Movie adaptations - Question the source

I have no idea what ppl's complains are about the recent Dragonball movie.

They say its campy, its lame, plot holes abound and the characters are stupid looking.
Well i say, THATS EXACTLY LIKE THE ORIGINAL MANGA.

Ok seems the movie combines the more aliens and scifi setting in the "popular"(see long winded and draggy) anime Dragonball Z with the setting and plot from the manga Dragonball.

Here's the math.
X= a draggy, plot hole filled show running at 291 episodes(not counting the sequel series and 17 anime movies). Takes at least 5 full episodes(100 minutes) to explain ONE plot point or finish ONE fight. Gaudy, campy, budgetly animated and fun filled power-shooting fest.

Y= A old manga. Read it here and see. Basicall just as campy, over the top, overblown, borderline retarded characters, oh and did i mention theres a lot of pervertic instances?(eg: balls and dicks showing up, ppl craving panties etc). dont believe me read it yourself. Its obviously a parody like Scary movie or Meet the Spartans.

http://www.onemanga.com/Dragon_Ball/


X + Y = Dragonball Evolution movie. A crappy, camp-fest. Over the top, overblown, budget special effects headache inducer with silly characters and cheesy villians.(ok they did not include Goku's balls and the panties obsession. THANK GAWD!!!)

So it brings me to the main point of my post. Which is this.
Why do people complain about a movie adaptation(of whatever) when its the SOURCE MATERIAL thats...........thats like that lor.

Don't get me wrong. There have been movie adaptations that the the fans AND the general public AND reviewers loved.
eg:
Games- Silent Hill, Resident Evil(1 only)
Graphic novels - Dark Knight, Watchmen
Manga- Deathnote(aside from this i can't think of any more that were even passable)
Cartoons - Flintstones

But most of the case, its usually pleases only 1 of the 3(be it th fans OR the public OR the reviewers)

Then you have those movie adaptations that is totally OFF from the original source material. Some have been well liked despite bearing only scant similarities with the original
eg: Blade, Wanted
.



But some have been hated(and i totally agree with the hate)

eg: Initial D, Man Thing




The third category is this
those that are complained about BUT stick close to the source material's essence.


Here are 3 of the most complained about movie adaptations i've seen
example

1) Transformers(Public loved it. Most fans and reviewers hate it. I loved it). Aside from the special effects action which were astounding and the dialogue + acting which was VERY well done, the plot was overly simple, characters almost one dimensional, fights were erratic, and overall the movie is shallow and "brainless".
SO WHATS THE PROBLEM??
The original cartoon(season 1 only. Cos season 2 and 3 were a major improvement) was JUST THAT

. The Epitome(see Godlike) of voice acting and animation(for the 80s) but with simplistic easy to follow stories, pre-set character sterotypes, erratic fights(its not easy to animate robots grappling) and a lack of in depth themes(all themes covered in the 13 episodes of season 1 can be summarised as "Good triumphs over evil". HOW DEEP IS THAT?!?!?!? MY baby brother can tell you that)

2) Doom(fans and reviewers and public all hate it. I liked it)
. The movie was brainless as well. Crappy story, dismal acting, "too much sneaking not enough shooting". Reviewers were quoted saying the movie had "thin character development, cheesy dialogue and lack of story".
Well lets look at Doom 95(the original and sequels) and Doom 3(the remake).
Doom95 HAD NO charcter development, or straight story or dialogue.
Doom 3 has A LOT of sneaking around in the dark, cheesy dialogue and a plot full of holes.
The ONLY change i can see in the movie that is not in the source material is the origin of the monsters being some extra chromosome thing(dont an extra chromosome lead to down syndrome??) and not demons from Hell. Other than that, the movie has everything else from the game.

3) Speed Racer(public hated it. Reviewers give or take. Fans loved it. I loved it).
Just some quotes of reviewers
-implausibility and the lack of identifiable peril in the driving sequences
-colorful and loud but story lacking depth.
-praise for the cinematography and the "playful and busy" musical score
- un-needed chimpanzee tricks, tiresome kid-brother high jinks, unbelievable Ninja martial arts by the whole family and a raft of vicious yet harmless villains
And here are my counter points.

-Its a kids cartoon thats being adapted. No one died in the cartoon, hence the lack of a peril in the races in the movie.
- the cartoon was episodic. Meaning that each episode was a self-contained story aside from the season premiere or ending 3 episode story arc. And like other cartoons of the 70s, the plots were simple yet timeless.
-Yes, the overall look and feel, plus the musical score in the cartoon was definately ahead of its time.
-The chimpanzee and kid brother capers were an "every episode must have" staple. Yes the whole family in the cartoon can kick ass and do. and once again, its a 70s kids cartoon, the villians are vilianous but will most likely tie you up over a pool of sharks and wait for you to escape than just shoot you in the face.
So there you have it. The public disliked the movie FOR BEING TRUE TO THE ORIGINAL in terms of essence and spirit of the show. Yet public, opinion of the speed racer cartoon till this day is rather high.

4) The Spirit
. Problems with the show cited were the inconsistent feel. It was hard boiled detective noir with looney toons zany. It was dark vigilante with camp. BAsically it was everything the original newspaper comic strip was.
Each month brought a different story, and each story was purposely created to have a different feel. One month could be a detective story, the next a comedy, the month after that, a sad tear jerking romance or a dream-like fun filled romp with a campy villian with over the top gadgets.
The movie had all that, within a single movie.
So whats the problem?????


