It's hard to really talk about PASSENGERS without spoiling a pretty major moment that happens about a third of the way through the film. So, just be aware that this article will have lots of information about the plot of this movie.
PASSENGERS is a visually stunning, confusing, mess of a movie. On the one hand, it's an original concept in a time where theaters are chock full of remakes and adaptations; one that takes some risks in its story. On the other hand, the risks it takes are worked into the story in a way that transforms any sense romance (seemingly one of the main selling points of the trailers) into something much more vile.
What I'm referring to is the moment where Jim Preston (Chris Pratt) decides, after being having no human contact for a year aboard a massive spaceship, to awaken one Aurora Lane (Jennifer Lawrence) from the cryo-sleep she and all the other people aboard the ship are in. In his loneliness and desperation, and just after a suicide attempt, Jim comes upon her pod and becomes somewhat obsessed with her. He watches all of her interview videos she submitted before boarding the ship (a sort of Ark going to a colony planet), and reads all of her writing. Essentially, he falls in love with a person he's never met.This level of obsession intensifies when he comes up with the idea to wake her up, knowing that she will not be able to re-enter the pod and will essentially be stuck on this ship with only him for the rest of her life. Even more, he lies to her about the fact that he woke her up.
What follows is one of the more troubling things I've seen in a major release, not because of the fact that it happens, but because of the way it concludes itself. Jim and Aurora, being the only two humans aboard the vessel, begin to fall in love, and at this point the film begins to resemble something more along the lines of a "romantic comedy", all the while working with the knowledge that it's all predicated on a huge lie.
Eventually, all is revealed and Aurora's love turns to hate, as one would expect it to. Then, after a series of complicated events, it comes down to the two of them to prevent the ship's core from overheating, killing them and all of the sleeping passengers. Up to this point, Aurora has sustained her hate towards Jim, but that breaks when he realizes that the only way to save the ship will involve him sacrificing himself. It's a moment that could have been ripe for so much emotional payoff. Jim, feeling the emotional weight catching up with him of how monstrous he's become, is willing to sacrifice himself in an act of atonement. Meanwhile, Aurora would feel many conflicting feelings, hating this person but also not wanting to be the only person on the ship.
It almost looks as though it's going this way, as we see Jim drifting along in space, oxygen leaking from his suit. A tearful goodbye seems to be approaching, yet this is stopped short by Aurora saving and reviving him and the two having a rather passionate kiss. It's as though they wanted an ending with real teeth, one where the central protagonist is does downright deplorable things and, despite the attempts to endear him to us, is punished. Unfortunately, they also wanted to eat that cake, as well as having it.
In no way does their still being together ring anywhere near emotionally realistic. For one, hardly any time is spent on Jim's debating awakening Aurora. Sure, there are a few moments where Jim is seen deliberating doing this, and in those moments we can see that he can see the weight of his choice. Compared to the latter portion of the film, though, these moments are woefully short. Secondly, the whole of said latter half begins to feel a bit Stockholm Syndrome-esque. To be fair, I originally thought that was the point, as this seemed to be a film examining the effects such an extreme situation would have on people. The main issue here is that this is a film that seemed to think itself more GONE WITH THE WIND, when it had more in line with Park Chan Wook's OLDBOY. Perhaps, if they had actually leaned into the direction of what the bulk of the film seemed to be (a meditation on how despiration and obsession corrupts), this would have been a film of note. Instead, it's a misfire of little consequence.
Monday, February 20, 2017
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
A Few Thoughts on the "Easy" Setting in Video Games
After a long day of work, it makes sense for someone to want to come back home and just unwind for a bit. Perhaps, they have themselves a tasty adult beverage, or listen to music, or (and more on topic with the title of this thing) they sit down and play some video games? This is an activity I've certainly engaged in a number of times, and it rarely involves me playing some deeply complex, technically rigorous piece, but more often something fairly straightforward (your CALL OF DUTY's, BORDERLANDS, and the like). Every so often, though, if I do take a dip into something more rigorous I may find my self playing it on the "easy" difficulty as an exercise in decompression.
For those who may not know, many games have different difficulty settings that you can choose from based on your skill level, or just how tough you want your experience to be. Something to note, however, is that most games are optimized to their "hard" settings, meaning that setting is the closest to many developers intentions for how the game should be played. Due to this, and to the desire for a greater challenge, many "hardcore gamers" gravitate towards "hard".
