2017 Hall of Fame Vote

Tomorrow is the date for one of my favorite debates.  Who should be in the Hall of Fame?  Clearly, more guys from the 90s should be in.  It is criminally under represented now.  I want to fix that.

First, I'm going to go through my "ballot" (remember, you can only vote for 10).  Second, I'm going to give a simple yes or no for whether each guy on the ballot should be in.

My ballot (alphabetical order):

Jeff Bagwell

            This really should be a no-brainer, and not just because I'm an Astros fan.  The only first baseman in history with 400 home runs and 200 stolen bases.  The most pure 5-tool first baseman in history.  The face of a successful franchise for 15 years.  The only reason why he's not in yet is unsubstantiated rumors that he may have taken steroids because...?

Vladimir Guerrero

            The best bad ball hitter I've ever seen (though I hear Yogi Berra was pretty good).  Tons of power, plenty of speed (though the Montreal turf destroyed his knees), a cannon of an arm.  The only knock was he was pretty bad with the glove, but who cares?

Trevor Hoffman

            Those who say "he wasn't Mariano" are stupid and have a ridiculously high bar for success.  He was the second best closer of his time, in many ways he's similar to Tim Raines (see below).  Plus, there's no beating him entering to Hells Bells (they basically invented the closer walkup music).

Edgar Martinez

            The greatest designated hitter of all time (sorry Papi), only injuries and a late start kept him from 3000 hits.

Fred McGriff

            The second greatest casualty (after the Expos) of the 1994 strike, because he fell 7 home runs short of 500.  It's crazy he doesn't get more consideration, especially since people now want to laud clean power hitters from the 90s.  (Of course he should get in just for his Tom Emanski commercial)

Tim Raines

            The second best leadoff hitter of all time, he had the misfortune of playing at the same time as the best (Rickey Henderson) in a small market and thus he has been overlooked.  As others have pointed out, he was essentially the same player as Tony Gwynn, just replacing 400 hits with walks and way more stolen bases.  And, of course, he has the greatest stolen base percentage in history.  He has to get in in his last year on the ballot.

Ivan Rodriguez

            Did he take steroids?  He's in the Canseco book.  I know, but I also know that when I watched him he was the best catcher I have seen.  Our generation's Johnny Bench.  Perhaps the most feared catcher of all time.

Curt Schilling

            Perhaps the most dominant postseason starter in the modern era, it was also unquestioned that when he paired with Randy Johnson in Arizona they were the best 1-2 punch of their time.  Anybody who doesn't vote for him because of his post-career outspokenness is an idiot.

Billy Wagner

            Closers are supposed to be dominant.  Nobody, except maybe Mariano, has been more dominant.  Only his lack of innings is keep his consideration down.

Larry Walker

            As someone else said, if you vote for Vladimir you have to vote for Larry.  They were basically the same person, but Larry was less flashy (and he played in Colorado).

So there's my 10, and it was tough to leave off 2-3 others.  So, of those who are left, who else should be in?

Casey Blake - no

Barry Bonds - blatant roid user, no

Pat Burrell - no

Orlando Cabrera - no

Mike Cameron - no

Roger Clemens - same boat as Bonds

J.D. Drew - no

Carlos Guillen - no

Jeff Kent - Yes - one of the best offensive second basemen of all time

Derrek Lee - no

Melvin Mora - no

Mike Mussina - Yes - 270 wins and a 123 career ERA+ pitching entire career in AL East (same as Juan Marichal, better than Bob Feller, Eddie Plank, Don Drysdale, Warren Spahn, etc.)

Magglio Ordonez - no (he was a jerk when I asked for his autograph)

Jorge Posada - Maybe, mostly because catchers are very underrepresented

Manny Ramirez - no - twice tested positive

Edgar Renteria - no

Arthur Rhodes - no (this guy pitched forever - proof teams are always looking for a lefty arm)

Freddy Sanchez - no

Gary Sheffield - based on numbers, yes, but no

Lee Smith - no

Sammy Sosa - no, see Bonds

Matt Stairs - no

Jason Varitek - no

Tim Wakefield - no, but I would love to give him a vote just because

So who do I think will get in?  Bagwell, Raines, Guerrero.  Hoffman will get close (around what he got last year - 67%).  Rodriguez will debut at about 50%.  Bonds and Clemens will probably both take big step ups (~60% from 45%).

