ericspeaksout-blog

[ericspeaksout-blog]

No One Knows For Sure, but I Intend to Find Out

Ok, here we go. My thoughts on ReBoot: The Guardian Code. I just binged this and I have very mixed feelings about it. For all the hate it was getting initially, I went into it with a completely open mind and I have to say... I really loved watching it. Not to say there aren't flaws, but as entertainment it works for me. I feel like the story holds my interest, the actors seem like they're trying and having a good time while doing it, and most of all it's fun. Isn’t that the point? Vera is my favorite. She’s delightful, and the actress plays unemotional and does the “AI” voice really well. It seems like it would be hard to make a character like that engaging, so props to her. Also, a lot of the things that people are criticizing as flaws were actually present in the first series, so I’m not going to take points off for the new show for being silly, wacky, or a bit disjointed at times. Tonally it feels very consistent, even in its disjointedness. I know nostalgia is a powerful thing, but it can also cloud judgement. Remember in the original series when Dot sang a seductive song to Enzo on his birthday and then Megabyte got jealous he wasn’t invited to the party so he crashed it and challenged bob to a guitar battle? Yeah… But the bizarre elements of ReBoot are something I find charming, and I actually wish this show would lean into it a bit more.

The biggest drawback for me is what you'd expect: the handling of the ties to the original series. I was anticipating the appearance of those original characters so much, and it was a total letdown. It seems like they completely undermined all of the character development that happened in the last several seasons and just copy/pasted some catch phrases. Where are Matrix? AndrAIa? How did they survive MB’s cliffhanger assault? Didn’t Hex sacrifice herself? I’m at least 10000% sure the cameos were going to be sparse like Frisket in episode 2, but Hefferon saw the backlash from the trailer and crammed in the original characters in the last episode without even researching continuity. But it was nice to hear the original cast (I think it was them) voice acting again. Also, as many have mentioned, the basement nerd was clearly a jab at the OG fans which is infuriating. Why would you double down and take shots at the people who have been the lifeblood of the keeping the memory of the franchise alive? And why did they specifically make it so the user guardians can’t reboot? That’s literally the name of the show...

That being said, I see some people actively campaigning to give this show low ratings, or have it cancelled, and I don't necessarily think that's fair. It's not the fault of the actors or the entire production staff that the showrunner didn't take the original fans' interests into consideration earlier in production, and I hate to see this show that (imo) has potential suffer for it. Parker did imply they can go check back in whenever they want, so I’d love to see them incorporate more of that plot into future episodes if it gets that far. I’d also like to see more of Tamra’s and Parker’s personal lives developed. I think this show would be well served with a longer run time, especially since it’s now navigating the real world as well as the online world. Overall, I really liked this show. I hope it gets renewed for more seasons and has time to find its voice the way the original did over the course of 4 seasons. Alphanumeric!

[ericspeaksout-blog]

Dr. Strangehate or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Fandom

With Ready Player One so close to release, I want to make something clear: I’m thrilled with anticipation for this movie! I’ve read the book, and I found it completely enjoyable. The movie looks to be a pretty faithful adaptation that takes this story and makes it into a fantastic spectacle.

But if I had never read the book and just listened to people I see commenting on Twitter, I’m not sure if I’d feel the same way. The main argument I keep seeing is "it makes a lot of references!" Yeah, and you know what else? It's FUN. I see so much hate being spewed about how this movie basically bastardizes beloved parts of pop culture and nerd fandoms by taking them out of their element and lining them up as Easter eggs. And to that I say... SO WHAT?

Let people have FUN. I’m sorry to break the news, but the world doesn’t belong to you, and as a fan these IPs don’t belong to you either. Invoking a pop culture artifact for the purpose of nostalgia doesn’t make me believe that the context in which it first/popularly appeared is now void or cheapened. You can have it all. Reach for the stars, people. Not everything has to be The Revenant. Sometimes people just want to have their pop culture/nostalgia itch scratched, and that's OKAY.

The specific example I’ll give is the one being brought up a lot because of it’s prominence in the marketing: The Iron Giant. Folks are saying that taking this character from his original context and putting him in a movie where he’s utilized as a weapon isn’t okay, because his story was anti-war and an allegory about the perils of violence. Don’t get me wrong, I loved that aspect of the movie. But taking something you love out of one context and placing it in a different context doesn’t somehow magically, retroactively invalidate the source material. It is possible to enjoy both. If you can’t compartmentalize and differentiate between intention and application, at least have the courtesy to stop holding everyone accountable for your own shortsightedness.  If I have a thermos filled with chicken noodle soup and the thermos has Wolverine’s picture on it, that doesn’t mean that I think the character Wolverine loves or endorses soup. Or thermoses. I, an adult being of sound mind, can differentiate between imagery appropriated for use as memorabilia and it’s source material.

And here’s the other thing: Iron Giant IS A WEAPON. 

