Philosophy to live by
Here are some of my favorite quotes that I try to live my life by, the key here is try. Life is suffering “suffering is caused by selfish craving and personal desire” Memento Mori “You could leave life right now. Let that determine what you do and say and think.” “Do today what must be […]
Here are some of my favorite quotes that I try to live my life by, the key here is try.
Life is suffering
“suffering is caused by selfish craving and personal desire”
Memento Mori
“You could leave life right now. Let that determine what you do and say and think.”
“Do today what must be done. Who knows? Tomorrow, death comes.”
You can only find happiness one place
“It is difficult to find happiness within oneself, but it is impossible to find it anywhere else.”
Love
“Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love; this is the eternal rule.”
“Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not be shortened. Happiness never decreases by being shared.”
“Everything has beauty, but not everyone sees it.”
Don’t worry
“I’ve had a lot of worries in my life, most of which never happened.”
Be authentic
“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.”
“A friend to all is a friend to none.”
Find purpose
“He who has a why to live for can bear almost any how.”
“Purpose is about pursuing something outside yourself as opposed to pleasuring yourself.”
Be present
“If you are depressed you are living in the past. If you are anxious you are living in the future. If you are at peace you are living in the present.”
Keep an open mind
“I would never die for my beliefs because I might be wrong.”
“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.”
Don’t be afraid to look stupid
“The man who asks a question is a fool for a minute, the man who does not ask is a fool for life.”
“He who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions.”
Stand for something
“You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.”
Don’t be angry
“You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger.”
“Holding onto anger is like drinking poison and expecting the other person to die”
Read
“The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.”
Pretentious or not?
Stop using the word pretentious, please I beg you. At this point the word has lost all its meaning a long time ago. People keep using and they keep using it wrong in my opinion. The word gets tossed out when it comes to art and especially movies. Some books might be called pretentious or
Stop using the word pretentious, please I beg you. At this point the word has lost all its meaning a long time ago. People keep using and they keep using it wrong in my opinion. The word gets tossed out when it comes to art and especially movies. Some books might be called pretentious or some games, but the vast majority of times people aim it towards movies especially.
Have you ever heard of music being labeled as pretentious? No, me neither. Movies on the other hand get labeled pretentious all the time. At this point, people aren’t even using it right, when people use the word these days I often think back to a quote in the princess bride. “I don’t think it means what you think it means.” Now let’s take the real definition.
“trying to appear or sound more important or clever than you are, especially in matters of art and literature.”
When people use the word 9 times out of 10 they mean arthouse movies. It’s often David Lynch, Standly Kubric or some other innovative filmmakers people claim to be pretentious. These two directories clearly have a distinctive way of making films, but they also have a vision, and should you chose to analyze their films you would find a lot and I mean A LOT of substance and this is not what pretentious is like, a real example of a pretentious director would be M Night Shyamalan.
So next time you see a slow, dull film that does not make sense at all. Don’t instinctively call it pretentious unless you have the scholarly background to comment on the work, or unless you are one hundred percent sure you know what you are talking about. Just call it boring and slow or whatever you feel regarding the film, but don’t just call it pretentious instinctually since there is a large chance that you are wrong.
It is also hard to prove if something is pretentious, the best you can hope for is a discussion, but the discourse will more likely than not be about defining the word pretentious more than on the film.
Pretentious has a bit of a negative connotation to it at least historically, but now I hear people use it to describe things that are out of the norm and a bit artsy.
Okay, I am going to talk about linguistics now and why words are important, to think it has come to this.
Ludwig Wittgenstein says that language works by triggering pictures of things in the real world. So if I say the word bear you might think of a grizzly bear, a polar bear, or Winnie the pooh, but if you think of a bowling ball then communication breaks down.
Pretentious doesn’t really correlate to something in the real world; the word has therefore been latched onto the type of slow, intellectual films. However, this still means the word is being used wrong.
It is important to use the right words otherwise communication becomes impossible. The problem with this whole Pretentious rant that I am on is not so much that I fear communication breaking down, more than it is about me being annoyed by people using the wrong words.
We all have to follow the same rules when it comes to language and words, otherwise a blog becomes meaningless, and I for some reason do not wish that to happen.
Brave New World is a literary Masterpiece
Brave New World is often compared to 1948, it is easy to see why. The two books touch on a very similar subject matter. They are both about how a futuristic society controls its people. They both have a man as the protagonist feeling out of place, with a feeling that something is wrong with
Brave New World is often compared to 1948, it is easy to see why. The two books touch on a very similar subject matter. They are both about how a futuristic society controls its people. They both have a man as the protagonist feeling out of place, with a feeling that something is wrong with the system. And they were both written by English men, BRITANNIA RULE THE WAVE! I guess.