Oh, and next year, the ballot adds likely first ballot guy Chipper Jones, plus Jim Thome, Scott Rolen, and Omar Vizquel (though he shouldn't-he was a terrible offensive player and overrated highlight real defensively) will get consideration.  It's just getting more crowded.

Rogue One Review and Star Wars Franchise Ranking

I finally got to see Rogue One for a second time, which means I can finally give it a proper review.  The problem is I have changed my placement of it in the series (see below) many times, so it’s a very fluid process.  But, first, the movie.  Obviously, many spoilers ahead.

To start with, the hype.  After the first trailer, I was very much looking forward to this movie.  Then I heard about the re-writes, and I was worried.  This was supposed to be a gritty war movie.  Was Disney destroying it?  The trailers still looked good, but I went into the movie with muted anticipation.

Let’s start with the beginning (a very good place to start).  No scroll: I guess I’m okay with it.  It’s not part of the main story, so something different is not a big deal.  And for people who said they were lost without it?  Give me a break.  You don’t need to read the book leading up to it to know exactly what is happening.  (Similarly, some people said they were surprised about the story, they didn’t know it was about the first Death Star.  Are you kidding me?  Did you watch any of the trailers?  It was quite obvious.)

I love the universe expansion.  That has always been one of the greatest things about Star Wars: the ability to visit innumerable places.  They did a really good job of showing a new side of the universe.  For the most part, the main characters are not in it, and where they are it works (except the droids, which are just kind of thrown in to say they’ve been in every one).

Speaking of main characters, DARTH VADER!!!  I knew he would be in it, but did not expect as much as we got.  I loved finally seeing his castle.  And that scene!  You know which one.  Wow!  That leads to one of my other favorite parts of the movie.

I feel like we finally saw the Empire being the Empire.  No-holds-barred evil.  Destroy a couple of cities?  No problem.  But it’s not for no reason.  I actually for once found sympathy for the empire, they’re doing what they think needs to be done to bring order to the galaxy.  That seems plausible.

What about the new characters?  I found them to be a mixed bag, and not necessarily in a good way.  The strength was definitely in the supporting characters, where there are a number of really great additions.  Chief among them is Chirrut, who has quickly become one of my favorites in all of Star Wars.  His blind faith made him quite the kick ass fighter.  His friend, Baze, is pretty cool as well in his reservedness (and his “little sister” comment is one of the great moments.)  Then there’s K-2SO, who is already the best droid (sorry R2) in the galaxy.  Not surprising since Alan Tudyk is the best character actor going.  Krennic was a pretty good villain as well.  He seemed to have a cool head and was driven, exactly what you would expect from his position.  I will also add I really liked most of the cameos (as mentioned the droids excepted) but especially liked Red and Yellow leaders and really liked seeing Bail Organa again.

Unfortunately, I was not as impressed with the main characters.  Jyn was just okay.  Maybe it’s bad comparing her to Rey, but she’s clearly not as interesting.  For someone who’s supposed to be strong, trained by a military expert, she doesn’t do that much (except one scene in Jedha).  Cassian has the problem of peaking early, like his first scene.  I felt like there was great potential for a character there – a good guy who is willing to do whatever it takes to succeed, even killing a “friend” – but it was not fully explored.  I wanted to like both of them, and it’s not that I did not like them, just that I wanted more.

This leads me to one of my biggest problems with the movie.  I really did not like the CGI Tarkin and Leia, and thought they distracted from what was going on.  When at first they only showed Tarkin from behind, I thought it would work well.  As soon as they showed his face, I thought it looked bad, like those bad Zemeckis CGI movies.  I really wish they had not gone with it.

Let’s talk about the music.  I was kind of bummed when they replaced Alexandre Desplat.  After his Godzilla, I was interested to hear what he came up with.  I wonder if he recorded anything that we can hear?  That being said, they found the perfect replacement.  In fact, from the beginning I had assumed that if Williams didn’t score Star Wars, Giacchino would be the best replacement.  After all, he became famous by being a Williams-lite with the video games of The Lost World and Medal of Honor (which sounds very much like Saving Private Ryan).  First listen in the movie, I was a bit underwhelmed.  But then again, I said the same thing with The Force Awakens.  After a second viewing and listening to the score, I will say it’s a good addition to the best scored franchise.  He throws in the famous Williams themes at appropriate moments, and I really liked the transition of the original Darth Vader theme into the Imperial theme when Krennic meets Vader. It's especially impressive since he only had just over a month to compete it.

