Ah, the Pink Panther. The cartoon was my first introduction to swing, and I'm pretty damn fond of the genre since. Although the Pink Panther was just the name of a certain gem stone in the film, the animated short at the beginning was so popular, it spawned a number of similar animations completely unrelated to the film. Like the classic Loony Toons, they are great entertainment, and I particularly like the style of the below episode.
The same kind of style shows up in Grim Fandango, a classic adventure game which I have only recently played. Along with its film noir themes, art deco style, and clever caricature, the game features some fantastic music of the 30s swing style (with Hispanic jazz roots as well, which I also enjoy).
I'll be sure to discuss Grim Fandango in more detail in the near future.
If you haven't played Bioshock by now, I'm truly sorry. Not only is it damn beautiful, it's wonderfully atmospheric. Even Yahtzee says so!
As I've said before, I'm a big fan of the culture of the 30s through 50s (and some into the 60s as well, though not on the rock and roll/hipster thing), and this game played a big part in rekindling that fascination (which was earlier begun in my childhood through the seeing of various classic musicals). It inspired me to the point of seeking to create a comedy radio show with a 50s theme, complete with website, at the local college at which I am currently enrolled. Unfortunately, the show never got off the ground on account of my request never being accepted, but I had quite a few great ideas.
In any case, Bioshock enthralled me for quite some time last year and continues to occupy a warm corner of my drafty heart. Since I'm not the only one who feels that way, it is obvious that there would be sequels, which I applaud. A great game should have more of the same. Unlike movies, I have a good deal of trust for a game sequel, as, unlike movie companies, video game companies have a reputation that they need to keep sparkling, or else they'll never be able to get decent sales, and no truly bad game sequels come to mind. Well, maybe a couple, but very few.
On the other hand, I've yet to see a movie based on a video game that I enjoy. While Resident Evil, Doom, Silent Hill, (though I can't fully comment on the latter, as I've never completed a Silent Hill game) and others were alright as movies, they never felt (or never were) "true" to the games, meaning that they diverged grossly from the source material. The very same thing annoys me about movies that are based on books, but totally go a different direction. Either stick to what the game/book is about as close as possible, or base the movie on the game/book's atmosphere, and not its plot. Don't try to tell the story in a different way--it always, always sucks. Why? Because it's riding success, and that pisses me off.
Where was I? Oh, yes. So, there will be a Bioshock movie. All I can say is that they'd better not screw this up. If you've played Bioshock, you know that the game itself plays much like an action movie; problem is that the game never breaks from the point of view of the protagonist. Of course, this means that, unless they're going to do a film fully in first-person PoV (don't count on it), they'll have to put a face to the "faceless" protagonist. It's for that same reason that one couldn't make a successful (read: popular with fans) Half-Life film (not that you'd have to--again, the game plays like a movie), even though we know what Gordon Freeman looks like. An actor in a movie would talk, and that's just against the rules for the game. It's just... wrong. Like giving Snoopy a voice. In Bioshock, we never see Jack's face, and only hear his voice in the intro. Wanna bet it won't be that way in the film? Aside from that, though, the plot is very movie-friendly, which is why I'm going to have high standards for it when it comes out. High standards and low expectations.
Not long after posting my previous article about the upcoming release of Diablo 3 I spoke with a friend (over Live Messenger, of course--oral dialog is for illiterate losers) about the matter to see what he thought of the news. His blunt reply was that Diablo 3 would "be boring." Surprised, I asked him why, and he (with a bit of a smug attitude, I might add) informed me that the true creators of Diablo had broken off from Blizzard (under the name Flagship Studios) and created the "true Diablo 3" (which I'd never heard of), Hellgate: London.