Yet, I think so many people neglect the real joys that can come out of "easy". As I previously stated, there is a real utility for decompression. Being able to completely plow through some monster, or what-have-you, that would have given you some difficulty on the normal setting is a remarkably cathartic feeling. There's a real sense of power that can come from that.While it's not as ultimately fulfilling as completing some truly difficult challenge, the immediate sensation is notable.
Deeper than that visceral sense is the feeling that comes from exploring the limits of the actual make-up of said games. Questions such as "Just how quickly can I clear this whole game?", "How long of a hit-combo can I string together?" can be answered and their results examined. More often than not, this leads me to somewhat of a deeper appreciation for the game in question. It should be said that it's also lead me to like some games less, as is the case of KINGDOM HEARTS, a game whose main worthwhile elements are contained in the complexity of its game play. Once those are removed, it becomes a mostly incoherent story where one just moves the camera around and does the most simple attack over and over.
I think more of us should embrace "easy" mode. There's real value there, and it would behoove some people to shed some of their oh-yes-I-am-such-a-hardcore-gamer shell. It just seems like such a limiting way to view this wide medium we call video games.
For those who may not know, many games have different difficulty settings that you can choose from based on your skill level, or just how tough you want your experience to be. Something to note, however, is that most games are optimized to their "hard" settings, meaning that setting is the closest to many developers intentions for how the game should be played. Due to this, and to the desire for a greater challenge, many "hardcore gamers" gravitate towards "hard".
Yet, I think so many people neglect the real joys that can come out of "easy". As I previously stated, there is a real utility for decompression. Being able to completely plow through some monster, or what-have-you, that would have given you some difficulty on the normal setting is a remarkably cathartic feeling. There's a real sense of power that can come from that.While it's not as ultimately fulfilling as completing some truly difficult challenge, the immediate sensation is notable.
Deeper than that visceral sense is the feeling that comes from exploring the limits of the actual make-up of said games. Questions such as "Just how quickly can I clear this whole game?", "How long of a hit-combo can I string together?" can be answered and their results examined. More often than not, this leads me to somewhat of a deeper appreciation for the game in question. It should be said that it's also lead me to like some games less, as is the case of KINGDOM HEARTS, a game whose main worthwhile elements are contained in the complexity of its game play. Once those are removed, it becomes a mostly incoherent story where one just moves the camera around and does the most simple attack over and over.
I think more of us should embrace "easy" mode. There's real value there, and it would behoove some people to shed some of their oh-yes-I-am-such-a-hardcore-gamer shell. It just seems like such a limiting way to view this wide medium we call video games.
Thursday, December 1, 2016
Mini Film Review: DOCTOR STRANGE
DOCTOR STRANGE works as a representation of what has worked for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, as well as working as a step forward for it as well. Though Benedict Cumberbatch's Steven Strange may appear a carbon copy of Robert Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark, it's through his journey to the mystical Kamar Taj, and his subsequent transformation of self that reveals how different this outing is from previous MCU movies.
It seems that director Scott Derrickson wanted to explore a variety of themes underneath the the banner of a Marvel film, touching on many elements of Taoist, Buddhist, Hindu, Confucian, and Christian thought. In showing Strange's journey through the spiritual world, we are simultaneously exploring it as well. It's refreshing to see another populist work want to dig somewhat into something beyond what scores a multi-demographic success in the box office.
The elephant in the room is, of course, the issue of whitewashing. In the source material, the Ancient One (the mystical master of Kamar Taj, and Strange's mentor) was a Tibetan man. Feeling that showing this would be encouraging certain unsavory stereotypes of south-east Asian peoples, Derrickson chose to take things in another direction. Unfortunately, this had the effect of erasing a potential role for an actor or actress of, or descended from, that region. It was a lose-lose situation either way, though it's worth noting that Tilda Swinton does a fantastic job as the Ancient One, really finding a way to make her enigmatic yet clearly possessing some sort of rich internal life.
It seems that director Scott Derrickson wanted to explore a variety of themes underneath the the banner of a Marvel film, touching on many elements of Taoist, Buddhist, Hindu, Confucian, and Christian thought. In showing Strange's journey through the spiritual world, we are simultaneously exploring it as well. It's refreshing to see another populist work want to dig somewhat into something beyond what scores a multi-demographic success in the box office.
