A game review? Objection!

January 17th, 2010

Phoenix Wright: Ace AttorneySure, why not? It’s not as though you, my dear readers, are under any delusion that this blog is purely about books any more :-)

Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney on the Nintendo DS doesn’t fall too far from the tree anyway, since within its interactive nature lurks a linear narrative. It’s not exactly a recent release either, considering that it was originally released in Japan way back in 2001 (isn’t it funny that the early 2000’s seem so long ago now?) More recently, it was updated for Nintendo’s new touchscreen platform and translated into English. The game consists of 5 loosely inter-related cases, where the eponymous lawyer must outwit his opponent and out the truth.

The graphics are simplistic, with each character having only a few frames of animation to show emotions such as triumph, remorse, shock, etc. The bulk of the storytelling is left to the dialogue, which is surprisingly competent, even with some of the lines and jokes which must have been quite difficult to translate well from the original Japanese version.

It should be no surprise that the experience is nothing like a real courtroom trial. Progressing through the game is mostly a matter of deduction, matching up various clues with holes in the witness testimonies and calling them out as “Objections”. Sometimes the game’s linear nature can make for frustrating play, as what might seem logical isn’t expected to unfold until later in the storyline and you’re left to figure out exactly what it is that you’re supposed to be discovering.

I found the stories just entertaining enough to keep me plodding through the game structure, but I could see how others might prefer to just read their stories unfettered by a game mechanic that, ultimately, is designed to impeded progress. If that’s you, maybe you should just stick with books. Then again, this game is nearing 10 years old – an eternity in the medium, and newer titles in the series (including a follow-on starring a different lawyer, Apollo Justice) may have improved on the forumla. Well worth picking up if you can find it on the cheap, purely for the novelty value of yelling “Objection!” into your DS and getting a reaction.

Bookmark and Share

It’s like, that movie…

January 4th, 2010

Avatar movie logo

I won’t write a whole lot about James Cameron’s latest, Avatar, because the following diagram sums up almost exactly how I feel about the movie (courtesy of Aurich Lawson, from Ars Technica):

A Venn diagram of Dances With Wolves, Fern Gully, Dune with Avatar in the middle

Avatar: the Venn diagram

It just seems as if storywriters cobbled together elements from many popular movies (look in the comments, especially) and added a huge dose of incredible 3D imagery – akin to hanging Monica Bellucci’s beautifully voluptuous body on Kate Moss’s scrawny skeleton. The movie is still entertaining – as the huge box office opening numbers attest – and the world of Pandora is certainly compelling, but time will tell whether this particular chapter of its history will have the same legs as Cameron’s previous work in the genre such as Terminator and Alien.

Watch it and make up your own mind, but if you do, definitely go for a 3D session otherwise you’d be missing out on one of the most compelling things about this movie.

Bookmark and Share

Holmes, Holmes on the range

December 30th, 2009

Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson

Sherlock Holmes movie poster

Sherlock Holmes, starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law, is one of the recent crop of sexed up literary classics such as The Picture of Dorian Gray, and Tim Burton’s upcoming Alice in Wonderland. This movie is surely conceived for the current generation, with its slow-motion flashbacks accompanied by a narration of how-it-works; you could be forgiven for thinking that this is a new CSI: Ye Olde England.

Director Guy Ritchie has delivered us a quick-thinking, fast-talking, and hard-hitting Holmes. Without having actually read the books, I’d hazard a guess that they’ve made a valiant effort to retain the spirit of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s work, but have sadly taken the liberty of emphasising the characters’ physical prowess as much as their intellectual capabilities. Regardless, Holmes solves mysteries by being a superlative detective, with or without biffo, and I found the movie to be agreeable, with Downey Jr. an inoffensive Holmes, and Jude Law playing the affable but beleaguered Watson perfectly.

However, there were two things that really, truly irked me in Sherlock Holmes, although they weren’t problems with the movie, per se:

1. The blatant declaration of franchise
It seems that a Hollywood movie wont’ be bankrolled these days unless it’s a sequel, or could potentially spawn sequels. When was the last time you saw a movie whose title doesn’t contain a numeral (deliberate attempts to avoid this, such as The Dark Knight notwithstanding)? Sherlock Holmes brings this to a new low, by incorporating Holmes’ arch-nemesis Professor Moriarty into the plot right from the get-go, but not resolving that particular part of the storyline.

2. It’s all about America
In the middle of the movie, the film’s antagonist Lord Blackwood delivers his monologue about the fruits of his nefarious plan, about how the “new colonies” are weak from civil war, how their government is just as crappy as the British one, and how by taking over both he will rule the world. It’s as if everything that happens up until then doesn’t matter, but once their precious country is threatened, that’s the moment when the penny drops and the duh-merican thinks to themselves “hoo boy, that’s why his ass needs a-whuppin’!”

