dramatic work before. All they really had to go on was stuff like <em>Beetlejuice</em>. We’ve seen Ben Affleck as a hero, a romantic lead, and even as a spy, and none of it reveals that spark of crazy you need to get this role right. </p>
<p><img src="http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/batman_1935_low.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>There is a theoretical Batman movie I think Affleck could do well in: the 1930s pulp. If the film were set in pre-WWII Gotham, and Batman wore spandex instead of armor, and Bruce Wayne <a href="http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/195348/18-obsolete-words-which-should-have-never-gone-out-of-style/">lunted</a> in a fedora with Commissioner Gordon, I think Affleck could do it. <a href="http://listenjena.com/post/55188521629/the-next-batman-movie">I’ve said before</a> how much I’d like that kind of movie. <em>LA Confidential</em> meets <em>The Rocketeer</em>. </p>
<p>But we know the world this Batman is going to occupy. <em>Man of Steel</em> firmly established this series in the same modern, post-9/11 world we got from Nolan. A campy Bogart Batman won’t fit there. To stand toe-to-toe with this Superman, Affleck’s Batman will have to be the militant ninja we’ve gotten used to in the last three films. With that in mind, it’s easy to predict what Affleck will do with the character. He’ll brood. He’ll clench his jaw the way he did in <em>Armageddon</em> and smirk sideways like in <em>Gigli</em>. </p>
<p><img src="http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/ba/bc/1366734798_2640_BenAffleck.jpg?itok=P8Ew79uS" alt=""></p>
<p>So why did they cast Matt Damon’s pal as Batman? Unless it’s that he recently stood on stage holding an Oscar, maybe it’s because this is a Superman sequel, not a new Batman franchise. Superman’s got to look as good as possible. Ridley Scott cast half a dozen Mr. Universes in <em>Gladiator</em> to make Russell Crowe look smaller. Maybe they’ve cast a bland, bro Batman to help bolster Superman as a protagonist worth rooting for. If they make the dark knight dull, the boy scout might just come off charismatic. </p>
tag:brianbeise.svbtle.com,2014:Post/champion-dont-boycott2013-08-16T11:44:00-07:002013-08-16T11:44:00-07:00Don't Boycott Trash; Champion Quality<p><img src="http://www.ventedspleen.com/letrightonein_final.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>Movie buffs love to berate others for paying to see—and therefore perpetuating—bad Hollywood movies. “Stop going to see Transformer movies,” they prophesy, “and they will disappear.” But even if that were true, it’s not the way to improve our cinematic landscape. Don’t boycott bad movies; champion good ones. </p>
<p>Nevermind for now the fact that no one should feel guilty for going to see bad pop. If it entertains you, no apologies necessary. The Twilight series doesn’t bother me, so long as <em>Let the Right One In</em> sees the light of day. It’s okay to front the cash for the junk-food flick of your choice, but we must also pay to support quality work, so that those artists can keep producing. </p>
<p>Standing outside <em>Fast and Furious 12</em> with a sign saying “no more garbage” won’t hurt that franchise, and it certainly won’t help whatever up-and-coming filmmaker is drowning right now on Kickstarter. It’s hopeless to try and rid the cineplex of lifeless movies, and it’s facile to complain about them. Better to spend your breath recommending flicks that deserve my ten bucks. </p>
<p><img src="http://blogs.ocweekly.com/heardmentality/BrandiCarlile500.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>This principle applies to every form of pop art. Bragging about not reading Stephen King does not help <a href="http://richardbausch.com/">Richard Bausch</a>. Hating on Katy Perry will not get more sales for <a href="http://www.brandicarlile.com">Brandi Carlile</a>. Forget boycotting trash. Champion the kind of art you want. </p>
tag:brianbeise.svbtle.com,2014:Post/remember-avatar-me-neither2013-08-06T13:14:00-07:002013-08-06T13:14:00-07:00Remember Avatar? Me Neither. <p><img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_vKlYYE7vMoA/TBQHvTbTVbI/AAAAAAAAACU/1rwMI1NDTso/s320/Avatar+Movie+Review+by+NIKHAT+KAZMI.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>Last week @aliarikan tweeted this: </p><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p>You know what actually does deserve an essay? How AVATAR, the most successful film in history, has left nary a blip on pop-culture.</p>— Ali Arikan (@aliarikan) <a href="https://twitter.com/aliarikan/statuses/363000648343625729">August 1, 2013</a>