The elephant in the room is, of course, the issue of whitewashing. In the source material, the Ancient One (the mystical master of Kamar Taj, and Strange's mentor) was a Tibetan man. Feeling that showing this would be encouraging certain unsavory stereotypes of south-east Asian peoples, Derrickson chose to take things in another direction. Unfortunately, this had the effect of erasing a potential role for an actor or actress of, or descended from, that region. It was a lose-lose situation either way, though it's worth noting that Tilda Swinton does a fantastic job as the Ancient One, really finding a way to make her enigmatic yet clearly possessing some sort of rich internal life.
Mini Film Review: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Although J.K. Rowling may have cut her teeth on writing the HARRY POTTER series of books, I don't think that same level of craftsmanship carried over to her first outing as a screenwriter for FANTASTIC BEASTS AND WHERE TO FIND THEM. This film adaptation of Rowling's auxiliary publication of a fictional textbook is, at best, uneven. Tonally, it seems to want to achieve all of the emotional beats of the entirety of the HARRY POTTER films, but in only one film. As a result, much of it never really lines up.
On the one hand, Eddie Redmayne's section of the film as Newt Scamander, author of the titular book the movie is (loosely) based off of, seems to want to be mostly the first film, THE SORCERER'S STONE, what with the whimsy and somewhat forced precociousness of Redmayne's portrayal of Scamander. Unfortunately, that's essentially all he is: kinda awkward. After this film was over, I had no idea who Newt Scamander really was besides superficial details. That characterizes much of his half of the film: surface-level whimsy and wonder with not much else to it dramatically.
On the other hand, we have the more serious section of the film, with Colin Farrell's Graves. It's this section of the film, with its focus on the Second Salem Society (a sort of neo-puritanical reaction to witches), and the complex interactions between its members, wizarding leadership, and the human government, that contains all of the depth of the film. These characters have real motivations, some of them shifting and overlapping, and feel more like actual people. It's a shame it feels crudely grafted on to its sub-par, but visually interesting, other half.
On the one hand, Eddie Redmayne's section of the film as Newt Scamander, author of the titular book the movie is (loosely) based off of, seems to want to be mostly the first film, THE SORCERER'S STONE, what with the whimsy and somewhat forced precociousness of Redmayne's portrayal of Scamander. Unfortunately, that's essentially all he is: kinda awkward. After this film was over, I had no idea who Newt Scamander really was besides superficial details. That characterizes much of his half of the film: surface-level whimsy and wonder with not much else to it dramatically.
On the other hand, we have the more serious section of the film, with Colin Farrell's Graves. It's this section of the film, with its focus on the Second Salem Society (a sort of neo-puritanical reaction to witches), and the complex interactions between its members, wizarding leadership, and the human government, that contains all of the depth of the film. These characters have real motivations, some of them shifting and overlapping, and feel more like actual people. It's a shame it feels crudely grafted on to its sub-par, but visually interesting, other half.
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Mini Film Review: Arrival
When one considers the current political climate in the United States, the timeliness of something like Denis Villeneuve's ARRIVAL is pretty fantastic. Given the premise of Amy Adam's expert linguist, Louise Banks, being called in to interpret the intentions of the seemingly unintelligible alien visitors to the Earth, it's hard not to think of how there are so many chasms between modern people in this day and age and how they put many of us in similar situations.
This kind of layered, heavily nuanced film-making isn't in any way new for Villeneuve, as his previous English-language film, SICARIO, was a pretty measured look at the intersection of dubious government action and hyper-masculinity, as well as being an allegorical take on how people face trauma at the hands of those systems. That same care carries over to ARRIVAL, a film that manages to work in both the concrete and the abstract. The actual drama of the film is effective due to the purposeful slowness of some of the pacing, scenes sometimes crawling from one to the next. Their run-times give you space to breathe in every detail, after which pieces start to come together.
I would dare say there's a sense of....melancholy? It's this haze that hovers over the whole of the movie, one definitely explored as some events go a bit downhill and as some characters are profoundly changed by their experiences with the visitors. It's these experiences that contain the heart of the film: the fact that the ability to communicate ideas is one of the most powerful tools we have as human beings.