Yes, the story showed the titular character go through an arc to understand resolving conflicts peacefully. Obviously that is the main takeaway. But I’m still not getting how taking the imagery of a character that people identify with and putting it in different circumstances for nostalgic gratification is so upsetting to some people. Samantha in Bewitched longs to be a “normal” person, which humanizes her and makes her relatable.  But we watch to see her use her witchcraft. Batman strives for the day when he can hang up his cape and cowl and live a “peaceful” life. But we read to see him dress like batman and fight villains. If these characters really got their wishes and the stories just became about mundane people going through their ideal day-to-day lives, would we still watch/read? There are many other varieties of fiction that could easily fill the position. The glam/flashy/dangerous/sexy/cool/naughty parts of superhero and fantasy stories are what draw in their audience in the first place. I’m not saying they are the most important parts, but I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss those as inconsequential just so we can virtue signal and pretend to have the moral high ground. We get it, Batman’s life sucks. But you want it to, because you keep reading. You want to keep seeing your values and struggles represented and reflected in these stories because it’s inspiring, and in order for that to happen Batman has to keep going through the grinder. Everyone knows that The Iron Giant is a lesson in morality, but he’s also a humongous, armed-to-the-teeth alien robot. Read: glam/flashy/dangerous/sexy/cool/naughty. It’s fair to acknowledge and even expand on that aspect of him. In fact, isn’t that why people read alternate reality/”what if” comics? Are characters not allowed to exist outside of the vacuum of our initial perceptions of them? (As a side note I should mention that the character that appears in Ready Player One isn’t the actual “Iron Giant.” It’s a digital avatar, in the likeness of IG, used by the protagonist.)

Also, the irony is that a lot of the same people railing against The Iron Giant being re-purposed in this way have no clue that the WB cartoon movie was based on a book. A book (written by a man who allegedly was so cruel that he drove two wives to suicide) in which the resolution of the story is the robot challenging a giant space dragon to a contest that results in the dragon being horrifically burned alive and then made a slave. (Yes, really.) Please tell me again about your stringent policies on faithful adaptations with regard to context?

What I keep seeing is a bunch of gatekeeping, and honestly it sucks. I enjoy fandoms when they’re fun, supportive, and inclusive. What I’ve seen with the buzz surrounding Ready Player One is venomous and antagonistic. I even saw one Tweet that suggested people actively try to ruin the experience of others who go to see the movie just because they don’t want to see it.

https://twitter.com/StillNotSam/status/973345958741229568

Really?

Please, I beg of you, let people enjoy things. Ghostbusters can be women, Jean Grey can come back to life, P. Diddy can be Brother Love, and Ready Player One can use pop culture icons as Easter eggs. None of these things retroactively nullify or worsen their predecessors. If you don’t care for the new iterations, fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But please stop actively campaigning to destroy something that brings happiness to other people just because you don’t agree with it.

[ericspeaksout-blog]

Rebooting Childhood

I just saw the trailer for ReBoot: The Guardian Code, and I have a lot of feelings. Feelings that I would usually post on Twitter, but this felt like it warranted something a bit longer than the limited space I have with that platform. So here’s my first post!

First, I’m excited! Generally I like seeing shows/movies/properties I enjoyed in the past get resurrected or followed up on in some way. I’ve loved the Voltron & Power Rangers reboots, and I’m very much looking forward to Tomb Raider & Lost in Space coming up.

That being said, this looks... Odd. 

https://nerdist.com/reboot-the-guardian-code-trailer/

I don’t mind when someone take a property and changes elements of it to update it or set it apart from the original. I can usually appreciate the changes or at least understand that a lot of my resistance to change is nostalgia, and that embracing different interpretations of something I love doesn’t mean that the old thing is now invalid. But I’m not sure how to feel here. I think part of it is the mix of animation with live action. It’s a bit jarring. And not only did they introduce the new live action aspect but going by the trailer it looks like most of the characters are unfamiliar, and the show is mainly a ReBoot sequel in name only. But I also don’t want to sh*t all over this series before giving it a chance. Scrolling through some Tweets about the trailer, it looks like people are actively hating on it. A lot of the comments have me ROFL, but all shade aside I don’t want the negative criticism to pour cold water over any momentum this show has before it even leaves the gate. Even the creator of the original series posted that he isn’t on board:

https://twitter.com/TheRealMrSweary/status/966497518220492800

A lot of the points people are making are totally fair, but I also know that along with creative properties there is the business side of things, and they likely had to change certain elements and include others so that they could sell this show in the first place. We live in a world where the $ is king, and that doesn’t always mean the end of the world. But sometimes it means compromise.

If anything, I’m really hoping that the showrunners see the backlash and lean into what fans are saying they want to see from this show they’ve waited YEARS for as it progresses. READ THE ROOM, and don’t try to shove a concept that people are pushing back on down their throats until it results in cancellation. Grow. Learn. Do Better.