</blockquote>
<p>Great question (<em>Thanks to Daniel Zarick for sending me the tweet.</em>). Why don’t we quote <em>Avatar</em> the way we quote <em>The Lord of the Rings</em> and <em>Star Wars</em>? Why didn’t it leave a lasting impression on pop culture? Nevermind the half-baked environmentalist sermon, the simplistic depiction of tribal civilizations, and the love interest stuck deep in the uncanny valley. I think we forget <em>Avatar</em> because it lacks the basic optimism that’s at the core of all lasting adventure stories. </p>
<p><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/8e/Indiana_Jones_in_Raiders_of_the_Lost_Ark.jpg/200px-Indiana_Jones_in_Raiders_of_the_Lost_Ark.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>The adventure flics that last allow us to believe in the resilience and potential greatness of mankind. In <em>Indiana Jones</em>, a normal man becomes a highly-educated globe trotter who defends history and freedom with his fists. <em>Star Trek</em> gives you a flicker of hope that mankind might pull it together and bring earth to a golden age of cooperation and democracy. In <em>Star Wars</em>, a farm boy learns powerful magic and gets a kiss from his sister, and <em>The Lord of the Rings</em> argues that men can overcome their faults and temptations, choosing friendship over power. </p>
<p><img src="http://bfme2.heavengames.com/lore/article_pix/hobbits_at_weathertop" alt=""></p>
<p>As you watch these movies, you connect with the lead by putting yourself in his or her shoes—imagining that you might be capable of that level of heroism. However naive and fantastic, these stories let you believe—if only for a few hours—the best about yourself, about others, and about humanity. Remember the tag line from the first great superhero movie: you’ll believe a man can fly. </p>
<p><em>Avatar</em> offers no such optimism. In that future, humanity is composed of corporate sociopaths and military monsters bent on committing atrocities. The hero is an exception, and how does he fight injustice? By leaving his humanity behind and becoming an alien.</p>
<p><img src="http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Archive/Search/2012/9/18/1347961540515/Avatar-010.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>Pop culture is a grand expression of who we are, how we like to feel, and what we like to believe. Maybe <em>Avatar</em> failed to influence pop because it presented a universe in which the key to solving humanity’s problems is ceasing to be human. </p>
tag:brianbeise.svbtle.com,2014:Post/as-gamers-grow-old2013-07-31T12:26:00-07:002013-07-31T12:26:00-07:00When Gamers Get Old<p><img src="http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mklw6q3wGN1qa62hgo1_1364869683_cover.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>Video games and I grew up together. We blew up spaceships, head-butted bricks full of coins, and jump-kicked multicolored ninjas who disappeared when they were defeated. Now I wonder if games will grow old with me. </p>
<p>My first video game was Super Mario Bros. of course. Others that stand out from my childhood include Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Arcade, The Legend of Zelda, Goldeneye, and then Halo. In all of these games the goal was some variation on kill the villain and save the girl. That’s still the carrot and stick of lots of games, but recently I’ve noticed a new dynamic emerging. More and more, the motivation for video game heroes is not romantic, but paternal.</p>
<p>Dishonored, The Walking Dead: Season 1, The Last of Us, and Bioshock Infinite all came out within the last year, and the protagonist of each game is chiefly concerned with the safety of a child. In some cases it’s actually their own son or daughter, but these games aren’t love stories. The big moments all play on our desire to protect our own, and even to shield them from violence. Bioshock Infinite was the first time I felt guilty because the younger character I was escorting was a witness to all the blood and mayhem. </p>
<p><img src="http://www.antd.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/no_anna_end_scene-300x202.png" alt=""></p>
<p>The emergence of fatherhood as a theme in games is surely due to changing demographics in the market. The Entertainment Software Association reports that the average gamer in 2013 is 30 years old and has been a gamer for just over a dozen years. </p>