Now, as much as I would like to retort that the game should have been called "Hellgate: Reno" for the sake of accuracy, the article and trailer (a trailer almost worthy of Blizzard's own cinematics department, if not for some cheesy clichés of acting and directing flaws--as one YouTuber so accurately observed, "That demon ate that ladies TITS LOLOL [sic]") gives me pause. As I've mentioned previously, post-apocalypse and sci-fi futuristic are favorite themes of mine, so this game gets points right off the bat. As for whether or not it is actually "the true Diablo 3", I'm inclined to disagree. Of course, the rights to Diablo 3 are owned by Blizzard, and so no second company can just go off and create an obvious direct sequel, and the visuals do have a dark, gothic appeal. Hell, even the box art has clear Diablo-inspired themes. I'm inclined to say that the screenshots show a game that is a bit less Diablo-like than my friend would imply, though. It looks more like a dark Oblivion than some kind of Diablo spin-off to me, but then I've never played the original games.
I'll try to find time to at least have a peek at the earlier Diablo games, then compare what I see to what Hellgate: London is, versus what Diablo 3 will be. I'm not of the opinion that great art can't be emulated, and even if the new Diablo 3 graphics look a bit like Word of Warcraft ("it IS WoW", claims my over-exaggerating friend), I'm willing to bet that they'll get all the kinks hammered out by the time of release. I almost have to believe that, or else I'd be giving up any hope that Starcraft 2 will be a credit sequel to the fantastic series.
If you're a fan of Blizzard's classic CRPG series, Diablo, you probably already know that there is a third one coming by now. If you're not, you most likely know anyway. This stuff is big news.
Just look at that beautiful trailer. I daresay, Blizzard's cinematics department contains some of the most talented 3D artists out there. Too bad the team is too small to do a full-length movie.
But I digress; I've never actually played any Diablo games, but the gameplay trailer (below) certainly urges me to do so. The graphics are absolutely stunning, and the action-packed gameplay looks like lots of fun. The gameplay style reminds me a lot of Nox, the graphics of Temple of Elemental Evil (except, of course, far better), and the interface of Lionheart: Legacy of the Crusader. I think that it's just fantastic that Blizzard hits the three best settings with its games; fantasy, sci-fi, and gothic. Even the website is impressive (though Blizzard's often are).
I'm glad that Blizzard decided to keep a semi-isometric view for their new game, without letting the visual quality slip one bit. Detail always melts away when you walk up to something and observe it closely in a first-person perspective, but with such a high view, the visuals continue to remain deliciously sharp. Even the water is better than that in Bioshock. I have to wonder about the so-called "destructible environments", though. The aforementioned Nox claimed that its environments were destructible, but what it meant was just that there is a wall in a couple levels that can be broken away to get some neat items or something. Hopefully the environment flexibility will remain even when one plays beyond the range of this demo. The style reminds me a bit of Black & White, except, of course, far prettier.
On to other things, since my original post concerning Starcraft 2, there have, naturally, been some updates for we anxious fans. Above and beyond the fantastic gameplay previews, there is a so-called "Story Mode Walk-through."
Am I the only one who is a bit worried about this? Jim Raynor looks and sounds different than he used to, and the way that the marine he speaks with wags his hand in a "I'm gay" kind of gesture makes me wonder if this whole "story mode" thing will just reek of cheesiness. Personally, I liked the old briefing rooms, though I understand that things have to change or else it's hardly a sequel. Still, Sarah Kerrigan doesn't sound a whole lot likeherself, either. I guess it must just be the effects, since the same voice actor is returning. If there's one thing I can't stand, it's changing actors in an ongoing series. According to Raynor's Wikipedia page, Blizzard is trying to decide whether they should have Raynor voiced by the new actor "whom they like", or the old one. In my previous post, I mentioned that I considered Blizzard a company that could "do no wrong." I think it would be very, very wrong to throw away his familiar voice actor for a new one, especially since the old is perfectly willing to come back.
Ah, well. For now, I'll trust Blizzard to do the right thing and keep the actors we're familiar with. Isn't that always the bestway?