Now, the two biggest positives.  First, it ended up being what I hoped it would be.  For the first time, I felt like I was watching a war in the stars.  Some people say it lagged a bit in the middle.  I did not think it was that bad, and anyways the final act is fantastic.  In some ways, it reminded me of Return of the Jedi (that’s a good thing) with the relentless final third of action.  And it wasn’t just action for action sake.  It also thankfully avoided a trope I really dislike; I call it going “Phantom Menace”, where everyone seems to be done at the same time before they all turn it around and save the day (see also: The Avengers).  Oh, and I was really looking forward to the AT-ACT beach scene, and while it wasn't long it was good.

Which leads me to my second biggest positive: they did not hesitate to kill everyone off.  I was worried about this, especially knowing Disney had a hand in it.  Not everything has a have a happy ending, in fact the best Star Wars movie (see below) obviously did not.  Not that Rogue One has a “sad” ending, but it’s certainly not happy for everyone.  I’m very glad they went that route.

Some people are upset with the very end, saying it makes the beginning of A New Hope not make sense.  He just saw them leave, why is Vader questioning them then?  Two points: I doubt A New Hope happens right afterward (after all, Tatooine is probably far away from Scarif).  Also, the Corellian Corvette is not a unique ship, in fact there are many, so it would probably take them awhile to track down the right one.

So, the movie is not perfect of course.  There are a few somewhat major faults.  Overall, the greatness definitely outweigh the problems.  I give it a solid 8 out of 10.

And now, let’s look at the franchise.  The definitive ranking of the Star Wars movies, which could very easily change as soon as you read this:

1.      The Empire Strikes Back

No surprise here.  Everyone knows it’s the best, the most perfect.

2.      A New Hope

Picking the second best is actually the most difficult choice.  I have this #2 because it’s the one that made it all happen.  If it wasn’t this good, we wouldn’t have the rest.

3.       Rogue One

I really have changed this ranking at least 6 times since I saw it the first time, everywhere from #2 to #5.  I’m pretty happy with it here, though again it’s pretty flexible.  The biggest thing is, as I said, the strengths greatly outweigh the weaknesses.

4.       Return of the Jedi

Proving I have no bias, this has always been my favorite movie, because it showcases my favorite character (Luke) in the best way.  It still does not get any better than the fight at the Sarlacc Pit.  The ewoks (and Han not flying the Millennium Falcon) are the only thing keeping this from being #2.

5.      The Force Awakens

I really like this movie, and it’s hard to have it this low.  I have no problems with it being a “rehash” of A New Hope.  In fact, I thought that was a good thing.  I liked all the new characters.  It left me wanting more (I’ve always said if Episode 8 was in the next theater I would have immediately gone there).  The only real problem with it is that terrible rathtars scene.

6.      Revenge of the Sith

I really like this movie, and nearly had it higher.  The Obi Won/Anakin duel is one of the best scenes in the franchise.  Unfortunately it comes right after “Anakin, you’re breaking my heart.”  I also really like the ruthless Anakin in the Jedi Temple.  Also, the opening space battle is the best space battle in the franchise.

7.      Attack of the Clones

Some people have this as the worst, but I cannot do that.  This is the most extreme of the movies.  On the one hand, I love the Kenobi spy storyline.  On the other hand, that love story.  Ugh.  The Kenobi story and Yoda’s lightsaber fighting make this clearly not the worst.

8.      The Phantom Menace

Jar Jar, young Anakin, politics, just bad.  Then there’s the final battle, where two-thirds of it is atrocious but the Darth Maul fight is the best in the franchise.  So it’s not all bad.

Passengers: Movie Review

It’s been a long time, between a hectic end of semester and Christmas break at home (where I never get anything done, even when all I set for myself was to learn the Latin Mass parts for the server) I just haven’t had time to write anything.  So I’m back, at least for now.

