That’s right.  I wrote little, even though I’m sure this was an expensive film.  I don’t refer to its budget when I call it little, I refer instead to the scope of its story.  At its heart, Real Steel is the story of a man looking for redemption, a son bonding with a father, and, lest we forget, giant boxing robots.

This is the film’s real strength.  It’s a bit of a cliche to say a sports movie has heart, but Real Steel does indeed.  It knows exactly what it’s about, and it understands that this is exactly enough for the film.  Too many movies today seem to believe that the more plot going on, the better the film.  As if a simple story told well isn’t enough of a challenge.  What makes Real Steel work is that it has enough faith in its characters and their story to allow that to be the focus of the film.  Giant robot fights don’t hurt anything either.

This is, at the end, a sports film, and like most underdog sports films, it’s meant to be inspiring.  And in nearly all ways, the film follows the traditional formula.  There’s a down-on-his luck protagonist, an intimidating champion, a road to glory, and a final showdown.  Along the way, our protagonist learns to be a better person, gains confidence, and proves he has what it takes to be a winner.  It’s almost all by the numbers, and there’s nothing wrong with that when it’s done well.

I’ve mentioned before how cliches are not bad in writing, and that EVERY story is filled with cliches.  It’s only when the story is poorly executed that we notice.

The twist to this film is the robots themselves.  And they are awesome.  Every bout is fun, thrilling.  And though the robots themselves are all merely remote-controlled automatons, they still manage to have a lot of personality.  It’s a neat trick, and one worth applauding.  The machines in this movie often have more personality than most flesh-and-blood characters in other films.

What I love though is that the film sidesteps so many other cliches.  The champion’s human operators are not portrayed as dishonest or cheating.  Merely ruthless and manipulative.  In the final bought, they don’t try anything underhanded.  They don’t kidnap the kid.  They don’t steal the control mechanism.  The stakes of this fight are not about life or death.  It’s about relationships, second chances, and, dare I say it again, heart and soul.  And, really, that’s more than enough.

Probably the most fun I’ve had at the movies in a long time, and a terrific movie all the way around.

Plus, did I mention awesome robot boxing?

Fighting the good fight, Writing the good write,

Lee

BigHeath2099 on Twitter suggests: “How about what animal would be scariest if there was a vampire version.  I’m thinking giraffe.”

Well, BigHeath 2099, as much as I can see where you’re coming from, giraffes are simply too gangly to be particularly dangerous.  Any monster that can be foiled by low ceilings probably won’t make the Most Terrifying list.

The topic isn’t an easy one.  I could, of course, point out that there already is a vampire version of several animals, and that a vampire vampire bat would be some sort of double vampire, which is like making Godzilla twice as radioactive.  In other words, big trouble.  Or vampire leeches, with the ability to become wolves, would be terrifying to behold.

There are two schools of monsterizing animals.  The first is to take a relatively harmless animal and embiggen it.  And it’s true that there’s nothing like a giant rat, rabbit, or chipmunk to remind us that we’re really not quite as secure in our position on the food chain as we would like.  Rarely is an already big animal made larger, although the idea of jumbo-sized elephants or megarhinos could be awesome.

Animals are often zombified, which has become something of a cliche at this point.  Although zombie cows are definitely the height of terror.  But zombie animals are basically just rabid, flesh-hungry beasts.  It’s not really a new genre.

But vampires could be cool.  Especially if they were actually allowed to be vampires.  A beast that can turn into a bat, transform into mist, climb up walls, and mesmerize its victims would be pretty awesome.  Even a giraffe with these abilities could be a dangerous beast indeed.  Of course, such a monster would also melt in sunlight, be forbidden from entering uninvited (how would a vampire goose ask for an invitation anyway?), and be repelled by holy water.  Still, it could be a problem for even the most experienced vampire hunter.

As usual, I’m probably overthinking it.  So rather than debate endlessly with myself, I’m just going to settle on the obvious answer.

Dinobot.

RobbClarke on Twitter suggested: “Traditional print for books Vs. electronics.”

It’s a big topic, not easily covered.  I’ve already written on this topic before, and it boils down to I like traditional print books and electronic books for different reasons.  I like paper books a lot.  Not the least of which is that once they are bought they are yours forever (or until nature or carelessness destroys them).  They’re easy to trade.  And buying them gives me a reason to leave the house.

E-books are just great for accessibility and portability.  The need for electricity is a bit of a downside, but at this stage in civilization, electricity is necessary for just about everything.  If we lost it tomorrow, we’d have more pressing concerns than e-books.  I don’t like that e-books are more impermanent than paper books, but that’s a trade off that is unavoidable.