So the question is this.
Why do people complain about movie adaptations' faults when those same "faults"(i dont regard them as faults but rather elements making up the entire essence of the source material) are present in the source material??
Selective memory?? Denial?? Whats your take?

Pic of The Week

ok, a fact known only to my closest friends = I try to draw.

Yes i learnt drawing in the army. YAY
Originally born out of sheer boredom, this small time obsession with committing my visual thoughts to paper soon grew.

Been drawing for a few months. Progressed from simplistic jap anime-ish figures to more american graphic novel style.
I am still far from being an artist, and i do not expect to make a career out of it. Call me a "drawing guy". Still learning, still trying.
Drawing is my hobby, my way of paying tribute to the thoughts in my head.

I would like to thank a very close friend in the army for sticking by me. Without his help, my new hobby may have been PSP playing and not drawing.


Pictures of the week. Ok actually week-n-a-half. Lots of things to do this week and a half. Bt still managed at least 1 new picture. All these pictures are NOT complete. They can never be complete, why? Because i am forever learning and as long as i learn how to improve, it means the pics will be improved upon. But for now, i'll post them up. Feel free to look and comment. Next week i'll post up a number of pictures showing my progress from day 1(note i learnt drawing without an instruction book). Click on pic to see full size



1) Finished up my Gundam Wing tribute picture(USa Graphic novel style)
-though may consider adding more details later on(when i learn how to draw more convincing gears and hinges). And maybe expand the group to include the lesser characters.


2) Yu-Gi-Oh(USA graphic novel style)x2 different shading styles
- I'm not a fan of YuGiOh. In fact i dislike it. Its like a Frankenstein son of DragonballZ and Magic Cards, with a third party of Pokemon for more excitement. But i do see the potential it has if it was re-done in a american graphic novel style. It could touch on a number of complex themes(shown to exist at but not expanded or even talked about in the manga and anime, instead they are cast aside for the more shallower/common themes of teamwork, friendship and winning) like schizophrenia(dual personality), morality questions of justified vengeance, the existence of a soul, the ouija board debate and question of Predestination just to name a few. Sadly, like i said, the potential exists but be it because of the publisher demands or the writer's own folly, such potential was not tapped. Instaed you get a "typical" shonen jump series. Here's my take on how YuGiOh would look i he american graphic novel style.
2 styles of shading. My more subdued style incorporating what my pal tought me, and the other a more dynamic higher contrast style. Biggest problem i had was his frakking hair. It is unreal. NOBODY can ever have hair like that.


They don't believe me. They never believe me. Those ignorant fools believe its all a game, a childish card game. It is so much more than that. To play this game, is to play with the devil himself, to dabble in hellish forces beyond human comprehension. There exists a dimension, a dimension of pure evil. Through the cards, inhabitants of that hellish dimension gain access to our world, to possess our souls. The psychologists pass off the demon possessed individuals as merely having an obsession, an addiction toward a harmless card game. Unknown to the learned men, those "addicts" are "compelled" to keep playing the dark game, compelled by a sinister power from beyond. To it, humans are mere playthings, like the cards are to us.
Why doesn't anyone believe me?! Those blind, deaf, mutes!
They say i have schizophrenia, split personality disorder. Obsessive compulsive behavior patterns and sociopathic tendencies, LIES! Obvious lies fabricated by the dark powers that be.
They want to play the game? I shall. And I shall beat every single last one of them, cast those demons back to the pit they came from. I will never stop playing. I shall harness their own power against them by mastering this game. I will rule the game.........the game will not rule me.



3) a Witch from Left 4 Dead (anime style)
Done jsut ths morning cos i was bored. Never intended for it to be a serious work, it was just a 20 minute doodle. But hey, maybe i'll improve on it sooner. Though i think the sketchy murky dark look sits pretty well with the pic
.
Mommy? Where are you?
You told me to stay put, you promised you'd come back.
Its scary here.
I hear the scary people all the time.
I hear the loud bangs, I am scared of loud bangs
I like the dark. , I cannot see the scary people when its dark.
You remember where you left me right?
I am so scared, i cannot stop crying
You said don't talk to strangers and i haven't.
They don't talk to me either
The tall guy is smelly and the fat man look funny
the other strangers don't talk much, they leave me alone.
But i don't want to be left alone.
I am hungry
Where did you go mommy?
Did the scary people get you?
I hear the bangs get closer
I hear the scary people roaring from far away
the strangers go and check out the noise
they don't come back too.
I will stay here in the dark so i cannot see the scary people
footsteps
light
Mommy?.........

Watchmen Part 2- Ends justify the means?

This one is about the Watchmen movie again :).

Mostly about the ending. Anyone who has watched feel free to chip in.

*takes deep breath*
1)In the original comic, Ozymandias/Adrian Veidt, was revealed to be the killer who had killed the Comedian (this scene was moved to the beginning of the movie) because the Comedian didnt quite react to "the plan" the way Ozymandias expected.(instead of going along and helping in the plan, the comedian "had a change of heart")

2) THE plan. Ozymandias had created a giant, alien-ish squid (pic below)

with the help of the greatest geniuses in the world(whom he later killed to protect his secrets) and teleported it into New York City to unleash wanton destruction
His reasoning, was this. With the world on the brink of war, his theory is that the presence of a major alien threat from parts unknown will unite the world against it, thus ending hostilities between the nations, and forcing them to become allies rather than enemies. For the greater good, he’ll kill a few million people in New York, if you will. In his mind, the ends justified the means.