While the similarities are clear the approach the two books take are completely different. 1984 is about controlling the people with force and fear, While Brave New World is about controlling them with pleasure.
In this post I am going to explore what makes Brave New World a Masterpiece, and not just in the “it’s a classic so it is by default a masterpiece” kind of way.
First, we have to take a look at the author.
Part 1 The author
Who is Aldous Huxley?
Born in 1894 as Aldous Leonard Huxley, in Godalming, Surrey, England.
The first thing about Huxley is that he was very smart and he came from a family that was very intelligent as well. His grandfather was Thomas Henry Huxley, a famous biologist who coined the term agnosticism, ”the doctrine that humans cannot know of the existence of anything beyond the phenomena of their experience” This means you can´t know shit.
His brothers were Sir Julian Huxley a biologist who coined the term Transhumanizme you can read more about it here. And Sir Andrew Fielding Huxley was a physiologist who worked on nerves and muscle fibers.
When Aldous was sixteen he contracted a disease that left him almost totally blind. This is also the reason he did not follow his brothers into the scientific field. Throughout his life, he could only read by straining his eyes, and he could not read for very long at a time. His brother Julian once said that despite this he had an almost unnatural ability to absorb difficult texts with ease.
You might wonder, “Wait, why was Aldous not knighted?”. An excellent question, he refused knighthood because he felt the award would not be compatible with his lifestyle. Which is kind of a boss move.
A random fact:
When he was born his head was too big for his body, so he only learned to walk at two since he kept falling over.
Part 2 the book
Brave New World is an interesting read, like most classic sci-fi the characters are not really the point. While the characters in the novel are interesting in their own right, they are really only there to explore ideas regarding the futuristic dystopia.
If I was to summarize the novel (and I am) the first thing I would say is that the story is about exploring the society Huxley has built. The thing is a lot of things technically happen, yet it feels incredibly light when summarized. This is because there are no “flashy” scenes that are made to draw attention and engage the viewer. The book is an exploration through and through and thus a little light on the plot.
The story centers around Bernard, a brilliant scientist who constantly finds himself not happy with the society around him. He and his friend/girlfriend/it’s complicated Lenia takes a trip to a “savage resort” and meets a savage named John. A savage is basically what you and I would be considered as in this world. They are people born from a mother (I know crazy) who values art, family, and commitment. They live by themself off the grid if you will. Anyways, Bernard brings John back to the civilized world and hilarity ensues, except it’s not that funny. That is more or less what the book is about.
Part 3 The society
The most interesting thing about this book is the way Huxley builds society. He has crafted the world, culture, people, and rules with such care and attention to detail. I will now explore society and try to explain why it is so well made or at least why I think it is well made.
The hard part is where to start. There are so many elements that all feed into each other and make for a great work of art. I guess the proper thing to do is to start where the book itself starts.
The book begins in a lab, where a director-type person is showing a group of students around the fertilizing facilities. See, in this world, people are not born anymore which would be cross and inconvenient. Instead, they are grown in fertilizer machines. Having people be grown instead of birthed makes for a brilliant example of how they have all moved away from nature. The problem is that humans are animals and they need to breed in order to survive. Removing this step is a crucial decision with some major philosophical indications such as, by removing what is natural for a being does it then cease to be that which it originally was? What are the implications and consequences of this? Is nature inherently bad/good? These questions are raised throughout the novel and there is a real tension in the modern world and the more naturalistic world represented by John.
So, babies come from machines and are then categorized into different categories based on what role they can serve in society. The highest rank you can get is Alpha plus and the lowest is Epilos minus.
The different ranks are even color-coordinated
The problem here is evident: you essentially remove all choices from an individual’s life. It is already determined from birth what your job will be, what your intelligence is going to be (remember you are made in a lab), and so on. Your dreams and willingness to work and improve play no role at all.
The age-old question of what is more important nature vs nurture is avoided completely since society conditions you from birth. Let’s look at an example of this in action.
There are newly “born” children sitting on a carpet, the babies are lower in status, so they are Epilos and deltas. The nurses then place books and plants in front of them. When the children go to them they get a minor electric shock through the carpet conditioning them to hate nature and learning.
The troubling part of this is that you can’t be better through hard work and determination. When you are assigned a place in society you have to stick with it with no room for improvement. This goes without saying, but I am going to say it anyway, don’t electrocute babies, it’s wrong.
Interestingly enough one of the characters explains why they have to hate nature. He talks about once they were actually conditioned to like nature. However, they had to stop it because a love of nature doesn’t get people to buy stuff. The whole point is to brainwash people and make them less thinking and feeling so they buy more shit. This is beginning to look like the real world more and more.