I finally got to see Passengers.  This was a movie I was very much looking forward to, even despite the poor reviews.  I was hooked from the trailers: a relatively new concept for science fiction (though similar to a story I had thought about for the past decade or so), two of my favorite actors, and sleek-looking trailers.  I wanted the movie to be good, though tempered after the aforementioned reviews.

To put it simple, I thought it was…not bad.  Let me start with some of the positives.  (Spoilers follow)

As would be expected, the acting was quite good.  Chris Pratt has proven to be able to do just about anything.  He was believable as a man stuck by himself in his desperation.  Jennifer Lawrence was also quite good, though somewhat going through the motions.  In other words, she was more Hunger Games and less Silver Linings Playbook.  That being said, I bought their relationship.

It was also a very good looking movie.  The special effects were very good, especially the water bubble when they lose gravity and the star as they fly by.  I also really liked the look of the ship, it was pretty different from what we’re used to.

As would be expected, Thomas Newman brings the goods, though as at least one review stated it was mixed a little loud at times.  We’re moving into the good-bad parts of the movie.

The tempo was a little off.  This is something that I will get into more after the review, but there were aspects that I would really have liked them to deal with more.  For instance, there is a huge ethical dilemma in the movie. Chris Pratt is so isolated he nearly kills himself.  I can buy that.  He stumbles upon a girl who attracts him, and he “falls in love” with her.  All good.  Then you have the huge ethical dilemma: go crazy by himself or doom someone else to die by waking them up?  They deal with it a little, but not nearly as much as it needed to be.  That being said, I thought Pratt did a great job of expressing the inner turmoil, especially after she wakes up, until she finally says “thank you.”

There are always the problems of convenience.  It’s a good thing he’s a mechanical engineer, so he can fix things.  It’s a good thing the one crew member wakes up so he can help them just when they need it.  Again, I know in each movie there will be conveniences, this just got to me a little bit.

There’s also the bad science.  Hearing the space collisions at the beginning of the movie, especially after Gravity did it so well a few years ago, was a bit disappointing.  Then there’s the whole “death and resurrection” of Pratt at the end.  The science was overall a little too Hollywood.

There’s also the stakes.  You don’t every really feel worried about them.  The trailers told you pretty much everything that’s going to happen, so no surprises.  It’s all a bit paint-by-numbers, which is disappointing especially after we’ve seen a slate of good science fiction movies in recent years with similar themes (Moon, Gravity, Interstellar, etc).  I just expected more.

So, in the end I think it’s good, but had the potential to be so much more.  There’s nothing really “bad” about it, but it also doesn’t really stand out.  I’d give it a 7 out of 10.

Now, as I was driving from the theatre thinking about it, I think I figured out how it could have been much better.  In effect, there was too much story for a two hour movie.  It really should have been a television event, like an 8-10 episode series like Stranger Things or something.  Here’s how I would envision it:

The pilot sets up the whole story.  It’s basically the first half of the first act of the movie.  The Avalon is travelling in space, something happens, and Pratt wakes up.  The rest of the episode is him trying to figure out what went wrong.  It ends with the bartender telling him to live a little.

The second episode is him living a little.  It gives you (and him) time to explore the place.  But it also shows how tedious it all is, how even in the fun he feels the isolation.  End with his spacewalk and near suicide.

The third episode introduces Aurora.  One day she’s just all of a sudden there as Pratt is walking around the station (the original screenplay had the reveal of him waking her up in the final act-which would have been much better).  He is cautiously happy to have a companion, while she is going through all of the problems he had in the first couple of episodes.  He helps her realize more quickly that they’re in it together.

The fourth episode is the relationship episode.  They fall in love with each other and everything is great.  It ends with some kind of problem on the ship.

The fifth episode is them working together to temporarily fix whatever is wrong, but realize it’s just a patch.  This episode ends with the big reveal that he woke her up.  Just when things seem bright, they get darker and darker.

The sixth episode is their estrangement.  It really gives time to explore both sides of the moral dilemma.  Why did he do it?  How does she respond?  This is probably the most interesting episode.

The seventh episode introduces the crew member.  He’s not going to be just a convenience; he’s going to stick around a little while.  A third wheel, making their relationship even more strained.  Meanwhile the ship is in it bad.  Things are failing all over.  Basically this is the first half of the final act of the movie.