In the movie, there is a squid. Look carefully at the machine that DR Manhattan is helping build. It has a ver long name but its short form if you take the first letters of each word it spells S.Q.U.I.D.
Now dont you want to go watch the movie again?
NVM.
Anyway, this time in the movie, Ozymandians tricks Dr Manhattan into helping him build that machine which mimics Manhattan’s powers(all the while pretending that he was researching a way of creating clean, renewable energy for the world.) Ozymandias than uses the device to blow up various cities around the world, thus framing Doctor Manhattan and achieving the same goal as the squid idea — by forcing the warring nations of the world to unite against a common enemy: Doctor Manhattan.

So, now i pose the question. Do the ends really justify the means? Take this concept and let it move beyond the narrative into the movie as a whole and apply the inherant "ends justify the means" philosophy into the ends of the movie and the means by which they got there.

Both endings achieved the same ends. Both presented the similar ideas and philosophies. But both are widely different.
Everyone has their own opinion.

here's mine.
I'm happy that the messages were kept. The ideas were kept and, faithfully translated to screen, were quite easy to catch. Whats more, i prefered the movie ending honestly. Having Ozymandians "betray" one of his own fellow colleagues just made the emotional impact even greater. In this case, yes the end did justify the means.

Another thing about the ending i want to being up is Rorshach. In the end, he disagrees with Veidt, determined to reveal to the world the mastermind behind the disasters, but he is stopped by Dr manhattan.
Dr Manhattan, so firm in his logic that "this is the only way to achieve world peace" and Rorshach "never compromising even in the face of armaggedon". In the end, Manhattan is left with no choice but to kill Rorshach to protect the peace of the future world.

Now i want to know what is your interpretation of that very sad moment before Rorshach's death when he takes off his mask and starts sobbing.
In interviews, Alan Moore himself states that he "just FELT it was how the character would react". Ok, so no concrete answer from him.
Personally, in the comic, that part came across to me as a little like this. Rorshach himself came to the conclusion that Veidt was right, that if he were to reveal to the world, the peace would be shattered. After all he's been through, Rorshach cracks. The calm inhuman demeanor he portrays throught the story shatters as he realises he was wrong all along. Yet he was still determined to go through with his actions if not for Dr Manhattan stopping him.
Now at the point in the comic where Rorshach takes off his mask and shouts to Manhattan "DO IT!"(aka kill me) i get 2 quite different interpretations from comic and movie.
In the comic his "do it" was more a "lost all hope" kind of thing. It seemed as if he were begging for death and willingly submitting to it. His "Do it" came across like as a challenge to Dr Manhattan. Like "Please kill me". His tears came from the fact that he realised there was no way out, that he was wrong and that he wanted to be killed. (a little sub point is that he realised that this new world no longer had a place for him and he did not want to live in a peace built on a lie)
But the taking off of the mask kinda signified that Dr Manhattan was merely killing Walter Kovacs, and that Rorshachs(the ideas he represent) would live on.(which in the comic is quite vividly shown that it was his intent).

The movie kept the end. About the mask significance and the ideas living on. Going so far as to show the huge Rorshach blood blot in the snow to further emphasise that point. The "do it" however was slightly different. The various sub-points are still present but require a little more digging than usual. In the movie, his tears seeemd to be out of fear.
I loved it, the emotional impact. Under all the cold inhuman demeanor, behind his hatred toward the sins of humanity, his isolated underground life, Rorshach is still only human. By the end, he comes across as even more human than Veidt who throughout the story is presented most as "a man of the world". Rorshach's tears are of fear. Fear of death. In the movie, he doesnt want to die. But knows that if he doesnt die, he will reaveal to the world Veidt's lie. Dr Manhattan knows that too and must protect the new peace, logically speaking.
When confronted, Rorshach knew his time was up and that there was no way out. He was helpless in the face of inevitability.

One thing which i think the movie would have benefitted is this.
In the comic, after Silk Spectre and Nite Owl leaves Ozymandias' fortress, Ozymandias looks back at the screens and starts to have slight second thoughts about the rationality of his actions. He sees the deaths reported by the news, then drops to his knees in tears as the scene pulls into the inscription on his statue "I am Ozymandias King of kings. Look upon my works e Mortals and tremble."
If they just added that little scene in, it would have been perfect. Whats more, they added the scene(not in the comic) of Nite Owl confronting Ozy again before leaving. Openly telling Ozymandias about how he defiled the concept of "a greater good" and how his legacy of world peace would be built on a lie and the deaths of millions. This scene combined with the previous comic scene would have made a better closure for the character of Ozymandias.

Wow, thats long.
Ok, just my opinions.

watching WATCHMEN

Just watched WATCHMEN on 14 March. Going to do so again soon. Why?
Cos its a great movie.

OK this is not a full review, just some thoughts and feelings and feelings of my thoughts on said movie.