Soma - happiness vs freedom
Now to what I consider to be the most important aspect of the book and that is the idea of soma and what it represents. Soma is this drug everybody takes to feel happy, yes you have to take a drug to feel happy. Every time someone is distressed, sad, or even mildly inconvenienced just take some Soma. It is being passed around everywhere and everyone has access to it.
Let’s take a minute to pause and look at what we got so far. First of all, everybody is made in a lab and genetically designed to fit within society. They are then conditioned to like and dislike things based on their place in society. Furthermore, they are given a drug so that they can only feel happy all the time. This is less than ideal. I would say essentially they remove any kind of freedom in order to be happy. The few characters in the book that actually think for themselves are not happy. So the book asks;
“is it better to be free or happy?”
Bernard, who is introduced as someone who is different from the rest, not really fitting in and not conforming as much as the others, refuses to take Soma. This is one of the reasons he is left out of place. He can see the things that are wrong, even though he can’t quite find the words to express this idea.
John the savage comes from the outside and has a clear perspective. At one point he warns everyone to not take Soma, and that it is poison for them and poison for the soul. Everyone else of course thinks he is crazy.
When Bernard and Lenina go to the savage camp Lenina gets so distressed that she takes too much soma and falls asleep. When faced with any kind of distress, just take Soma, are you sad? take Soma, no one is actually feeling happiness through authentic means. A more potent point is that humans need to feel pain; it is part of the human condition. Pain and failure are what makes us grow and become better. How are you going to know happiness if you have nothing to contrast it with?
Sex and commitment
In Brave new world, no one is in a relationship of the traditional kind. Bernard wants to be with Lenina and so does John, but neither of them can have her because relationships are prohibited and as they state multiple times in the book.
“everybody belongs to everyone”
Thus no one can get married, get kids, or start a family. These are all elements vital to our experience as humans today. You might think not being in a relationship with someone is freedom and in a sense it is, but it also takes away your ability to choose a life partner thus limiting your choice and in turn your freedom.
At one point Lenina says that she has been with all the men in her department.
People are very sexually liberated everyone is having sex with everybody. At some point, most of the alphas have gathered in a religious ceremony where they all take Soma and have an orgy, the cue for the orgy to start is that somebody says orgy-porgy.
Shakespeare and art
Art plays a big part in the story or more precisely the lack of art plays a big part. Art such as Shakespeare’s writing is also prohibited in this society. The people live with no art and beauty at all, for admiration for art doesn’t get people to buy stuff.
The lack of art makes for a deeper conflict in terms of the human condition, take my favorite character from the book Helmholtz Watson as an example. Helmholtz is introduced as one of Bernard’s friends if not his only friend. Helmholtz and Bernard both feel empty inside, they both know something is wrong with the way society works, but they can’t put it into words.
Helmholtz talks about how he wants to write something, he wants to get something out, but he is unaware of what it is and how to get it out, it’s this vague feeling of dread.
A side note is that doing the scene where Helmholtz and Bernard talk in the beginning, Bernard suddenly gets paranoid that someone is listening in, he opens the door only to find nothing. This is interesting, for what would the harm be in people listening? It is not clear, but this society does not like people talking bad about it and thus one has to be careful. However, the threat is not as clear as in 1984.
Helmholtz is shown Shakspears’s work by John and is instantly mesmerized by it as if Shakespear was the thing to fill his void. One of the reasons for Helmholtz not being able to write is that he has no reference point, there is no art to get inspired by.
Religion vs Ford
Religion is also a thing that does not exist anymore, for religion according to the book is only for people fearing death. Since no one is worried about anything, you get a job and a social status assigned to you before you are “born”. You don’t have to worry about finding someone because everybody belongs to everyone and if you are just a little distressed you just take Soma and you get to be happy, or you take a lot of Soma and you fall asleep.
There is a very large degree of hypocrisy in that statement, for the people still worship something or rather someone. They all worship Henry Ford as some kind of deity, everyone uses Ford instead of God, people say for Ford’s sake all the time along with his Fordship. In that way Ford has simply replaced God it’s still the same doctrine nothing is actually that different from normal religion.
This worship of Ford further built on the theme of consumerism for what could be more of a critique of capitalism than having everyone literally worship Ford as a God?
John is us
John the savage serves a very important function in the story. John is us, he represents our way of living. He is placed as the outsider in the story, everyone thinks of him as crazy, uncivilized, and stupid. However, he is the voice of reason and sanity for he sees the truth from an outside point of view. He sees how Soma is poison to the soul, as do we. He gets upset when his mother dies, as would we (I hope). He tries his best to warn people, but they are so indoctrinated that they cannot see the problems at all.
Taxicopter
Apparently, Taxicopters are a thing in this book, people use taxicopters to fly around instead of a normal taxi. I guess flying cars was too much of a stretch.
