There_Is_No_Sayid Reviews

Boston Strangler (2023)

A decent production brought down by conspiracy mongering

[5/10 · 19 March 2023]

From a production standpoint this is a decent film. The film does underuse the amazing Carrie Coon, but Keira Knightly gives a good performance and the direction is moody and atmospheric. The violence which we do get to see is disturbing without being sensationalized, romanticized, or sexualized.

But the film is brought down by the script. Another review I saw said that the movie wants to be Zodiac, the David Fincher masterpiece which is also about the search for a serial killer. That assessment is plainly true after watching the film. Much of it is clearly inspired by Zodiac, from the Fincher-esque muted palette, to the false leads about possible suspects. There's even a scene where Knightley goes to question a possible suspect and has to excuse herself when things get creepy. It's virtually identical to a scene in Zodiac with Jake Gyllenhaal doing the same thing.

The problem is that the Boston Strangler case is not the same as the Zodiac. The Zodiac killings were never solved. We don't know who did it. So the speculative nature of Fincher's film makes sense. That film even refuses to definitively accuse the person it posits as the most likely suspect. In contrast, we know who did the Boston Strangler killings: Albert De Salvo. He confessed to the killings at the time and was linked definitively to them through DNA evidence in 2013. Unlike the 1960s film starring Tony Curtis and Jimmy Stewart, this movie doesn't show us DeSalvo or mention his name until more than halfway through it's run time, a nice choice in my opinion, although one which also echoes Zodiac's treatment of Arthur Lee Allen. But the problem becomes that once DeSalvo is captured and confesses, the film spends a substantial amount of time, around quarter of its run time, pushing the idea that DeSalvo wasn't the killer and that someone else was, perhaps DeSalvo's cell mate, or a man who was arrested for similar crimes in Michigan. The idea that DeSalvo might have been innocent of the Strangler killings (he definitely committed other crimes including the serial rapes he was convicted for) was a popular one for many decades because the main evidence against him was his confession, which some people felt may have been coached or coerced. But that uncertainty went out the window with the DNA evidence linking him to the crime and it's irresponsible for them to push this other notion.

Furthermore, the film misses the thematic underpinnings of Zodiac. That film was about the uncertainty of knowledge and the toll which obsession with the case takes on those involved. This film eschews most of that in favor of a more traditional tale of journalistic striving for the truth. It hits some of the obligatory tropes of that genre, such as a few scenes where we see the strain on Knightley's marriage from working too hard, but in contrast to Zodiac, it portrays her obsessive quest for a solution as healthy and heroic. That makes the indeterminacy and conspiracy mongering of the film more problematic.

She-Hulk: Attorney at Law (2022)

The weakest of the MCU shows.

[5/10 · 14 October 2022]

I am a huge fan of Tatiana Maslany from her work on Orphan Black, so i was excited by her casting in this show. And Maslany does fine work, even if the nature of the show doesn't give her quite the range of material to work with as her multi-role part on Orphan Black did. But the show has a number of problems which her acting can't really overcome.

It's clear that the creators were trying to do a different kind of MCU show, one focused less around superheroics and action sequences. Jen says in the pilot that she's not a superhero and has no intentions of becoming a super hero. And she largely sticks to this throughout the show. There are a few action sequences with her, mostly brief ones, and she eventually does acquire a super-suit, but they never go full tilt into super heroics and keep the show mostly centered around the non-action content.

A lot of fans hate this aspect of the show. They wanted something more traditionally in the MCU, with She-Hulk busting heads and taking on some Big Bad at the end (an expectation which the finale mocks). But I think that it's admirable that they're trying to tell a different type of story within the MCU. One of the more interesting aspects of the show is how it gives us a more ground level, slice-of-life look at the MCU, a world which is, in some ways, like our own, but filled with magic and super powers and alien weapons and stuff. It makes decent use of a bunch of C and D list Marvel characters to show us the lives of folks who may have super powers but aren't particularly super at using them. In this sense, it's actually much more mundane than the Netflix Marvel shows like Daredevil, which were supposed to be a very "ground level" look at the MCU.