Its too short. I have read the book and i will say that the movie only covers half of what the book covers.
HOWEVER I must applaud the director and producer for something. They themselves admitted this, that the movie was too short. Zack Snyder himself said the original script would have turned up a 6 episode mini series or 2 movies. The director and Dave Gibbons(the artist) agreed to cut it down to 1 movie. A single movie of 180 to 200 minutes. Producers thought it was still to long and cut it down to the current 163 minutes. So basically there is at least half and hour worth of stuff cut out.
The good thing is that the director is not just treating Watchmen as a movie, but as an ongoing PROJECT.
Slated to coincide with the DVD release are 2 other watchmen related releases.
1) Tales of the Black Freighter - a anime film adapting the "comic within the comic" that was in Watchmen. It's inclusion is vital to helping develop especially Ozymandias' personal sub-plot and character development as many parallels can be drawn between the Black freighter story and Ozy's.
2) Under the Hood - The original featured a biography of sorts by Hollis Mason(the original Nite Owl) about the first masked vigilantes, how they got together, the trials they faced and how it all ended. Basically an entire history back story setting up the events in the Watchmen present day story itself. This is now going to be presented as a "documentary"(though ya a "false" documentary) recounting the lives of the original "Minutemen" which was a very important sub-plot in the comic.

This movie is just the main course. To have a complete meal, you need the starters, main course, a accompanying drink and the dessert at least.
In other words I recommend watching this movie, then waiting for the director's cut DVD to come out and watching the other 2 features which will be on the DVD as well for the full Watchmen experience

So
In many ways, the book and the film are entirely different things. But in actual fact, they are one in the same to about 95%. Only that certain things are enhanced or dimmed. Most of the flaws are not the fault of the writer or director but rather of the medium itself. A book medium being very different from a movie medium

3 main Things that are dimmed
1) One thing that was dimmed were Dave Gibbon's(the original artist) visual motifs and symbolism.
The book uses a lot of little visual motifs that have a certain symbolism to what is going on. eg: the graffiti images of lovers embracing, the first-person point of view of people moving through rooms and looking into reflective surfaces, the Rorschach blots that turn up in places other than Rorschach’s face etc. All of it is meant to tie people’s lives together, even though some of those never meet, and to tie past and present together in a very metaphysical sense. In the movie, you don't get a chance to slowly scan through each scene and go "ah, wasn't this visual cue seen earlier? What is it's significance? etc etc" the turn back the film and pour through the earlier visual cue. You don't get to do that.
In this movie, some of the visual cues still remain but they require a quick mind to pick up on them. Some of the visual cues have been substituted with dialogue references though.

2)Another thing that was dimmed
Alan Moore likes to use this technique. He sort of overlays events in one location with the sound from another. eg: the sound of a TV broadcast seems to be commenting on a sex scene, or some conversation between prostitutes in the street seems to be a bickering commentary on a fight that is happening, or a scene from the past or future. Everything comments on everything else, and everything is connected. There is no "what happens next" because the book can be flipped forward or back and the connections can be slowly discerned and made, unlike a movie.
addition: Ok, where Alan moore uses this technique in his narrative, Zack Snyder(the director) uses a similar style but employing not narrative and background chatter, but in situ dialogue and songs playing in the background.

3) the back story and sub plots
Ok, the back story will apparently be featured in the "Under the Hood" (mock)documentary to be released the same time as the Watchmen DVD. But that doesn't mean its gone totally in the movie. There are a number of flash backs that re-tell the back stories but they go by so fast that you have to pick it up yourself.
If the back story in the book is like a hundred apples falling around you and you slowly pick up the pieces and eat, the back story in the movie is like a hundred apples being thrown at you in quick succession. You don't catch it, it flies by.
Subplots, like mentioned earlier, probably comes together with the 30+ minutes that was cut from the film


Few Things enhanced
1) The main characters. The characters used to be just analogies. Visual representations of human psychological stereotypes and ways of thinking. Their interactions throughout the book are a analogy as to how those different schools of thought and philosophies would clash or coincide. Now in the movie, they are less as analogies and more as actual characters, actual people. They have been truly humanised. Even the subtle changes to the plot, the ending especially, are all in a bid to give the characters more human expressions and for the "blade to cut deepest", Everything is given a very "personal" feel. I loved this change. The director took the characters and made them so much more. You can think about the various schools of thought, stereotypes and philosophies that they may represent and yet you can immerse yourself in the plot and really feel for what the characters are going through.

2) The ending. I wont spoil it here. But I feel this ending is better. Seriously the ending for the comic was......lame. Create an artificial alien life form, teleport it into New York and explode it killing millions and uniting the rest of the world to combat an alien threat that doesn't exist. Aliens?? Come on!!!!
The new ending allows for less "suspension of believe". It is more logically feasible than the comic ending and it allows for deeper wounds and more personal repercussions.

3) The enjoyment factor
Looking again at the comic, it is not without its flaws. Fight scenes are a single panel or only glossed over or referenced to, shot angles are boring and visually static. The book sometimes reads more like a social commentary than a story. The movie, gets rid of the boring. It is action packed, it is exciting. The social commentary and satire are still there but it is balanced with pure movie fun.


So, was it a good movie?? YES
Was it a good adaptation of the comic?? I don't know. Without having the full experience of EVERYTHING(namely the movie, the cut scenes, the anime and the documentary) it is hard to tell since even the director admits the movie is an incomplete adaptation.

However, with all the backstory and subplots flying in your face, only fans well versed in the comic already might be able to catch all that ball. Only the well versed fans will watch and go "oh my gawd thats sooo just like in the comic" or "woa he rembered that bit of visual reference". Such little things might be lost to the general viewer. So go with an open mind and don't just heck care THE LITTLE THINGS. Cos its the little things that count. Catch everything!! Every bit of conversation has significance to later events, every action, every background sign. Hell even the music has special significance to the scenes.