Conclusion
Brave new world is a book that touches upon many different subjects and themes. It weaves all of its ideas together beautifully and with such attention to detail. Everything is expressed through the characters and how they experience the world around them.
I started this post by comparing it to 1948 after all the two books seem like companion pieces at this point. They both depict a future that is, shall we say, less than ideal. They both achieve this in very different ways and here really lies the beauty of Brave new world, see in 1948 it is very clear. You have a totalitarian government that suppresses all citizens with violence. Whereas, the worst thing happening in Brave new world is when Bernard loses his job and gets fired. Now, that might not seem all that bad compared to 1948, however, Bernad falls on his knees and begs not for him to get fired. He also calls out his friends and tries to rat them out so that he can save his own skin. The fact that he would go against his friends so easily only by the mere thought of being ostracized really proves how much the people are being controlled without them even noticing it.
On the surface Brave new world might not look so bad, surely 1948 is a much darker and more hard dystopia, and that might be true, but Brave new world is not just a dystopia. It is a utopia disguised as a utopia, where everything seems perfect, but nothing is.
Freedom has been replaced by happiness, but not just happiness fake manufactured happiness. All throughout the novel, Bernard has this feeling that something is wrong. It’s not something he says more than it is something he feels, everything about him indicates that he knows that something is off, yet he can not express this idea for the fear of being ridiculed or worse. But we never see the “or worse” part and that is the true brilliance of Brave new world and why I consider it a masterpiece.
Never Die is a kickass adventure!
“Never Die” written by Rob J Hayes is an eastern-inspired fantasy novel and it might also be one of the best books to recommend to people who do not read. The book has a nice fast pace, some really cool characters who are a blast to follow and it’s not too long. All these aspects
“Never Die” written by Rob J Hayes is an eastern-inspired fantasy novel and it might also be one of the best books to recommend to people who do not read. The book has a nice fast pace, some really cool characters who are a blast to follow and it’s not too long. All these aspects make it easy to recommend for people who are looking for an action-packed adventure.
The story is about a creepy boy who resurrects strong dead warriors, so that he can make a small team to kill the immortal emperor of ten kings. Now if you think that sounds even remotely cool then I would highly recommend you pick this book up.
The book reads really fast, the action scenes are very well written and fun to read, it feels like you are reading kickass anime. I was never once bored reading the book, but what really makes it all work are the characters.
I am a sucker for a good team story, where you have a team of different types with different abilities and personalities teaming up to achieve a goal. I simply love those kinds of stories. In Never Die you have a master swordswoman, a sarcastic bandit, a fat man who drinks a lot, and many others. They all have different fighting styles making the battles feel fresh every time there is an action scene. However, they all also have different personalities and they play off each other in a very nice and entertaining way.
The book is also self-published so if you want to support an independent artist then this is the way to do it. Rob does a lot for the self-publishing scene, and I think he deserves some support. I am not done with reading his stuff and I have heard that he only gets better and better which is very reassuring.
Velvet Buzzsaw, an arthouse movie about art
Velvet Buzzsaw, let just take in the title for a bit. Velvet, a smooth and soft clothing material made with silk, cotton, or nylon. And buzzsaw a metallic circular blade made to cut. The two words make for an interesting contrast of a title. You might say, “isn’t the title irrelevant for the overall quality
Velvet Buzzsaw, let just take in the title for a bit. Velvet, a smooth and soft clothing material made with silk, cotton, or nylon. And buzzsaw a metallic circular blade made to cut. The two words make for an interesting contrast of a title.
You might say, “isn’t the title irrelevant for the overall quality of the movie?” and to that, I say yes, but I still like the title.
Summarizing Velvet Buzzsaw is easy enough. You have a cast of characters all working in the art world. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Morf Vandewalle, an extremely pretentious art critic, whose review can make or break an artist’s career. Rene Russo plays Rhodora Haze, the head of the gallery all the characters are associated with. She is more or less the boss, the alpha, the godfather (mother?) of this whole operation. She has an assistant named Josephina (Zawe Ashton). one day Josephina finds some paintings from a deceased person who lives in her apartment complex. Well, it turns out the paintings are evil and now everyone who is associated with the paintings is being killed off in mysterious ways.
Wait, is this an arthouse film about art?
The Film is a little light on plot if you will, the film is about a large cast of characters who are all working in the art world, and are all assholes except for one. The movie explores how the cast interacts and it explores interesting power dynamics throughout the film.
Josephina finds and steals the art from her deceased neighbor, when she enters his apartment for the first time she is originally drawn in by a cat. Cats are of course connected to the supernatural with their association with witchcraft.
The theme of power dynamics is explored beautifully by Josephina. She starts the film as a small fry, a little fish in a big pond. She is introduced when she receives a call that her boyfriend is cheating on her. This understandably makes her upset and she enters her job crying. No one is actually taking notice or bothering. Morf is the only person who asks her if she is okay. However, he cuts her off before she gets a chance to speak, with his own not so important question.