The eighth episode resolves the problem.  They have to work together, maybe the crew member dies in the accident (not because of health problems, something dramatic), and Aurora realizes she cannot go it alone.  The thing is, she needs him more out of human necessity, not the new found love as in the movie.  They fix the ship, but there is still tension.  They should not be in love with each other in the end, but more stuck in this thing together.  That’s more realistic.  End on a semi-happy survival note.

Then it could be really interesting to see more of what happens.  I would love another season or more, but I think it would be cool if future seasons were a mix between the two on the ship and the future on Homestead II.  Someone is reading her story (so their timeline is flashbacks) as they are settling the new world.  That would really expand the whole story and make it more compelling.  Anyways, I know this isn’t going to happen, but I still think it would be interesting.

I think that’s enough on Passengers for now.  Next I need to see Rogue One again so I can properly rank the Star Wars movies as they currently stand.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe

Now that I have seen Doctor Strange, and we have about 6 months until the next movie, I wanted to give my two cents about the Marvel Cinematic Universe.  Let me state this upfront: I think overall it's very overrated.  Yes, there are a couple of good to great movies.  The majority, however, are average or worse.  The most interesting, for sure, have been the "different" ones.  The strongest aspect of it has been the casting.  Nearly all have been great.  Of course, there are two giant flaws.  First, as many people have said, the villains are largely forgettable.  Because they are forgettable, the final battles are all the same and not that interesting.  The second biggest problem, overall, is the music.  There are a couple of good themes (Captain America) and a couple of good scores (Ant Man) but most are disappointing.  That means a lot to me.

So let's look at the movies:

Bad:

Iron Man 2 (2010)

            The worst of the bunch.  It completely fell flat.  The villains were terrible.  Huge disappointment, especially after the first.

Thor: The Dark World (2013)

            One of those movies that is completely forgettable.  Another in a long line of "blue guy" villains and energy beams. 

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

            Blatant anti-Church themes aside, this was a total misfire.  Hey, I know, let's take a 15 minute pause for no reason in the middle of the story to hang out at a farm.  That's a great idea.

Ok:

The Incredible Hulk (2008)

            I'm a fan of the Ang Lee Hulk, so I was probably more disappointed than most with this one.  The same problem as the first Iron Man: watching a villain who is exactly the same as the hero slug it out is boring.

The Avengers (2012)

            Some people say this is the best, I say it's cliched and predictable.  The final big battle has no stakes because I knew exactly what was going to happen.  Only saving grace was Hulk Smash.

Iron Man 3 (2013)

            Definitely better than the second one, but still missing something that could have made it a lot better.  I wasn't too disappointed with the whole Mandarin thing, and I thought Guy Pierce was better than most villains (not surprising).

Good:

Captain America: The First Avenger (2011)

            I really wanted to like this movie.  I think the concept was good.  A traditional Captain America World War II story.  The problem is, I hardly ever think, "man, I really want to watch that."

Thor (2011)

            The first stretch for the MCU, it was done very well by Kenneth Branagh.  Perhaps the best supporting cast of any of the movies.  Plus, the introduction of Hawkeye.

Ant-Man (2015)

            A fun heist movie with a very good cast.  Michael Pena is probably the best supporting character of them all.  But again, the villain is "meh."

Doctor Strange (2016)

            Quite a ride.  The graphics are breathtaking in many scenes.  The cast is solid.  All around, a very good addition.

Iron Man (2008)

            The one that kicked it off, with the "real" Rhodey.  It's good it worked or this whole thing would have crashed on takeoff.  Robert Downey Jr. was, of course, perfect.

Great:

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

            A great Cold War type spy movie.  People like to dump on Captain America for some reason, but his is one of the few (if only) trilogies that got better with each installment.  The only truly great non-Loki villain, and there's two of them.

Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

            Just fun, and a complete shock to most.  It even gets over some of the usual bumps (forgettable villain, sky machine) because it's so fun.

Captain America: Civil War (2016)

            My pick for best of them all because it's the best overall.  The airport scene (yes, some people say there's no stakes because friends are pulling punches) is one of the best scenes in any superhero movie.