Why is it that America is always depicted as “the world”? It’s as if the average citizen can’t fathom how a foreign person could conceivably do significant evil to the world if it’s not a threat to the U.S. of A. Take Quentin Taratino’s Inglourious Basterds – they even had to insinuate themselves into history of Nazi Germany. Sadly, I’m sure that if pressed, they would just retort that America makes movies for America, and if you don’t like it go and make your own… except that they ripped off Sherlock Holmes from the British. Oh well, I’m sure the irony is lost on Hollywood. At least they have the decency to make their movies entertaining, unlike Australian ones.

Bookmark and Share

What’s the catch?

December 28th, 2009
The cover of 'Catcher in the Rye' by J.D. Salinger

Dunno why the carousel horse was significant enough to warrant being depicted on the cover

Reviewing a literary classic is fraught with danger, if only because there’s bound to be loads of stuff I miss – captured by decades of academic scrutiny – making me seem unlearned. Yet any serious reader, especially geeky ones, can’t ignore the classics… ahem… especially if you couldn’t be bothered going out to buy or borrow a book after you’d finished your previous one, and your wife just so happens to have a copy (no, I’m not reading Pride and Prejudice, er… again.)

This is my first time reading J.D. Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye, a book relentlessly studied in high schools, but not one that I ever came across in my schooling. Maybe because I imagined that I’d have to turn in an essay after reading it (which this review is, in a way), I approached the book with an analytical eye, but unsure of what to look for exactly. This is most likely why I found it difficult to like when I first started reading – the language was too old-school for my tastes, the main character was particularly odious, and it seemed to be completely lacking in plot.

But there’s just something about Holden Caufield’s story, isn’t there? It’s not that the character himself is likeable per se, but in the glimpse that you get of the world through his eyes, you start to see a little of your own world – the ever-present malaise affecting society that’s bubbling just below the surface. Salinger doesn’t claim to have the answer, which is largely why I found the book so unsatisfying initially, but he does manage to impart some timeless wisdom to eternally disaffected youth through these words spoken by Mr. Antonlini:

‘Among other things, you’ll find that you’re not the first person who was ever confused and frightened and even sickened by human behaviour. You’re by no means alone on that score, you’ll be excited and stimulated to know. Many, many men have been just as troubled morally and spiritually as you are now. Happily, some of them kept records of their troubles. You’ll learn from them – if you want to. Just as some day, if you have something to offer, someone will learn something from you.’

There’s something wonderfully recursive about that quote, given that the story is written in the first person from Holden’s perspective. And that seems to be the crux of it. The book isn’t so much a story as it is parable for misguided young persons.

If I was writing an essay, that would be my conclusion. What do you think… would I have passed?

Bookmark and Share

Imagine if…

November 29th, 2009
The otherworldly-looking Lily Cole

The otherworldly Lily Cole

You will quite likely have heard of The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, probably because Heath Ledger died of an accidental drug overdose during its filming. Ledger’s death also occurred at around the same time that he was being lauded for his superb performance as The JokerĀ  in The Dark Knight, further increasing the anticipation for this movie.

Without wanting to make it a recurring theme here at GeekReads, I tell you: don’t let yourself get affected by the hype. Parnassus is a clever and entertaining movie and Ledger is good in the lead role of Tony, a disgraced charity mogul being used as a pawn in a bet between Mr. Nick (the devil) and the doctor, but it’s not a performance that will win him the same accolades that he received for playing the deranged nemesis of Batman (inevitable awards given as a posthumous “tribute” notwithstanding). Nevertheless, I still much prefer Heath Ledger to Eric Bana, who can’t seem to shake off his “Australian-ess”.

The rest of the cast – including the very exotic looking and doll-like Lily Cole (Valentina), and Verne Troyer (Percy), who must be the only short-statured actor who can act if his ubiquity is anything to go by – play their roles well, and provide plenty of circus freak-show moments to keep the movie interesting. Unfortunately, the characters never quite fit together, and lack the chemistry necessary to hook you into the story emotionally. Completing the triangle with Tony and Valentina is Anton (Andrew Garfield), an orphan adopted by Dr. Parnassus, who is more annoying buffoon than viable love interest.

The look and feel is hard to describe, but the feel of the movie is dirty, gritty and gypsy-ish – the seedy bits somewhere in between past and present London, although it is set in modern times. In contrast, the bright and surreal scenes inside the Imaginarium take some getting used to, and like the characters (or maybe because of the characters) vary greatly in consistency. The movie certainly lives up to its name though, with lots of very imaginative sets, costumes and visuals.

The four Tonys: Heath, Johnny, Colin and Jude

The four Tonys: Heath, Johnny, Colin and Jude

Mention must be made of the stand-in actors – Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell and who donated their time and effort to help complete the movie (their fees are being donated to a trust fund for Ledger’s daughter, Matilda). Each of them does a marvellous job of channelling Ledger. Personally, I thought Johnny Depp did the best job.

I really do wonder how the movie would have turned out had Heath Ledger lived. The ending did feel somewhat tacked on, and I never did quite figure out whether I was supposed to like or hate Tony. Surprisingly, Parnassus is an original idea from (director) Terry Gilliam and Charles McKeown, so maybe a few years down the track they’ll do a remake using the original concept.

If you do go see this, try not to think of it as “Heath’s last movie”. You’ll enjoy it more.

Bookmark and Share