Later on, Josephina and Morf enter a relationship with each other. However, Morf is starting to realize something supernatural is taking place and that the art itself is evil. When this happens he starts to slowly lose his mind, as you would if evil art is out to get you.
Does the idea of evil art sound stupid yet? It kind of works in the movie however, when I type it out it looks strange and stupid. Like, UUHHHH beware of the evil art, ANYWAYS.
Morf loses his marbles and Josephina essentially breaks up with him. Saying she fell for his intelligence and passion and now he just looks like a loser. If it wasn’t already clear the characters in the film are kind of douchebags. They more or less have to be in order for the film to kill them off one by one in more and more gruesome ways. There is only one character that is nice and low and beholds she doesn’t die isn’t that just great.
Josephina fails to inform Morf that they broke up, later he gets a call telling him that she is cheating on him, this makes the movie come full circle in a strange way. Josephina starts the film being weak and inferior to everyone else. But, by discovering the evil art she becomes powerful in the art world, this power corrupts her.
The characters in the movie don’t really care for each other, they are only interested in using each other. Also, every single character just takes off their classes all the time! There is not a scene where the glasses stay on, they just take them off all the time. You might think this is trivial, and yes kind of, but it still bothers me. If you notice something so stupid then there is something wrong.
Rhodora also has a tattoo saying “No death, no art” which serves as a really bad way of foreshadowing what is to come later in the movie.
The movie is also kind of a parody of itself. Morf is talking like the most pretentious art critique ever, so much so that it actually becomes tiring with time. I have no idea if people at art galleries really talk like that, but if they do I will stay clear.
Did you like it?
I did, somewhat, it was a little better than I expected, however, I did expect the worst so take that for what you will. The biggest thing against the film and why I ultimately can’t really recommend it for many people is that it feels like a light version of an arthouse film. It is supposed to be this intellectual piece, like a David Lynch, Darren Aronofsky, or Ingmar Bergman film. It feels like a pale imitation of a pale imitation of a real arthouse film.
It has to go darker and more strange to really work. every time it kills a character it cuts away or does not show the horrors. It needed to be more upfront, more provocative, more thought-provoking, it needed to be more of everything.
The movie is super hard to really recommend since it does not satisfy the fancy arthouse fans (like myself) or anyone else for that matter. It is not scary enough to satisfy horror fans.
It’s not a terrible movie, it just does not leave a big impact at all. This is a movie that will be forgotten in no time. Overall I thought it was fine at best, it does have some good things going for it, but time has passed since I saw the movie and the impact has degraded over time.
What even is cyberpunk?
What is it? With the popularity of Altered Carbon and Blade Runner 2049. Along with the rise and very high fall of cyberpunk 2077. The word cyberpunk gets thrown out a lot. But what is it? What does it actually mean? Where did it come from? What are its implications? Let’s find out! History So..
What is it?
With the popularity of Altered Carbon and Blade Runner 2049. Along with the rise and very high fall of cyberpunk 2077. The word cyberpunk gets thrown out a lot. But what is it?
What does it actually mean?
Where did it come from?
What are its implications?
Let’s find out!
History
So.. where did it begin? Well, the word cyberpunk was coined by the American author Bruce Bethke. He wrote a book called “Cyberpunk” The idea behind the name was to combine the word cybernetics (The act of replacing certain human functions with tech). And the word punk, (the loud, booming, and sometimes nihilistic music).
Bethke did not invent the genre, only the term. The origin is believed to go all the way back to the 1940s and the author Samuel R. Delany. The purpose was to explore the idea that maybe high tech might not be as cool as we think it is going to be. Man, what a bummer!
What is it?
Okay, now that all the boring stuff is out of the way. Let’s get into what the hell cyberpunk is.
Cyberpunk is a subgenre of science fiction. It is characterized by having an interesting contrast between high tech and a growing dehumanization. So basically the more tech the worst people are off.
The quote that captures the essence of Cyberpunk the most is. High on tech, low on life.
Most of the time there is an anti-hero type guy or gal who fights/rebels against the system (like punk music).
Cyberpunk started as a literary work. The most influential people here would be William Gibson, Philip. K Dick, and Bruce Sterling.
Cyberpunk started to really pick up steam when Ridley Scout made his masterpiece Blade Runner 1982. The movie is based on the novel “Do androids dream of electric sheep?” (Best title ever!). Blade runner has kind of become the quintessential aesthetic of what cyberpunk should look like.