A brief look at the scores (not a great track record):

5 Good Ones:

Thor (Patrick Doyle)

Ant-Man (Christophe Beck)

The Incredible Hulk (Craig Armstrong)

Captain America: Civil War (Henry Jackman)

Doctor Strange (Michael Giacchino)

A Good Theme and Not Much Else:

Iron Man (Ramin Djawadi)

Captain America (Alan Silvestri)

The Avengers (Alan Silvestri)

Not Bad, But Nothing To Write Home About:

Iron Man 2 (John Debney)

Iron Man 3 (Brian Tyler)

Thor: The Dark World (Brian Tyler)

Captain America; Winter Soldier (Henry Jackman)

Guardians of the Galaxy (Tyler Bates)

Avengers: Age of Ultron (Brian Tyler and Danny Elfman)

2016 Season Review and Postseason Preview

Well, the 2016 regular season is over.  It was, without a doubt, the most disappointing season I can remember...ever.  At least as an Astros fan.  They've had worse years, definitely, but never one that fell so short of expectations.  But let's look beyond that.  First, let's see how I did with my predictions:

AL East

Toronto - building on last year

Baltimore - I liked their additions

Boston - Price was a good pickup, but too high a price (HA!)

New York - old men get older

Tampa Bay - still a year or two away

Well now, I was close.  The top three are all in the playoffs, just not in that order.  Not bad.

AL Central

Kansas City - love this team makeup

Cleveland (Wild Card) - a solid young team

Detroit - do they have enough?

Chicago - good pieces don't add up

Minnesota - not enough

Nobody saw that many injuries for KC.  Besides that, I was pretty much dead on.

AL West

Houston - too much talent not to

Texas (Wild Card) - a healthy year for a strong team

Los Angeles - somewhat of a mess

Oakland - always in the chase

Seattle - King Felix no more

Oy.  Freaking Rangers playing way above their stats.  Freaking Astros being the Astros.  This was way off.

So I successfully picked 3 of 5 playoff teams, though two division leaders I had in the Wild Card.  Not bad.

NL East

Washington - only Matt Williams could fail with this much talent

New York (Wild Card) - fantastic starting rotation and just enough offense

Miami - if Giancarlo can stay healthy

Philadelphia - rebuilding mode

Atlanta - blowup mode preparing for new stadium

Perfect!  Even the Mets in the Wild Card!

NL Central

Chicago - drinking the Cool-Aid

Pittsburgh - a tough division means they just miss Wild Card for first time in four years

St. Louis - because they can't keep winning

Milwaukee - trying to copy the Astros

Cincinnati - Votto is gone by the All Star Break

Again, flip Pittsburgh and St. Louis and this one is perfect, even with the second place team just missing the Wild Card!

NL West

Los Angeles - they eventually have to live up to the hype

San Francisco (Wild Card) - because it's an even year

Arizona - Pollock injury crushes them

San Diego - not much to see here

Colorado - even less here once CarGo leaves

Top two are perfect.  You know what that means?  I was 5-5 with NL playoff predictions!

ALCS - Houston over Toronto

NLCS - Washington over Chicago

World Series - Houston over Washington (complete homer pick, I hope it is not a jinx)

What a way to jinx!  Next year, I'll pick the Astros to go 0-162.  Yeah, that'll work.

Anyways, here's my look at the postseason:

AL Wild Card:

TOR over BAL

            A tough one to call, with Toronto's experience against a better starter for the Orioles.  Usually you go starter, but in this case I'm going with the home team.

NL Wild Card:

SF over NY

            Again tough, but this time I'm going with pitching.  How can you pick against freakin' Bumgarner?

ALDS:

TOR over TEX

            Somewhat wishful thinking, somewhat expecting the Rangers to play as they did against every team not named "Astros."

CLE over BOS

            Boston's offense is fantastic, but the Indians have a better team.

NLDS:

WSH over LA

            At some point they have to play up to expectations, right?  The loss of Ramos really hurts, though.

CHI over SF

            Mostly because I cannot abide another Giants playoff run.

ALCS:

TOR over CLE

            The Blue Jays get hot and keep rolling.

NLCS:

WSH over CHI

            What should be a great championship series comes down to the wire, and Harper plays hero.

World Series:

WSH over TOR

            I'm sticking with my Nationals World Series pick, and when it comes to the Series I have to go US over Canada.