UPDATE: Apparently there have been some complaints from fans about the art style of Diablo 3. They claim that things look too cartoonish in exaggerated proportions and excessive colorfulness in the world, as compared to the darker, more realistic, gritty, and gothic style seen in the previous Diablo games. Again, I can't say that I fully understand, but I know that Blizzard, after working so long on the colorful and cartoonish Warcraft 3 and World of Warcraft, had to drastically tone down the colorfulness in their Starcraft 2 previews, because they were so used to using vivid colors, while Starcraft has a darker, grittier art style, albeit not gothic, like Diablo. The fans have made a petition, which, among other things, claims the following problems:
What we got in Diablo III: - Cartoon'ish art direction, obviously influenced by the Warcraft universe, Diablo isnt Warcraft.
- Hand made, pastel looking textures with bold lines, defined contours, smooth colors and clean shapes.
- Dungeons with a blue/green environment lighting, technique used in cartoons to depict a dark, creepy and scary feeling but once again, this is Diablo, a mature game, dungeons should have a dark aura with the occasional lights from candles, just like we got in the previews Diablo's.
- Character models defined by cartoon characteristics like over-sized and exaggerated parts, vivid colors and unrealistic elements, almost directly taken away from World of Warcraft and pasted to Diablo.
- Outside scenarios with vivid colors, beautiful forests with colorful vegetation, shinny and beautiful waterfalls where even rainbows take place.
- Cartoon'ish and unrealistic weaponry and armory, over-sized and stylish armors, over-sized weapons, items that look pasted directly from World of Warcraft.
- Blocky, cartoon'ish graphic elements like big, over-sized fire braziers in dungeons, heavily influenced by the World of Warcraft art style, over-sized and cartoon'ish scenario decorations like smiling statues, Warcraft styled architecture and decorations.
With the following solutions:
What we want:
- A darker, gothic, cryptic and creepier environment.
- A more realistic artistic direction, more independent from the Warcraft universe art direction.
- Darker dungeons without a blue/green environment, Diablo dungeons are dark and shadowy.
- The return of the light radius / shadow system from Diablo 1 and 2, a concept modified picture made by me roughly shows and suggests how the shadow system should work on Diablo 3: http://i31.tinypic.com/2zta5o7.jpg
- Slightly less colorful and less vivid outside scenarios, they are too heavily influenced by the World of Warcraft ones.
- And most importantly: An independent and renewed artistic direction, not a recycled art direction taken from the Warcraft world, Diablo never was meant to be as cartoon'ish as Warcraft, they shall have independent and distinct styles, this isnt happening in Diablo 3, at first sight it looks like a remake of World of Warcraft, graphically and artistically speaking.
When they put the twostylesside-by-side like that, I can certainly see what they want, and I must admit that I like the style the fans are looking for. It definitely seems more authentic.
After months of anxiously waiting, I have finally had the opportunity to see Disney/Pixar's newest film, WALL-E, and I feel obliged to express my deepest feelings of appreciation for this masterpiece.
Before I go into the specifics of the film, let me try to explain why it hit such a chord with me.
Since my childhood of watching many classic musicales and, later on, games such as Fallout, more recently, Bioshock and Grim Fandango, I have had a fascination with the culture of the 30s to 60s, in particular the music and projected Utopian lifestyle. It was a time of great prosperity where, in spite of the problems of the time, the future looked like a bright one. Great music in great films, such as On Moonlight Bay, Singin' in the Rain, and Hello, Dolly!, the latter of which had some film snippets and music in WALL-E, helped to give one a sense of prosperity that would never fail.
Additionally, such works as Star Wars, Star Trek, Alien/Aliens, the Ender Series, etc. have given me a firm love of the fantastical space science fiction genre, particularly the 70s and 80s style, which WALL-E has taken great technological advances to emulate visually.