This kind of layered, heavily nuanced film-making isn't in any way new for Villeneuve, as his previous English-language film, SICARIO, was a pretty measured look at the intersection of dubious government action and hyper-masculinity, as well as being an allegorical take on how people face trauma at the hands of those systems. That same care carries over to ARRIVAL, a film that manages to work in both the concrete and the abstract. The actual drama of the film is effective due to the purposeful slowness of some of the pacing, scenes sometimes crawling from one to the next. Their run-times give you space to breathe in every detail, after which pieces start to come together.
I would dare say there's a sense of....melancholy? It's this haze that hovers over the whole of the movie, one definitely explored as some events go a bit downhill and as some characters are profoundly changed by their experiences with the visitors. It's these experiences that contain the heart of the film: the fact that the ability to communicate ideas is one of the most powerful tools we have as human beings.
Friday, October 7, 2016
A Few Thoughts on STRANGER THINGS, episode two
***This contains spoilers***
Oh boy...
This episode left me with more questions than answers. For starters, when did this major shift occur in Barb regarding Nancy's relationship with Steve? In the previous episode, she's all gung ho with the idea of the two dating, going so far as to essentially "mmhmm gurl" when Nancy found Steve's invitation to meet her in the bathroom. In this episode, she seems very against the idea of Nancy going to Steve's party, citing that "he just wants to get in her pants." Honestly, what did she think before? Secondly, was the decision to have the mystery beast that took Will also take Barb supposed to be some kind of subversion of the "final girl" trope? Barb would have been the "chaste" one in this situation considering that it was Nancy who seemed to want to engage in the illicit activity with Steve. So, according to the trope, Nancy would have been eaten before Barb. Obviously, I'll have to see how this plays out, but in the moment it seems bizarre.
Third, is Jonathan Byers crushing on Nancy? Is that the look he gave her after she talked to him in the hallway? Also, are we supposed to find it cute that he was taking pictures (while hidden in the woods) of Nancy and friends at Steve's party? Something tells me that this was the intent, but I assure you I read it as supremely creepy. Another also, why was he still there even after Nancy went back inside the house after falling in the pool? Was he waiting for her to come back out? Was he trying to photograph her through the window? A third also, the worst way to establish this kid loves photography is to show him snapping covert pictures of the girl we barely see him speak to. In fact, he doesn't really speak to anyone outside of his immediate family in the first hour or so of this series. That whole segment of the episode was so bizarre on so many levels, and I'm at a loss at what the Duffer's intended the audience to feel.
At this point, I'm starting to feel the weight of the influences of other films from the 80's on the show, and not in a good way. During the day, Mike plays hooky from school to look after Eleven. We can essentially call this section of the show "the E.T. part", because that's essentially what it is. It also confirmed something for me that I had suspicions of: I don't feel anything for Eleven. Now, that's not for lack of trying. I just haven't seen much in these first two hours to really attach me to her. The problem with doing what they do in this episode is that it's missing a few elements that E.T. had. In E.T., the titular character is a little, green, pot-bellied, pencil-necked alien with a face like the maggot-baby from ERASERHEAD. In short, he's weird looking. That goes a long way to adding humor to scenes where the kids try to give him clothes to disguise him or try to hid his presence. Simply put, a strange looking creature doing human-like things will have the appearance of being humorous.In the case of Eleven, her looking like a girl with a buzz-cut kind of takes the wind out of any humor hat could be drawn from the scene.
The E.T. moments also stretched into Eleven hiding in the closet and in the basement. The closet yielded a little bit more information about her past and relationship to the massive facility, but it also prompted more questions from me. For one, how much English does she know? In the flashback she seems to have more of a grasp on it, but in the present she has to be taught what a recliner is. If she knows more, is she choosing not to speak because she doesn't trust anyone, or does she honestly not know much of it? This isn't so much a problem, as much as it is a general question. If it turns out she knew a good bit of English, then having her go so long without talking would seem just a way to stretch for time.
The only major positive for me was when Will's mother, Joyce Byers, uncovers more about the mysterious phone calls she's been getting that she believes is, somehow, Will. In this moment, as she's seeing the lights flicker in a pattern that's leading her to Will's bedroom, it's one of the few times in the two hours of the show I've seen up to this point that doesn't have the characters catching up to information the audience already knows. It's something that I noticed in the first hour, but this second hour has almost doubled-down on it. I'm not against dramatic irony, but so much of this show is the audience finding out a good bit and then the rest of the characters finding out and hour or so later. I'm concerned that this is a trend that will continue through the whole of the season.