The dreary, grey, and poor existence of people, struggling to find anything resembling hope or happiness. The ultra techno future of Los Angeles is the frame for cyberpunk. By the way, have you noticed it always rains in blade runner, what’s up with that? This is not necessary for all of cyberpunk, but it seems to be a popular choice. There are exceptions to this like with everything else of course. (there will be some sick recommendations at the bottom of this post). However, the real aesthetic inspiration for cyberpunk is actually Hong-Kong
In 1995 Ghost in the Shell, directed by Mamuro Oshii, based on a manga by Masamune Shirow was released. Blade runner draws on what is called urban space, this includes Asian cities like Tokyo and Hong Kong. Gibson’s work also included an Asian-inspired cityscape. So while we all might think of Blade Runner´s Los Angeles, the visual identity of cyberpunk is more on the Asian side. Hong Kong is the big daddy of them all. The thing about Hong Kong is that it has a large pool of people. People from all over the world, with different backgrounds. The instantly recognizable, yet alien city is the perfect backdrop for an ever-changing society. The diversity of people is important. See, in Blade Runner, the rich white guys have all the power. They live in this high-class mega building. Whereas, the rest of the people live on the ground. They are multicultural and they live in relatively poor conditions. In that way Blade runner is a critique of the class system.
So is Cyberpunk a dystopia or a utopia? Well, it’s neither. See, a utopia is the perfect version of the future. Where everything is awesome and we are all happy-go-lucky. A dystopia is the opposite, outlining the worst possible future. Cyberpunk is actually a heterotopia, a society that is different. The concept was elaborated by French philosopher Michel Foucault. What he means is basically a society that is different and strange that does not conform to the established rule.
Another aspect of cyberpunk is the idea of cyberspace. This is essentially a network of data where you can upload your mind and navigate a virtual space while your body is idle. The most famous example of this is the matrix.
Philosophy
Now! It is time to utilize the most powerful weapon of them all! Philosophy! You heard me, Philosophy fam. See here is the thing, science-fiction was, at least in a classic sense, more concerned with big ideas. rather than character or plot. This can be very off-putting for new readers of the genre.
Our understanding of narratives and what they should contain has been limited over the past couple of years. Character development and plot have become the holy beacon of what stories most contain! (This is a rant for another post). Classic science-fiction is all about asking complex questions about the human condition and society. And let you think about the answers for yourself. Questions like: “what would first contact with aliens look like” or “if you could put your brain into a robot would you still be human?”
Cyberpunk is, to me at least, the best genre when it comes to Philosophical questions.
The themes we are going to look at is that of transhumanism, identity, and Ship of Theseus
You might think this is too heavy and boring stuff. Rest assured, it is not. Plus, this is basically the whole point of cyberpunk. Engaging in these questions is what makes the genre “fun” to explore.
Transhumanism
The first theme of importance to cyberpunk is that of transhumanism. Sounds fancy right? So, transhumanism is the belief that. Technology will help us surpass what we would believe to be normal for humans to do. The goal is to use technology to enhance strength, intelligence, lifespan, and so on. The term originates from British biologist Sir Julian Huxley (brother to Aldous Huxley). There is a lot of debate regarding Transhumanism, such as nature vs the artificial (a debate for another post). Huxley talked a lot about how humans had become more and more aware of their consciousness. This awareness also meant that we began to realize mental possibilities. He also noted that humans were surrounded by unused potential. Transhumanism and cyberpunk seek to bridge this gap.
My first experience with this concept in media was in Disney’s Treasure Planet. In that film, the chef is a cyborg. He has a robotic leg, arm, and eye. A great example is also robocop. These kinds of robotic augmentation play a role in cyberpunk. In Ghost in the Shell the character Baku has synthetic eyes. The Major aka Makoto, the lead in Ghost in the shell has her entire body augmented. The last of the main characters is Togusa, a man who has refused any robotic transplant. The three main characters represent different states of argumentation. The idea of replacing a limb with something robotic and metal is nothing new, I could list hundreds more shows or movies that have done it. The idea is not inherent to cyberpunk, but I still think it is an important aspect of at least some cyberpunk tales. The whole point is to create an image where something cold and robotic merges with the living body. The warm blood ends and cold steel begins.
Cyberpunk also has a connection with the horror genre in this regard. Specifically body horror. The idea of your body changing into something hideous with the help of cybernetics is a strong image. An example could be the movie Akira, where the lines between sci-fi and body horror are blurred.
The peak of transhumanism is the singularity. Whoa, what is that you might wonder. Well, the simple version is that the singularity is the point where technology transcends human technology. By doing so the borders between humans and AI will be erased and the humans will merge with technology. Instead of having a robotic arm or left ear, imagine your whole body being a machine with your conscience inside. Imagine being able to upload or download your consciousness to whatever body you wish. Man that sounds pretty sweet, right? I am sure there is no philosophical problem with this at all.
Ship of Theseus
Okay, so there are some philosophical questions we have to raise. The first is the thought experiment of the Ship of Theseus.