I shall break down one scene for easy reference. The very first scene in the movie of the murder of the Comedian.
The music playing is "unforgetable".
1) It references later events in which it is show how the Comedian has impacted the lives of our main characters through the years, who the comedian is and why he does what he does. In a way, though he may be dead, his legacy lives on in, making him "unforgettable".
2)Another purpose for that scene is this. If you feel like laughing while the comedian is getting the crap beat out of him and the soulful slow song is playing in the background, as the comedian is hurled through the air ever so gracefully as the song reaches its climax, then that scene has served its purpose. Its only right for one to laugh at a comedian eh?
3) You can see it(the song) as the Comedian's own inner dialogue, as he looks back and reflect on his past, especially about his past with Sally Jupiter(the woman in the picture). And it will make more sense after you find out the events that lead up to his death(revealed later in the film)
4) the lyrics
"Thats why, darling, its incredible
That someone so unforgettable
Thinks that I am unforgettable too"
Also reflect how Sally Jupiter thinks about the Comedian.


THAT is The most interesting thing for me about the movie. the various multiple meanings behind each scene and the hidden significance of the various going-ons per scene. From dialogue, visual cues to hand gestures, recurring visual motiffs and background music

So WATCH THE MOVIE. Its definately worth it.

Megatron: Ascension

A fan video i made using scenes from the "Megatron: Origin" graphic novel.

Dunno why, just felt like doing it.

Anyone can watch, enjoy and comment.
I wanted to make it full animation with voices but
1) I dont know how to use Flash
2) I can't hire the voice actors i want.

Note: Enable javascript

Transformers: Infiltration

Transformers Infiltration. The first in a new (well started in 2005) series by "4th greatest" comic company IDW. Following the bankruptcy of Dreamwave(the previous publisher of transformers comics), the rights to Transformers comic was bought up by IDW. But instead of continuing the plot-hole ridden, convoluted, inconsistent, story set up by Dreamwave, IDW decided to craft their own Transformers comic continuity.

Keeping a tone and spirit similar to Marvel comics "Ultimates" universe continuity, this new Transformers series utilises all the familiar characters but takes place in a world very similar to our modern post 9/11 day and age we live in. No more space ships, anti robot ray guns and giant world destroying weapons. "Real" is the topic word of the day in this new TF series.

The premise is quite unique in Transformers fiction and contain many elements that the 2007 movie copied. For one thing, Cybertron is now a dead husk of a planet and the war between the autobots and decepticons has spiraled out into many battlefronts across the galaxy. This time the Transformers did not come to earth by chance many million years ago like in the cartoon. Earth is just another frontline in the ongoing pan-galactic war. A frontline which only recently has risen in tactical importance due to the discovery of an element called "Ultra-energon".

Another element that is unlike previous Transformers media, is the emphasis on the use of disguise, subterfuge and an undercover "cloak and dagger" approach. No longer do the Decepticons just blast their way into town and attempt to subjugate every planet they come across. They now follow a strict protocol involving working behind the scenes, unknown to the local inhabitants, to topple any form of order into chaos, then sweeping in to claim the spoils of war. Alternate modes like being able to transform into cars to blend with the local vehicles now serve an even greater importance as to minimize discovery by the locals. Only as a last resort do the factions' soldiers transform and battle in full Robot mode.

Story - 8.5/10

This new tale opens on earth and we are introduced to the world throught the eyes of a spunky loner teenage girl, Verity Carlo, living "off the grid". Her rootless existence is one day shattered by the discovery(and subsequent stealing) of a palm top computer that contains information exposing Decepticon presence on earth. Events spiral out of control. One thing leads to another(some more humourous than others) and soon we have our human cast through with the audience can be introduced to the world of IDW's Transformers. Hunter O'Nion(sci/fi geek fanboy obsessed with aliens) Verity Carlo and Jimmy Pink(Mechanic and possibly the most normal of the bunch). Starting off with what seems like a simple "destroy all evidence" mission with the Decepticons wanting to kill the humans that have exposed them and the Autobots intent on protecting said humans, soon spirals into something a lot bigger and draws our 2 big players (Megatron and Optimus Prime) to the Earth Front. But there is more to the story that meets the eye. Humans have been researching and monitoring alien robot activity via black Ops organisations like Skywatch and the Machination, each intent on acquiring Transformers or their technology for less than noble gains(sound familiar??*hints at SEctor 7 in the movie*). Whats more, with the situation on earth Escalating out of control, a far more sinister threat lurks in the vast shadow of the cosmos................

The slow build up from the start is very fitting for the story. I like the new take of a secret war rather than the all out battles we're so familiar with in the tv series and previous comics. Very realistic setting(no human ray guns or space stations or funny quasi-future jump suits), this story could be taking place today for all i know. Unlike Marvel's Transformers series which thrust you thick into the action or Dreamwave's which has a build up with as many holes as a rifle range target, Infiltration actually has a decent believable build up that leaves one curious to know more. And it is refreshing to see the autobots acting like a real combat unit. Also, that they are not perfect, With internal squabbles,chain of command issues, breaching of mission perimeters etc. A far cry from the "do no wrong as a whole" autobots in the cartoons and previous comics. The decepticons now actually have the advantage over the autobots with better planning in their plot wheras the autobots are just "putting out fires". The autobots vs decepticons no longer come across as "forces of good VS legion of evil". But rather just as opposing imperfect military factions with their own agenda.And now, earth is only just another front in a galaxy wide war. That's new too. Its like earth, due to its Ultra-energon deposits, is just like a....an oil rich area which the bots can use. But there are other areas that are currently hot spots. Though the whole Skywatch/Machanation plot point gets a little lost here. I like the approach IDW is taking with interconnecting plot threads spinning in and out of the other titles like StormBringer and the spotlights.