Another trend that concerns me pertains to the usage of the musical score.
Now, I know that S U R V I V E were seeking to emulate John Carpenter/Tangerine Dream, and the soundtrack is fine on its own, but some of the ways it's used in context strike me as odd. For example, in the aforementioned scene where Johnathan pines after Nancy in the hallway, a very ominous piece of music plays as he's shown exiting the building. The problem there is that music doesn't fit emotionally with what preceded it. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the music could have been removed and the scene would have largely played the same.
Overall, this was a pretty tough episode to get through. All this seems to not bode well for the rest of the series that, for some reason, I intend to keep watching. Here's hoping things improve.
Oh boy...
This episode left me with more questions than answers. For starters, when did this major shift occur in Barb regarding Nancy's relationship with Steve? In the previous episode, she's all gung ho with the idea of the two dating, going so far as to essentially "mmhmm gurl" when Nancy found Steve's invitation to meet her in the bathroom. In this episode, she seems very against the idea of Nancy going to Steve's party, citing that "he just wants to get in her pants." Honestly, what did she think before? Secondly, was the decision to have the mystery beast that took Will also take Barb supposed to be some kind of subversion of the "final girl" trope? Barb would have been the "chaste" one in this situation considering that it was Nancy who seemed to want to engage in the illicit activity with Steve. So, according to the trope, Nancy would have been eaten before Barb. Obviously, I'll have to see how this plays out, but in the moment it seems bizarre.
Third, is Jonathan Byers crushing on Nancy? Is that the look he gave her after she talked to him in the hallway? Also, are we supposed to find it cute that he was taking pictures (while hidden in the woods) of Nancy and friends at Steve's party? Something tells me that this was the intent, but I assure you I read it as supremely creepy. Another also, why was he still there even after Nancy went back inside the house after falling in the pool? Was he waiting for her to come back out? Was he trying to photograph her through the window? A third also, the worst way to establish this kid loves photography is to show him snapping covert pictures of the girl we barely see him speak to. In fact, he doesn't really speak to anyone outside of his immediate family in the first hour or so of this series. That whole segment of the episode was so bizarre on so many levels, and I'm at a loss at what the Duffer's intended the audience to feel.
At this point, I'm starting to feel the weight of the influences of other films from the 80's on the show, and not in a good way. During the day, Mike plays hooky from school to look after Eleven. We can essentially call this section of the show "the E.T. part", because that's essentially what it is. It also confirmed something for me that I had suspicions of: I don't feel anything for Eleven. Now, that's not for lack of trying. I just haven't seen much in these first two hours to really attach me to her. The problem with doing what they do in this episode is that it's missing a few elements that E.T. had. In E.T., the titular character is a little, green, pot-bellied, pencil-necked alien with a face like the maggot-baby from ERASERHEAD. In short, he's weird looking. That goes a long way to adding humor to scenes where the kids try to give him clothes to disguise him or try to hid his presence. Simply put, a strange looking creature doing human-like things will have the appearance of being humorous.In the case of Eleven, her looking like a girl with a buzz-cut kind of takes the wind out of any humor hat could be drawn from the scene.
The E.T. moments also stretched into Eleven hiding in the closet and in the basement. The closet yielded a little bit more information about her past and relationship to the massive facility, but it also prompted more questions from me. For one, how much English does she know? In the flashback she seems to have more of a grasp on it, but in the present she has to be taught what a recliner is. If she knows more, is she choosing not to speak because she doesn't trust anyone, or does she honestly not know much of it? This isn't so much a problem, as much as it is a general question. If it turns out she knew a good bit of English, then having her go so long without talking would seem just a way to stretch for time.
The only major positive for me was when Will's mother, Joyce Byers, uncovers more about the mysterious phone calls she's been getting that she believes is, somehow, Will. In this moment, as she's seeing the lights flicker in a pattern that's leading her to Will's bedroom, it's one of the few times in the two hours of the show I've seen up to this point that doesn't have the characters catching up to information the audience already knows. It's something that I noticed in the first hour, but this second hour has almost doubled-down on it. I'm not against dramatic irony, but so much of this show is the audience finding out a good bit and then the rest of the characters finding out and hour or so later. I'm concerned that this is a trend that will continue through the whole of the season.
Another trend that concerns me pertains to the usage of the musical score.