You have a ship made of a hundred pieces of wood. You then replace one piece every day till all the pieces have been replaced. You then take all the old pieces and build the same ship again. The question is, which one is the original ship? Obviously, there are a lot of answers depending on the approach you take. I find that the people I ask often say the latter is the original. This indicates that the original material is more important than the starting point of the set material.
What does this have to do with cyberpunk? I’ll get to that now.
Let’s say you replace both your arms with cybernetic ones, so you look like Jax from Mortal Kombat. Then after some time, you replace your left foot, and then an eye. Finally, you have replaced your entire body, the question is if you stop being you at some point. You then reassemble your flesh and blood body, which one is the real one? The real question is are you as a being, your body, your thoughts, or your consciousness? Do you need all of them? Or can you separate them?
In Ghost in the Shell, you can replace your body if you wish to. Your body is the shell, and your conciseness is the ghost. So, are you the ghost, the shell, or both? In Blade Runner Roy is an artificial human, with feelings, memories, and a sense of self-planted in him. Is he alive? should he have human rights? All questions that are worth pondering.
Once all these questions seemed like wild hypotheticals, however, since AI is being developed real fast we must start to consider these themes. Here is my answer to the ship of Theseus.
First of all, The ship is not a thinking being, it does not have a consciousness and therefore the example is a little more simple than it would be if we apply it to a human. However, the same sentiment is present.
Here is the thing. There is no original ship. You cannot point to one of the two ships and say that one is the original. The ship is constantly changing and the original wood is not what makes the ship. Imagine a book, you have different kinds of books, some are small, some are big and fat with thousands of pages. So if I had a big fat book and I started to tear out pages. You then have to say stop when the book is considered small. You can’t do it. There is simply no real point where the book becomes small. Is a book size all about the page count? Is it by how many words? Some books have thicker pages and thus appear bigger. The idea of a “small” book will be different from person to person. Some may think a book under 200 pages is small. Some a hundred, there are simply too many variables. You can’t say after x amount of pages being torn that the book is now small. For what if I were to put a page back? Would it then not be a small book? The ship is what it is, by removing and adding pieces the ship itself is changing. At no point can you say, now the ship is no longer the original. It all comes back to the ancient argument of the body and soul.
Identity
Okay, after all that my head is hurting, hang on a bit longer. We need to get through this last point before moving onto some badass recommendations. The final point is that of identity. This should be straightforward, right? Right?
Identity is a tricky one, the field is vast and complicated so I will try to narrow it down a bit. One might feel inclined to identify oneself by physical attributes. Attributes such as eye color, height, weight, deformities, and so on. The problem with this is that under cyberpunk all these things can change. your physical vessel or shell is completely arbitrary at least in some cyberpunk stories.
Okay, so my body is not me, great now what? What do I even have left? Well, how about my thoughts? are they not my own? They might be, but keep in mind that in most cyberpunk everyone is hooked up to some sort of network. And if someone was to plant a thought in your head via that net. Then the thought would not be your own now would it? This brings us to one of the most important themes, that of memory.
Memory is a very fragile thing both in cyberpunk and in reality. The chances of you remembering a thing incorrectly is more likely than you think. That’s why when you talk to someone and you both recall the same incident, you can have two very different versions of what happened. The human mind doesn’t actually store memories like an archive. It is much better at storing feelings and sensory input. That is why when you think back to visiting your grandparents when you were young, you don’t remember specifics, but more like what the food tasted like, the unique smell in the house, and how you felt doing it. The mind is not fit to remember details like that. But memories are what happened to me. It is what makes up who I am, is it not? Indeed that is the problem here.
In cyberpunk, we have plenty of great examples regarding the theme of memory. The first one comes in Blade runner.
In Blade Runner, there is a scene where someone is playing the piano.
“Her memory of lessons allows her to play beautifully, so it means little whether she lived through the lessons or not”
Here they reject the distinction between “real” and prosthetic memories. The fact that the memory is not her own plays little to no role. Your experiences do not matter at all. It does not matter if you have taken piano lessons or not, the point is that you play. The fact that it did not happen is nothing. This is a little scary, to say the least. Imagine that you go fishing with your friends. You set up, you drink beer, you catch some fish and crack jokes. Then when you get older it turns out that all those things never really happened. It is not important whether or not you went out with your friends on fishing trips. What matters is that you know how to fish and nothing more.
A real problem here is that life is made up of those small moments, lessons, and experiences. Simply having them in order to obtain a skill (Like playing piano) takes the fun out of life.
In Ghost in the Shell Makoto has captured a criminal. Doing the interrogation it is revealed that all his memories are not his own. His ghost has been hacked and his memories have been implanted by someone else. This is a truly terrifying implication. Imagen, not only that your memories were gone, but worse, false. Your memories are what makes you, you. All the experiences and memories in your life are what have formed you into the individual you are today. What if it was all a lie?