Then, on top of that, various works, such as the aforementioned Fallout, Solar Flare, Resident Evil (more the first three games than anything else), etc. have sparked an interest in futuristic apocalyptic themes.
WALL-E seamlessly combines the three in an amalgamation of awesome, a compilation of kick-ass, a medley of the monumental.
Now, let's move on to the movie itself.
I went into the theater expecting WALL-E to be fantastic, as, along with game developers Valve and Blizzard, I consider Pixar to be an entertainment company that can "do no wrong." I've liked every movie they have thus far released (yes, including Cars), and I didn't expect WALL-E to be an exception. I vastly underestimated it.
For movies and games, I go with my best hopes being that I walk away feeling unsatisfied. Yes, unsatisfied--wanting more, not because the entertainment was lacking, but because I have become so lost in the world presented, I only wish I could lose myself deeper into it. WALL-E had me wishing I could see it again as soon as I'd stepped out of the theater. I must say, that's a first.
The characters simply wowed me. I anticipated, at best, to think that WALL-E was cute, but my empathy expanded beyond him, to encompass almost every character--even the villains, simply because the concept appealed to me so much. It's similar to how I love GLaDOS from Portal, even though she was the antagonist (in this case, I was fascinated by AUTO). In particular, I loved EVE. Her voice, her laugh, her expressions, her design. Genius.
The movie turned out to not only be a stupendously imaginative science fiction/post-apocalypse film with beautiful visuals (of course, this is Pixar we're talking about--this here ain't no Madagascar), but it also had some truly funny moments, warnings about avoiding excessive consumerism and environmental neglect (which usually annoys me, because it's usually forced down one's throat, but WALL-E lets one take the message, or leave it and just enjoy the movie as a work of fiction), and, what surprised me most, some very, very touching love scenes. I actually shed a tear. Twice. For robot love! Somehow, Pixar managed to make the emotions EVE and WALL-E felt more real to me than any actor has ever done, as I've never become choked up over any human actors' emotions before (with the exception of the triumphant end to Apollo 13 and the bittersweet end to Where the Red Fern Grows). I think it's actually because they are robots. In most movies, when two people get together, I can't help but imagine them fulfill their "love" by having sex after the picture is over. Obviously, that's impossible for two robots. The most they do, and can do, is hold hands and exchange an electric "kiss", and that's enough for them. It's love for the sake of love--there's nothing more innocent and pure than that.
Bottom line: from "Put On Your Sunday Clothes" over the opening space scenes to "Down to Earth" over the ending credits prologue, WALL-E is pure gold and an instant classic. The musical score is great, too. Within an hour and a half, WALL-E has firmly rooted itself at the top of my favorite movies list, even above my beloved Lord of the Rings.
Of course, the movie does have a few flaws that I noticed. All films do. Note that spoilers follow.
UPDATE: I added new observations.
SPOILERS BEGIN:
1. I don't mind at all how the live action film next to the 3D characters look, but some of those films with the CEO of Buy 'n Large looks a bit crappy, in my opinion; particularly when he explains that Earth is too toxic for any plants to survive. His hazard mask looks like something out of a cheap sci-fi flick. - It isn't as bad as I first thought, and any other oddness is probably intentional.
2. Although the Axiom has apparently been in space for seven hundred years, there are only six or seven captain portraits on the bridge. Is the human life span drastically increased, or what? - Yes, they all lived over 100 years, if you read the dates under the portraits.
3. I assume that the plants that end up growing on Earth are able to do so because they have been dormant seeds for so long and just now are finally able to grow. However, it looks like all of the plants are beans of some kind--they don't seem to have a very wide variety, particularly since, in the credits, a ton of flowers, trees, etc. are depicted in what is a sort of prologue. Additionally, it shows some fish, turtles, etc. Where did THEY come from? - Most likely there was some kind of zoo, garden, etc. on the Axiom, and they were just waiting for the planet to be ready for those things to be returned.