Characters - 7/10

Most of the bots are the same old personalities we all knew and loved. Only problem is, writer Simon Furman makes the assumption that if you pick up this book, you are already well versed in your TF characters and/or a long time fan. There is hardly any introduction on the bot characters with only Ratchet, Prowl, Starscream and Megatron(just barely in meg's case) being decently fleshed out for the newcomers. The rest(to the Transformers newbie reader) may come across as just blank slates, stock "background" characters or at worse one dimensional. The Batttlechargers are just dumb muscle, the other 4 decepticons just lackeys going along with whatever Starscream says, Ironhide the strong silent type, Bumblebee the ever helpful, Sunstreaker the uppity one, wheeljack the guy who makes cracks the code locks on the palmtop computer tec. There are hintings at their character personalities but they are too subtle. On the other hand, the actions and reactions to the various situations the characters are thrown in are really feasable and do not require any suspension of belief. They are very "real" characters. Compared to this comic, Optimus Prime in the 2007 movie is an illogical, obstinate, one track mind, one-trick-pony. And Megatron in the movie is a rampaging savage animal as opposed to the cold calculating military tactician with a hidden lethal and brutal bloodlust when he "cuts loose" in combat.


As for their looks, anyone familiar with the cartoon can immediately identify who is who. Unlike the 2007 movie, the characters in this comic mimick

Anyway If i didn't have my prior knowledge of Transformers, i would not have enjoyed this book as much as i did. However, the human characters were for once, not as annoying as previous ones. I actually liked Verity Carlo and Hunter. Especially the part in the decepticon base where Verity comes face to face with Megatron. We see the independent, headstrong, almost bitchy Verity was all just a facade. Inside, she's just a scared little girl with a troubled past.(and this facade falls away even more in Escalation, revealing her inner vulnerabilities). Hunter?? well, he just clicked with me. I'm a fanboy of Transformers just as he's obsessed with Aliens and Robots. So ya, go refresh your transformers knowledge of the basic "who is who" before going into this book. I would have given it a 9/10 but thats only cos i already have quite a substantial knowledge of transformers already. But from a Transformers "newbie" point of view, i shall give it 7/10 for rushed introductions to familiar characters.

Art - 9/10

E J Su. Definitely a new name in transformers. At first i approached his art with distaste. Compared to Dreamwave, EJ Su's art was just downright....unimpressive. But then it hit me. His art is very down to earth, and it fits well with the very down to earth story. Not too simple and dull like mid-Marvel US, not too stylised like Generation 2 or most marvel UK, and not too flashy like dreamwave.His panel layout has some hinting of a manga touch through the frequent use of action lines

and very anime-esque expressions(big eyes with dot pupils to show surprise, constipated look of concentration or stress etc etc) on humans but aside from that, the proportions of the human characters are still kept realistic.(don't expect them to look like Ash ketchum. lol.)


The Bots. The bot designs are what really shine. Like Don Figueroa before him, EJ su has re-designed the bots with modern alt-modes and the bots actually look like they can transform into those alt-modes without "morphing". He approaches the look of the robots with more an engineering design touch as opposed to from an artist's touch.
The parts slide and shift believably to transform the bot. This shows that the bots can be designed realistically to transform WITHOUT altering their look too much from the original G1(I guess the 2007 movie designers never looked at Figureoa's or Su's art). (THIS is Jazz BTW)
They all have joints where they are supposed to have joints and this time even the face and mouths are individual moving parts and not some magical soft plastic that acts like flesh like in previous transformer shows and comics. So you'd think that now with the robots looking VERY robotty, they will have very machine-like expressions on their faces? WRONG. EJ Su, doesnt show the robots' emotion through contorting of the facial features like how a human does(or how dreamwave and marvel did for that matter with their bots). He uses the robots' body language, tilting of the head, shadows and frame angles to great effect in showing a decent range of emotion, effectively bypassing the "dull surprise"(<---check this up on tfwiki.net if unsure) that so plagued dreamwave(Pat Lee's especially) art.The colouring by one John Rauch just enhances the gritty feel of the art. The colouring even looks on par with other graphic novel miniseries like "The Ultimates". Sure its not as great as Alex Ross or Stephan Seijic. But it definitely ain't Jose Delbo or Rob Liefeld. In terms of Transformer art, EJ Su, though a newcomer, deserves to be up there among the likes of Don Figueroa and Guido Guidi.