Awards picks:

AL ROY:  Gary Sanchez

NL ROY:  Corey Seager

AL Cy Young:  Corey Kluber

NL Cy Young:  Kyle Hendricks

AL MVP:  Jose Altuve

NL MVP:  Kris Bryant

A Look at Stranger Things

This week, after hearing all kinds of good things about it, I finally watched Stranger Things.  If you haven't heard about it, don't worry, it's only the biggest series this summer.  Two episodes each day for four days.  Let me cut to the quick: there's a lot of good and some not so good in this series.

The Good:

One thing entertainment is supposed to do is hook you, leave you wanting more. Or in the case of a series, leaving you wanting to continue watching.  This had it in spades.  A lot of it had to do with the mystery.  Just what the heck is going on?  Then, once you pretty much know where it's going, the characters and the story are good enough to keep you coming back. 

Another thing entertainment is supposed to do is keep you thinking about it after you've finished.  Again, yes.  A couple of days after I finished it, I'm still thinking about it, still reading about it, still watching videos about it on Youtube, I even went back to watch the beginning of the first episode to see the introduction of the characters for a second time.  I'm not obsessed, but it did leave me thinking about it and wanting more.

The characters are pretty good and memorable as well.  Part of this is the writing, a lot of it is the actors.  In fact, I would say in general the child actors were better than the adults.  In recent memory, I can only think of Super 8 as a story with better children actors.

There was just enough comedy sprinkled in to make me laugh at times.  There were two things in particular that worked for me.  One was the interplay between the kids when they weren't yelling at each other, just being friends.  Especially when they're being nerds (remember kids, in the 80s nerds were not cool!) and quoting Lord of the Rings (Mirkwood) and Star Wars (Lando!).  Probably my favorite quote I won't get right but it was something like "going against that with a wrist rocket is like R2D2 fighting Darth Vader."  That really made me laugh.  Then there were the deputies reactions to the bully.  "She can...make you piss yourself."  "What?!?!"

Then there's the 80s nostalgia.  They pretty much hit on everything.  It felt like the 80s, and I especially loved the "vintage" look titles.

  But this is where the good starts to blend with the not so good.  There's a fine line between paying homage to a time, and relying on/depending on period clichés.  This came very close to crossing that line.

Another era, related to the last, that comes verges on transitioning to bad is the myriad of homages.  Again, some are good, too many are too many, and it's close.  I get that they were going for a Spielberg/Goonies/Stephen King feel, and they definitely got there, but it bordered on completely unoriginal and hackneyed.  At one point, (MILD SPOILER) when they're on the bikes riding away from the vans, I was waiting for the E.T. music to cue up.  But overall, it's ok.

The Bad:

One problem with these kind of horror shows is they can become to formulaic.  There were a couple of times when it fell into that trap.  There were a few too many times when I knew exactly what was going to happen because that's what happens.  It was especially apparent at the end of episodes, when you could tell they were about to wrap up but then had to throw in a mini cliffhanger to make you want to watch more.  Guess what: by the end of the second episode, I'm in.  You don't need to "shock" me for me to come back.  Never mind the end of the seventh.

Then there's the ending of the series.  I really don't know why horror feels like they have to have an open ending like that.  Maybe I'm in the minority, but I actually would have preferred if they ended the series, no cliffhangers, and then had a second series that was completely different.  No continuing story.  No continuing characters.  Like an Outer Limits or Twilight Zone or I guess American Horror Story  (I've never watched it so I'm just guessing there) where each series is independent.  The only common thread being some kind of weird supernatural/science fictiony mystery.

The monster/the upside down.  The concept in the end is not terrible, just at times it wasn't scary enough.  The monster itself wasn't that interesting.  By the end of the series I knew the main characters were going to make it.  I knew they wouldn't kill any of the kids.  I knew Wynona Rider and the sheriff were going to make it.  So while I was still interested in seeing what would happen, it wasn't as edge-of-your-seat as it could have been with higher stakes.

SO

In the end, it does what it's supposed to do.  It's entertaining, interesting, keeps you hooked, and makes you think about it.  But it's not perfect.  It relies just a tad too much on 80s nostalgia.  It sticks a little too close to horror genre clichés.  But I am definitely excited about a second season.

B+