Now, I know that S U R V I V E were seeking to emulate John Carpenter/Tangerine Dream, and the soundtrack is fine on its own, but some of the ways it's used in context strike me as odd. For example, in the aforementioned scene where Johnathan pines after Nancy in the hallway, a very ominous piece of music plays as he's shown exiting the building. The problem there is that music doesn't fit emotionally with what preceded it. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the music could have been removed and the scene would have largely played the same.
Overall, this was a pretty tough episode to get through. All this seems to not bode well for the rest of the series that, for some reason, I intend to keep watching. Here's hoping things improve.
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
A Few Thoughts on STRANGER THINGS, episode one
***This contains some spoilers for this episode***
If there was one word to describe the first episode of the Duffer Brothers' STRANGER THINGS, it would be "pleasant." It's no more than that, and it's no less. Given it's nature as an ode to the 80's and its movies (Spielberg and Carpenter seem to be the focus in this first installment), it has all of the prerequisite elements: a John Carpenter-esque score (made by the brilliant duo, S U R V I V E.) as well as various decade-specific needle-drops; era specific font for title cards and for the intro; kids on bikes in a suburban setting; a soft filter that gives it an era specific look to the picture quality; "Spielberg Oners"; etc. Really, I could probably go on for a few more paragraphs listing the amount of either straight up references or nods to films from the 80's. This isn't inherently a bad thing, though it remains to be seen if this will continue on with diminishing returns.
The actual plotting of this episode feels quite nice, as nearly every character gets introduced and given their respective story lines in a fairly succinct manner. The only one that seemed to go nowhere belonged to Nancy Wheeler, older sister to the character Mike Wheeler. The episode took her from having just entered a new relationship, to her kissing her new boyfriend, and finally to them kissing some more. It doesn't go much further than that, and given how much more every other character gets, it's unfortunate.
As far as moments go, the one that stood out the most to me was the sequence introducing the four main characters as they play a game of Dungeons and Dragons. It really gives the sense that these characters are good friends, and it's a pretty tensely shot scene, as well. Also, the symmetry between this scene and the moment that Will Byers gets taken by what is practically the Demogorgon from their D&D session is really tight narrative in a way I can't help but be happy with. Also, I have to mention the one-take shot in the police station. It was very clean and understated.
I can't really say too much in the way of where this show is going, considering this is the first episode, but I do hope that things move beyond this merely "pleasant" feeling it's giving off. As much as I liked certain elements, I didn't really finish the episode with any anticipation of what's coming next. At any rate, I'll continue the series.
If there was one word to describe the first episode of the Duffer Brothers' STRANGER THINGS, it would be "pleasant." It's no more than that, and it's no less. Given it's nature as an ode to the 80's and its movies (Spielberg and Carpenter seem to be the focus in this first installment), it has all of the prerequisite elements: a John Carpenter-esque score (made by the brilliant duo, S U R V I V E.) as well as various decade-specific needle-drops; era specific font for title cards and for the intro; kids on bikes in a suburban setting; a soft filter that gives it an era specific look to the picture quality; "Spielberg Oners"; etc. Really, I could probably go on for a few more paragraphs listing the amount of either straight up references or nods to films from the 80's. This isn't inherently a bad thing, though it remains to be seen if this will continue on with diminishing returns.
The actual plotting of this episode feels quite nice, as nearly every character gets introduced and given their respective story lines in a fairly succinct manner. The only one that seemed to go nowhere belonged to Nancy Wheeler, older sister to the character Mike Wheeler. The episode took her from having just entered a new relationship, to her kissing her new boyfriend, and finally to them kissing some more. It doesn't go much further than that, and given how much more every other character gets, it's unfortunate.
As far as moments go, the one that stood out the most to me was the sequence introducing the four main characters as they play a game of Dungeons and Dragons. It really gives the sense that these characters are good friends, and it's a pretty tensely shot scene, as well. Also, the symmetry between this scene and the moment that Will Byers gets taken by what is practically the Demogorgon from their D&D session is really tight narrative in a way I can't help but be happy with. Also, I have to mention the one-take shot in the police station. It was very clean and understated.
I can't really say too much in the way of where this show is going, considering this is the first episode, but I do hope that things move beyond this merely "pleasant" feeling it's giving off. As much as I liked certain elements, I didn't really finish the episode with any anticipation of what's coming next. At any rate, I'll continue the series.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)