Overall - 8.9/10

A good update to a classic tale. More time could have been spent on the bots and less on the humans though. For a book 1 in a series, it does its job well of re-inventing the franchise. Presenting something new while keeping the spirit of the originals. Also, it keeps the audience asking questions and curious to know more.THe TPB also includes a nice sketch section featuring E J Su's concept designs for the transformers.
Check it out now at any comic book stores. THIS is Transformers(not that wham bam brainless action thing called a movie)

Aliens Vs Predator - Re-match

Aliens versus Predator. A famous science fiction/Horror series crossover between 2 famous film franchises. Aliens(debut in the 1979 film "Alien" starring Sigourney Weaver and directed by Ridley scott), and Predator(debut in 1987 film "Predator" starring Arnold Schwarzenegger and Produced by Joel Silver). The idea started off from a scene in Predator 2 showing an Alien skull within the Predator spaceship. The idea went on to spawn a critically acclaimed comic series by Dark Horse, a number of novels, a series of computer games and finally 2 movies.

\,

In my post today, i shall be discussing not one of those said media involving AVP but rather the concept of "aliens Vs predator" as a whole. The essence of the franchise if you might put it simply. And i shall use info from the 2 films(im guessing that more ppl woul have heard of or watched the films as opposed to read the comics and books.

The 2 films (Alien Vs Predator directed by Paul WS Anderson and Aliens Vs Predator:Requiem by the Strause Brothers) were only moderately successful at box offices. However reviews by critics were not as kind. I feel the reason for the negative reviews are attributed to a servere misunderstanding of Aliens Vs Predator franchise. The reviewers come into the films expecting a simple monster-on-monster smack down, which AVP is not and never was. If you were to delve into the comics and books, Aliens Vs Predator has many concepts anchored in psychology, historical mythology, animal beharioral patterns, even Philosophy and life values.

HUH?? Philosophy and life values?? In a monster movie??

Of course i say. THINK ABOUT IT. I shall break it down, concept by concept and how each monster personifies said concept and why they might come into conflict. When im done, go rewatch the films again, and maybe pick up some of the novels or comics.

1) New Vs Old

"If it aint broken, don't fix it". A very common phrase used nowadays. The Predator, if anything, embodies this in its totality. As shown in AVP(Alien Vs Predator) and AVPR(Aliens Vs Predator Requiem), The Predators have a strict almost obstinate adherance to not just ancient tradition, but even ancient forms of combat, equipment, and way of thinking. For example in AVP, the 3 Predators, though knowing they are going up against Aliens, do not utilise any weapon that is effectively "anti-Alien". All their weapons, except for the shoulder cannon, are not acid-proof, can be cut by Alien claws and even their armour can be chewed through by an Alien(evident by the Alien being able to break through the Predator's metal facemask and through its head in one bite.) Even their ways of taking down an Alien creature are "standard".(cut off its tail to cripple it then utilise superior strength and size to immobilise it in an open environment and then kill it with a ceremonial knife). Sure its tradition, its been done before, tried and tested. The weapons could have still been used creatively, but alas, they only utilise their "old" ways of combat. Once those weapons were lost and the means of effecting the old ways of combat were gone(eg: getting trapped in a cramped lower chamber and unable to use size to their advantage), the Predators were helpless. Obstinate and unwilling to "think out of the box" they succumed. Tradition and "the old ways", though, need not be a disability or a milestone around one's neck. The "wolf" Predator in AVPR utilised its traditional weapons to great effect against the Aliens he faced. The difference betweein "Wolf" and the 3 Predator initiates is that Wolf used the old weapons in "new" ways. A spear need not be used to stab as that would bring a shower of lethat acid blood. Instead, he used the spear as a bludgeoning tool. He did not cut the acid blood filled tail of the Aliens but instead went for the boney joints were there was the least likelyhood of bleeding. Knowing he would have a disadvantage in cramped close quarters, he utilised ranged weapons(despite it not being considered an "honorable" kill in Predator culture) and was not afraid to add other weapons to his arsenal.(Their tradition dictates only 1 shoulder plasma cannon per combatant, yet he took 2)

Tradition is not a hinderance. Over adherance to tradition and what one learnt, is the hinderance. Lessons of the past is not an instruction manual for handling future problems, but rather, it is a set of ingredients that one can use to come up with their own creative solution for future problems. Used creatively, "old ways" and tradition not longer are a hinderance to progress, but are a supplement and an aid to progress.

2) Adaptability Vs Stagnation

The Alien creature is the very embodiment of adaptability. From its way of overcoming obstacles to its very biological nature. The Predators on the other hand adhere to strictly to a set of ways that have not changed in centuries. The Alien's biology dictates that the adult form alien would take on physical characteristics of the host that it impregnates. Most of the time, the Alien facehugger embryo would try to impregnate the "dominant" species of a said environment. A wise choice as the dominant species in an environment would most likely mean that the species has many traits that make it the most likely to survive in the set environment. But that is an example which is more present in the comics. In the movies, the Alien adapts quickly to combat situations. First off, it tries to get up close to its opponent such that it is able to use its razor sharp claws and lethal spiked tail to greatest effect. Should the target possess ranged weapons, the Alien would opt to lay in wait and ambush its prey when it comes near. It learns quickly. For example, in the first movie an Alien sees another Alien blown apart by the Predator's Shoulder cannon shot. It then decides to retreat into the darkness and later catches the Predator unaware, tearing off the shoulder cannon FIRST. Another example is the first hand to hand combat scene between Alien and Predator in the first movie. The Alien, beaten hurt and tail cut off sees that the Predator is using its size and the space of the large room to its advantage(little hiding places, many obstacles for the Alien). It distracts the Predator then retreats into a smaller, cramped room. the Predator follows and thats when the Alien springs its trap.