I think the Print Vs. E-books debate is built on a false dichotomy.  Maybe it’s just human nature but we like to pit things against each other in competition and have a clear winner.  I’m not going to play that game.  (Although if pressed I will say I assume print will eventually lose.)  I’m just going to say that each has their advantages and weaknesses, and I’d like both to be around and prosperous as long as possible.

itendswithZ via Twitter says: “do a silly one. like how 3D looks like crap”

I don’t think 3D looks like crap.  I just don’t think it really looks like anything.  Aside from a novelty value, it doesn’t really add anything to a film.  Except making it more expensive and more inconvenient.  It doesn’t appear to be going away anytime soon because the movie industry is really really determined to make it stick.  But that’s about the only reason.

I would prefer though that they stopped retroactivally 3D-ing movies that were shot in 2D.  It usually ends up being as successful as colorizing B&W films.  You can’t just paste an entirely new format on a film after the fact.  It rarely works.  Just look at the digital effects pasted into the original Star Wars trilogy.  They tend to stick out.  A film is not a stack of Lego blocks that can be broken down and reassambled at will.  Anymore than a well-constructed book could have blocks of text removed and added at whim.  It’s this haphazard disrespect for the medium that makes 3D truly destructive to me.

Okay, that’s enough from me.  Thanks for stopping by.

Fighting the good fight, Writing the good write,

Lee

The story is about a town where special people live.  (Sanctuary meets Eureka).  The people aren’t bad, but there was a time of “troubles” when the special people were persecuted for their specialness.  (X-Men).  And a pair of investigtors do their best to puzzle out the mysteries that pop up ever week.  (X-Files or just about any cop show out there.)

But everything is a cliche if you take it in broad strokes.  What really hurts Haven is the execution.  With only three episodes, I’ve seen three stories I’ve seen elsewhere already.  The first was about a woman whose emotional state controlled the weather.  Saw that on the X-Files.  The second was about a kid who had the unconcsious ability to manipulate reality with his dreams.  Saw that in a Buffy episode and felt an awful lot like a replay of the first episode of Haven in terms of story beats.  The third episode is about inexplicable rage seizing people.  This was the same plot that was just on the episode of Eureka the very same night, in the hour before Haven came on. 

If I’d never seen or read any urban fantasy story then maybe Haven would have something new to offer me.  As it is, it’s just thoroughly unremarkable.  While I don’t hate it, I can’t imagine going out of my way to see it.  And in the 80′s, when viewing choices were a lot more limited, I might have even watched it.  But this is the future, and I can watch pretty much anything I want when I want. 

I think the problem isn’t with Haven itself, but with the entire genre.  I think urban fantasy on television is a dead end.  It’s hard to do anything new.  All of Syfy’s original programming just seems like a variation of something I’ve seen too many times before.

I feel like the guy watching the end of the Western.  It’s not that Westerns are completely dead, but there’s almost nothing new to be done.  The beats have been so thoroughly explored that anyone familiar with the genre can predict nearly everything that’s going to happen.

I think urban fantasy is experiencing the same problem. It’s great that the genre is flourishing to some degree, but what was once special, seems commonplace, predictable. I love fantasy / sci fi for the unexpected and new, but the limitations of television and the tapped out nature of the genre makes this more difficult than ever.  There are still interesting shows out there.  True Blood comes to mind.  Although I don’t know if the show really does anything that different as much as get that extra edge that comes from being on HBO and being very well produced.

(But even HBO’s brand of boobs, swearing, and gratuitious sex has become cliched to some degree.)

I’m not suggesting that the genre is dead.  Not yet.  It can go on a long, long time the way it is.  People like predictable things.  Predictable things allow people to feel smart.  And we don’t necessarily watch TV shows for the stories.  We watch for the characters we like, the payoff of seeing a recurring story play out, even if those stories are by-the-numbers.

(If you don’t believe me, ask yourself when was the last time you saw a show with a pair of mixed gender, unattached protagonists that you didn’t automatically assume they were going to hook up at some point?  Heck, Scully and Mulder never made a damn bit of sense as a couple, but that didn’t matter because, who gives a damn about their personalities?  They’re the leads.  They fall in love.  End of story.)

And I don’t want to act as if I have any answers, even if I turn out to be right.  Because if you were to ask me how to save the genre, I’d say honestly that I don’t have a clue.  And I’m not even sure the genre needs saving.  I am not the audience obviously.  I don’t even read much fiction, fantasy or otherwise, and I don’t watch much TV.  So maybe I’m the wrong guy to bring this up.

I could be wrong.  I’ve been wrong once or twice before.  People do seem to enjoy their generic Twilight vampires and by the book Towns with a secret!  And given the limitations of TV production, the urban fantasy genre probably isn’t going anywhere.  It’s a great way to bring fantasy to the small screen on a reasonable budget.  Something like John Carter of Mars might make an awesome TV show, but it’d be impossible to produce without robbing it of all the wonderful fantasy elements.

But I’ll admit that I might just be the odd man out on this one.  Perhaps I’m just a crank.  Or maybe I’m a prophet, a seer into the strange, inevitable future.  Ignore me at your peril.  Or not.

Fighting the good fight, Writing the good write,

Lee