4. All the humans supposedly had an extreme loss of bone mass from being in outer space, lying in a hover-bed, for their entire lives, and yet the captain and others seemed to be able to stand alright on the ship, even if they had to waddle to move. Then, when they were on Earth, none of them hand a problem standing or waddling. Considering their extensive body mass and lack of bone, shouldn't their legs have simply broken under their own weight? - I guess the illustrations of the BnL CEO exaggerated the bone loss a bit.
5. WALL-E, after escaping certain destruction from an exploding pod, presents the plant he had saved to EVE, in outer space. Wouldn't that cause the plant to freeze, explode from the lack of pressure, or die in some other way? - I've heard that something won't die instantly in space, but would be able to survive at least ten seconds. I don't know if that's true, but I'm willing to accept it.
There are more little things, but those are the most glaringly apparent to me. The rest I can handle with suspension of belief. - There's actually very little else to complain about.
SPOILERS END
Now, I'm back to anxiously chewing my fingers to the bone, waiting for WALL-E to come to a local theater and come out on DVD. I'm actually more anxious to see it now that I've seen it once than when I'd never seen it before. That alone makes it a great movie.
P.S. If you're anxiously awaiting a chance to see it again, as I am, give the video game a try. It has a condensed (and somewhat inaccurate) version of the movie in its gameplay/cutscenes. Warning: the game sucks as much as the movie rocks. You can find a compiled version of the game's cutscenes into a sort of mini-movie here. Yes, using torrents for such a purpose as this (which is no greater copyright violation than anything on YouTube) is legal, so go ahead and enjoy.
P.S.S. WALL-E is NOT a rip-off of Johnny-5, so stop insisting that he is!
UPDATE: I was aware of a number of Apple-based easter eggs in the movie, including WALL-E emitting the Mac welcome sound after recharging, him watching movies on an iPod, AUTO being voiced by MacInTalk, but the extent of such easter eggs escaped me until I read this article. As beautiful as Apple products are, I still have a simmering dislike of them. Maybe my love of EVE will eventually alleviate that hate?
UPDATE 2: I think that WALL-E has aggravated my OCD--I can't seem to get the music, the story, and the emotions it stirs from my head. Is this love, or am I turning fanatical fan-boy? Too bad there isn't a WALL-E fan community to speak of. What is there to discuss? In my spare time (while listening to WALL-E's fantastic sound track and wishing I was in a theater instead), I had been attempting to recreate various WALL-E characters as websites, though I think that I'll never actually get around to it. I did, however, get around to designing a Buy n Large website, of sorts. Looking at it makes me cringe a bit. I need to practice before trying anything professional, that's for sure. I did manage to do a fairly good job of recreating the BnL logo in Adobe Illustrator, though.
UPDATE 3: There is a fascinating article at CGSociety about Pixar's work on the various visual effects of WALL-E. I think that my feelings of the movie have been perfectly laid out in a quote from the article.
“I worked on many, many films, and I would say what is special about this film to me, is when you are watching this first act play out before your eyes, it’s easy to feel like you are watching cinema history. It feels like the ground is breaking.”
I've watched the movie twice, and it still feels "like the ground is breaking." I just can't wait for the DVD!
UPDATE 4: I've uploaded the afore-mentioned WALL-E mini-movie to Google Videos (YouTube's fat, pimply younger brother) and embedded it below. Note: contains LARGE spoilers. EDIT: Okay, someone reported it for some stupid reason. It's not like there aren't such cutscenes all over YouTube, and FULL MOVIES all over Google Videos. WALL-E included (thanks to watch-movies.net--please go and pay for WALL-E before enjoying it at home; it's well worth it). Pricks.
UPDATE 5: Note that a WALL-E fansite of sorts does exist.
FINAL UPDATE: One may be interested to read the Pixar Blog and note that, as of this update, WALL-E has passed the $100 million mark. I hope it keeps on going for a long, long time. It more than deserves it.