The problem is that they don't manage to take this promising, or at least interesting, premise, and make it into a compelling show. The lack of an overarching villain (there is technically one but it's very weak) or plotline probably hurts the show in this regard. Again, I get that they wanted to buck a number of tropes of the MCU, including the use of a central villain who gets defeated triumphantly at the end. But the result is a show which feels disjointed, with the episodes not really relating well to each other. The show certainly could dispense with the overarching plotline and make things episodic, which might be what they were intending, but that also relies on having a strong and compelling storyline within each episode. But that largely doesn't exist here. She-Hulk says in the finale that the show is supposed to be a legal comedy, but the legal cases in the show are mostly lame and don't function well either as drama or comedy.

Part of this is due to the structure of the show itself. We're only given nine episodes, but they waste one of these on an origin story which is largely pointless given the eventual thrust, and apparent goals, of the show. Instead of an origin which could probably have been disposed of in one scene, we're given an extended episode long training montage where Hulk trains Jen in her new powers. Given that super-heroics aren't the focus of the series, why do we need this? All it does it rob valuable time from the show. I mentioned Hulk already, which is probably a good time to mention that the early episodes especially are chock full of guest stars and cameos. She-Hulk even makes fun of this at one point, saying that "This isn't going to be a guest star every episode kind of show". But in the first half of the season it is. We get Hulk, we get Abomination, we get Wong. Like the first episode training montage, all of this really robs time from She-Hulk herself, who often feels like she get short shrift in her own show. It's telling that some of the best bits in the show, like Madisynn ("with two Ns and a Y, but it's not where you thiiiiink!") or Jen's co-workers going on a humorous odyssey to find a super-hero tailor, don't really involve She-Hulk at all.

The finale highlights a bunch of these problems. Coming out of the previous episode, She-Hulk has suffered a big personal setback, but we're not given a whole lot of time to address this, either humorously or dramatically. The episode also features an extended scene with her coworkers infiltrating a meeting which, again, just takes time, and focus, away from Jen herself. The ultimate villain, such as he is, is pretty lame. This is something that She-Hulk actually points out, but lampshading a lame plot point doesn't magically make it not-lame. This leads into an extended sequence where She-Hulk literally breaks the fourth wall, breaking out of the Disney+ menu to confront Marvel Studios about the show. On the one hand, this is cute, and kind of clever, and amusing. On the other hand it also feels a bit indulgent and lazy from the writers, using a literal deus-ex-machina to resolve a meandering and pointless finale. It also feels like it hasn't been set up well enough. Throughout the series, She-Hulk breaks the fourth wall and talks to the audience, acknowledging that she's in a tv show (a bit that they cribbed from the comics). But Jen/She-Hulk doesn't do this consistently enough in the show to really makes this digression in the finale feel like a natural pay off to the show. It also, as I said, robs time from the show that could be better spent on She-Hulk herself, the nominal star of the show. And, again, this is from a plot development that I largely liked. Which demonstrates one of the problems with the show: there's a number of bits here which are interesting or funny individually, but which don't gel into a cohesive whole. The idea of She-Hulk breaking out of the narrative constraints of her show to resolve the ending, is a neat and interesting idea, and on some levels actually works on screen. But without proper build up and pay-off it feels just shoe-horned in.

So, despite a likeable lead actress and character, a promising premise/mission statement, and some individual bits which are pretty good (I also wouldn't mind some, sparing, use of Madisynn in other MCU projects), the show doesn't ever really find its feet and become something cohesive. Perhaps a second season, if we ever get one, will resolve a bunch of these problems.

Licorice Pizza (2021)

The story of a teenage sex pest and the adult woman who inexplicably loves him.