<p>I am that average gamer—out of college, working, maybe gaining a few pounds, and often gaming with a sleeping infant balanced in my arms. No wonder there are fewer prepubescent elves saving pink-dressed princesses in games these days. </p>
<p><img src="http://tn.loljam.com/14/upload/post/201306/27/11593/39711392bc5cce80c6bdee70bc1d86d5.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>So I’ve grown up, and now there are games that tap into my newfound paternal instincts. I still enjoy saving the princess now and again, but more and more I’m drawn to grizzled protagonists, like the married outlaw in Red Dead Redemption, whose teenage son gives him no end of grief. </p>
<p>As my generation continues to age, I wonder if video games will keep up. <br>
Usually, as you progress through a game, your character gains strength and abilities. You might start off with a weak jump at level one, but you’ll be flying by level ten. It’s a good mirror for growing up, gaining powers like a driver’s license and your first apartment. </p>
<p>What about when I’m sixty? Will there be games that explore the idea of losing power and strength as you go? What if at level one you can run, but by level three it’s hard to even jog? And forget about climbing over anything. Will my vision blur? My hearing deteriorate? Will I try and fail to protect my grandchildren from a zombie because arthritis has crippled my trigger finger? I’d play that game, but there must be better material than that in the theme of growing old, and I hope game makers seek it out in the decades to come. </p>
tag:brianbeise.svbtle.com,2014:Post/inception-and-narnia2011-11-17T05:43:00-08:002011-11-17T05:43:00-08:00Inception and Narnia<p><img src="http://www.unicorngarden.com/countd02.jpg" alt=""> <br>
Cobb’s revelation at the end of <em>Inception</em> reminds me of Puddleglum’s victory over the Emerald Witch in “The Silver Chair,” book four of C.S. Lewis’ <em>Chronicles of Narnia</em>. I think each scene might shed light on the other.</p>
<p>At the climax of “The Silver Chair,” deep in an underground country, the evil queen has bewitched our heroes into believing the surface world does not exist. She pretends to have never heard of the sun, and when Prince Rilian describes it as like a lamp but larger, the witch tells thm they are dreaming things up from what they see in the room. A lion is just a dream inspired by cats, the sun by a lamp.</p>
<p>It is Puddleglum, Lewis’ most pessimistic character, who saves them from the witch. Maybe there is no Narnia, he says, but then our pretend world is a lot better than this real world of yours (entirely underground and occupied by monsters). He accepts that all he holds dear might be a dream, and then decides he’ll go on living as if it were real anyway. “I’m on Aslan’s side even if there is no Aslan to lead it,“ he laughs.</p>
<p>Then the witch turns into a huge serpent and they cut her head off. It’s awesome. </p>
<p><img src="http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/100706/inception_320.jpg" alt=""></p>
<p>In <em>Inception</em>, the shade of Cobb’s wife tries again and again to convince him to stay with her, to trust her when she says the reality he clings to is just a dream. He overcomes the temptation by realizing she is too simple to be anything but a shade. He realizes that he can’t imagine her “with all your complexity, all your perfection, all your imperfection.” Though he’d like to, he can’t believe in her because she’s not quite as lovely as the real thing. The shade of Cobb’s wife stabs him but he escapes.</p>
<p>Like Puddleglum, Cobb overcomes the temptation to stay in a dream-world by citing the superiority of the real thing. Then, in the end, when he gets home and sees his children, he abandons his totem, before it can tell him whether or not he’s dreaming now. Again like Puddleglum, Cobb decides he wants to live as if his home is real, even if it’s not. He wants to hold his children, even if they’re shades.</p>
<p>Much is made of the “he isn’t safe” quote from “The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe,” but the postmodern questions of objective truth always brings me back to Puddleglum. “I’m on Aslan’s side even if there’s no Aslan to lead it.“ It’s not the cheeriest sentiment, but it is fantastic and courageous and childish. Cobb is not fooled in the end, even if he is dreaming. He decides or learns that love always hopes, even when the object of love might be an illusion. </p>