In AVPR, the "Wolf" Predator shows how adapting to different combat situations, though given the same tools as the Predator initiates in AVP, is more effective than just sticking to a set form of combat. In cramped spaces like the sewers he utilised more agile parries, grabs and brapples, and short, quick stabs and punches to overcome his enemies. In open terrain like the roof tops, he utilised his full bulk and strength, cuting loose with full swing blows and powerful, precise spear thrusts. Finding out that he would be facing a new threat in the form of the Pred-Alien, the Wolf Predator supplements his arsenal with a second Shoulder cannon and stickybombs. Though armed with shoulder plasma cannons, he used them only if the enemy was very far away and not likely to be able to disable his guns. Later into the movie, his shoulder cannon gets damaged but he adapts them into a handheld, precision shot pistol.

Here's one life lesson we can learn from the movies. Change or die. Adapt or die. In everything that we do, the situtaion always changes. Do not get held back by memories of Halcyon days or regrets of mistakes. Learn from those, use them, and adapt to the ever changing present.

3) Feeling Vs Logic

The Alien = Feeling based way of functioning

Te Predator = highly logic based way of life

Why?
Well the Alien does show intelligence, but not in a "logic" sense of intelligence. It does things without conscience, without actual "thought", living and doing only because it feels like. It is pure Id, instinct and impulse. Assimilate, Grow, feed, reproduce, destroy potential threats, ensure species survival. It does not think about doing these things, they are just that ingrained into the Aliens physiology. They are animals, pure "id". And that is one extreme of relying too much on one's feelings and foregoing logical thought. we become animals. Feed, Fight and F**K(see reproduce) etc. Many of their actions shown in the film can be considered illogical but that is the whole point, and the whole meaning and essence of the name "alien". They are just that illogical that they are "strange" and "alien" to us. As Humans we have the capability for logical thought and should use that to balance our feelings lest we become animals.

The Predators are also highly intelligent judging from their space-faring capabilities and technology. However, they depend on logic too much. And a warpped "hunter's" logic at that. A prime example is their logical reasoning that one must commit "honorable suicide" when one gets defeated by one's prey. Yes it is a logical thing to do. You're about to die at the hands of the creature you wanted to kill, it is an embarrassment, it is dictated by customs and traditions, etc. Their logic is warpped in a sense that they see death as the only "last resort" out of a problem. This is the same thing that people who comsider suicide go through. At first the considering of suicide is a purely feeling thing. Then it goes on to a warpping of the person's logic in that he thinks(and actually logically reasons out to himself) that death is the only way to go.

Other examples of the Predators' over adherance to logic would be that They insist on finishing off their prey despite being out numbered and out matched(dictated by customs that they do so or die trying. Yes logical but warpped) and the number of examples such as over adherance to ancient tradition. They would not kill females of a species if they are not deemed a threat.(see Predator 2) This warpped logical way of thinking can be used to the disadvantage of the Predator should a feeble looking but brave old woman pull out a gun and shoot the Predator in the back.

lol.

Lesson learnt. An over adherance to either feeling or logic isnt good and can be disasterous. Not only that, it tends to make one "alien" to the people around them. I personally advocate a BALANCE between logic and feeling.

4 et al) Yes yes this is a long post so i shall end here. However, other themes covered within the essence of "Aliens Vs Predator" are

- philosophy of critical realism(perception and sense-data)

- Maternal psychology

- philosophy regarding "Purpose" and "reason for being"

- Nature Vs Nurture plilosophy

- "Is blood thicker than water?"

- Moral Ethics and Egoism

So much in-depth elements present in the essence of AVP and it gets shoved aside and overlooked by people content on seeing only a bunch of monsters kill each other.

Critics may say "ok fine, there are a number of in-depth references and elements persent in AVP and AVPR but they are still bad movies".

Well allow me to counter some of their arguments as to why they say the movies may be "bad".

1) Too dark.

I say, "true to the original". The original "Alien" film and sequels like Aliens and Alien Resurrection were very darkly lit(or rather, not lit) as well as Predator 2 night scenes.

2) Uninteresting and "stock" human characters

I say. ITS ALIENS VS PREDATOR. Who cares about the humans. What matters is the essence and spirit of the concept that is Aliens Vs Predator. Oh and not to mention its a monster movie. Humans are beast fodder at most. They are MEANT to be uninteresting.

3) Actions of the Aliens or Predators seem "silly".

I say. THEY ARE ALIENS. Meaning creatures that are not like us. Their very actions are alien. They are meant to be.

Now, nowing all of this, go back and re-watch Alien Vs Predator and Aliens Vs Predator Requiem.

If it interests, pick up the comic books. Especially "Deadliest of the Species" (available with other stories as "Aliens Vs Predator Omnibus 2" found in any bookstore that sells comics). That story and other stories in the comics expand on the AVP concept to include elements like

- Plilosophy of Ontology(the nature of being/existence)

- Philosophical realism and the question of objective/subjective reality

- Politics

- Environmental Philosophy

- Utilitarianism

Just to name a few. The AVP comics are an extremely good read. It balances in-depth philosophical references with graphic monster on monster action and intriguing storyline.

For more in-depth reading concerning logic and feeling and what a true "balance" entails see the following

http://spacesofaderangedmind.blogspot.com/

- a project that my friend(the writer of the blog) and i (a frequent contributer) are working on. It concerns self-improvement and basically giving one a more wholesome and fruitful experience of life and living itself.