[6/10 · 9 October 2022]

I've been a fan of Paul Thomas Anderson since Hard Eight. I've enjoyed most of his films. But this one left me cold

It's certainly got a vibe to it, and some people will enjoy that. Like many PTA films, it's got a lot of quirky scenes to it, and many of those are individually interesting or compelling. But in films like Magnolia and Boogie Nights there is also a strong plot or theme which links these scenes into a cohesive whole. Here there isn't. Now you could just do a movie which is a slice of life about interesting things which happen. But that depends on the characters being likable, or at least interesting. Here that's not really the case. The main character Gary is supposed to come off as charming but just seems like a jerk and a sex pest. Despite being the central event of the movie, the romance between him and Alana, the adult woman who inexplicably falls for him, is never really explored. Why does she like him and put up with his antics? This is never really answered or even explored. Unlike other PTA movies, like Boogie Nights, there's not really a narrative arc. It rambles along for a while and then just ends.

Stargate Universe (2009–2011)

Not Your Father's Stargate

[8/10 · 3 November 2009]

First off let me say that I was a casual fan of the first two Stargate series. While not "appointment television", they were shows I enjoyed, especially Atlantis, and I'd watch them when I was home. That said, I think that SGU has vastly improved on the brand.

I can understand why some die hard fans of the first two shows are disappointed in SGU. It is a radical departure in style from the first two shows. In fact it was such a departure that I was surprised to find out that the creative team on SGU is identical to the creative team on the previous Stargates. This show owes much more stylistically to Battlestar Galactica, and the premise is similar to that of Star Trek Voyager. The show is more naturalistic in tone and more character driven than the previous two shows. Stargate fans who had become wedded to the idea that there was only one way to do a Stargate show are understandably disconcerted. But understanding doesn't mean that I agree with their criticisms.

The fact is that after ten years of SG1 and five years of Atlantis, the formula which they used was largely played out. There were only so many times that the wise cracking military leader, his science officer, the token woman and the token alien could step through a gate and save the world from English speaking Aliens with odd brow ridges before it got stale. SGU is taking the elements of the Stargate universe and going someplace new, figuratively and literally, with them.

The pilot shows some of the differences. It begins with a bang, with people tumbling out of a stargate in a chaotic mess, no explanation given. What we find out is that a group based on an alien world has been experimenting to dial a special address on the stargate which will lead to an unknown location. On the verge of success they are attacked by alien forces and escape through the stargate. Then end up on a ship, The Destiny, designed millions of years ago and sent out across the universe. They're now galaxies away from Earth and lack the power to get back. Worse yet many of the ships systems are failing. The first three hours deal with their efforts to repair the ships air recycling system. The next two deal with their declining power. The latest episode deals with their lack of water.

The show uses a much more naturalistic filming style than the previous Stargate shows. Lighting is often construct to appear as if it's coming from actual sources. There's high quality sets. We get to see planets that actually look like they might be alien worlds instead of the Canadian woods. The aliens, so far, are appropriately alien looking and not just people with odd brow ridges. The acting is often subtle, especially from Justin Louis as the military commander in charge. The series makes excellent use of their cast of supporting and background characters.

The show perhaps suffers somewhat from seeming too close a riff on Battlestar Galactica which was one of the finest shows of the last decade. SGU isn't there, at least not yet. But it's a fine program, likely the best new show this fall, although that's not necessarily saying much given the slim pickings of the 09 season. But what also needs to be considered is that SGU is much more a Stargate show than a riff on Battlestar. In some ways it's a logical extension of the themes which have been explored in the previous two series and in some ways it's a throwback to the early days of SG1. In the crew of the Destiny we have a small, ill prepared group trying to avoid threats to their lives and explore the universe. This hearkens back to the early days of SG1 when O'Neill and his team lacked infinite resources. At the same time SGU is a culimination of the increasing complexity of human exploration of the universe that was shown in SG1 and especially Atlantis. When SG1 premiered there was a small special forces team going through one Stargate. When Atlantis wrapped production they had expended the universe to include dozens of small bases and a handful of large bases in two galaxies, multiple faster than light starships, and international cooperation on the Stargate. SGU is the culmintation of some of this as it is, in many ways, the least military of any of the Stargate shows, with far more of a civilian presence, and far more discussion of the human implications of both the technology they've discovered and the stresses they're being put under.

Anyone reading this should seriously discount the negative reviews. I believe that many of them are likely sock puppet accounts, but irregardless the show is a quality product which is a worthy addition to the Stargate franchise and to any scifi fans viewing list.