If your body is artificial and your mind can be hacked do you even exist at all?
Recommendation
Congratulations you made it through the article! Your reward are some recommendations if you are looking for more in the genre of cyberpunk. I will not be including things I don’t like or anything I have not experienced myself. So if you find yourself thinking he forgot this and that, keep in mind by then you would have already seen it and thus no recommendation is needed. Some works on this list are more “cyberpunk” than others, that is to say they incorporate more themes and ideas regarding the classic idea of cyberpunk. Oddly enough, movies are strangely scarce when it comes to cyberpunk.
Film
Blade runner 1982
There are many versions of this film, I say go with the final edition.
Upgrade 2018
A hidden gem about a guy merging with an A.I, it has some excellent action and a but load of cyberpunk iconography.
Games
cyberpunk 2077
I feel inclined to include this, the reason should be obvious.
Deus ex
I understand this is a whole franchise. The one I played was Human Revolution. Deus Ex excels in the Transhumanist aspekt. The main character has plenty of augmentations to enhance his physical abilities.
Books
Neuromancer
An absolute classic where an antihero hacker type named Case has to traverse cyberspace. At least, that’s what it is on the surface. It is worth mentioning that it can be a little confusing, at least it was for me, but hey, maybe I am just a dumbass.
Snow Crash
This 1992 cyberpunk novel by Neal Stephenson is also about a hacker exploring cyberspace. In the novel, it is called the Metaverse. The story is about Hiro Protagonist (yes, that is his name) he is a hacker and pizza delivery driver for the Mafia. One day he receives something called “Snow crash” and stuff starts happening. It has a lot of colorful characters and neat ideas.
Anime
Akira
Is one of those quintessential anime movies and a great example of cyberpunk. The story is about a new version of Tokyo after the last one got nuked. In this new Tokyo, technology has advanced, but people still live in poverty. The school system is violent against children. In the midst of all this, a biker gang roams the street with their advanced bikes and neon lights.
Akira also has some of that good body horror with some great disturbing imagery.
The animation is absolutely jaw-dropping and still impressive to this day.
Texhnolyze
is about a boxer named Ichise who gets paid a lot of money for losing a fight on purpose. This is exactly what happens, nothing else happens at all. Except that’s not true he wins the fight he was supposed to lose and the mafia cuts off his arm and leg. I am not sure I would classify this under cyberpunk, it barely fits under the label, and then again just barely. The reason for its inclusion is because it touches on the subject of augmentation. Ichise gets his limbs replaced, now he can really knock people out with a robotic hand.
The show is high on technology (at least in some aspects) and VERY low on life, in fact, I feel I have to warn you. This show is the most nihilistic thing ever! It is crushing in its hopelessness. There is no bright moment except for Yoshi’s mustache. It feels like nothing good ever happens to anyone. So be warned it’s a bit of a downer.
It does have exceptional execution, everything works well together, the visuals, the voice acting, the tone, the story, everything just works. It’s a sublime piece of work. It might not be high on tech, but it is very, VERY low on life.
KAIBA
This right here, this is a hidden gem. Don’t let the art style fool you, Kaiba is about body-swapping and selling bodies to the highest bidder. The story follows Kaiba, who wakes up with amnesia and has to piece a greater mystery together.
The cartoonish art style actually helps the show. The childlike style contrasts with the seriousness of the story in an eerie way.
Ghost in the shell 1992
Feels a bit odd recommending it after praising it so much in the post, but I still think it is a bit of a masterpiece.
Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone complex
Here it is, I saved the very best for last. Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex is a spinoff series of the original 1992 movie, it differs slightly in presentation.
This is in my opinion the finest example of cyberpunk. Every single episode explores another aspect of the world while simultaneously moving the plot along. Where the movie is darker, more stilted, and a bit more philosophical. The show is more action-packed, while still exploring in-depth philosophical themes. The characters are also given more, well, character. They are more involved, more fun, existing, they also feel more relevant.
Ghost in the Shell SAC might not be the pinnacle of cyberpunk in terms of the already established esthetic of the neo-Hong Kong look. However, in all other aspects, it stands as the best in terms of quality.
Bibliography
Cyberpunk. (n.d.). Retrieved April 23, 2021, from https://www.britannica.com/art/cyberpunk
Transhumanism. (n.d.). Retrieved April 23, 2021, from https://www.britannica.com/topic/transhumanism
Huxley, J. (2015). Transhumanism. Ethics In Progress, 6(1), 12-16. doi:10.14746/eip.2015.1.2
Yuen, W. K. (2000). On the Edge of Spaces: Blade Runner, Ghost in the Shell, and Hong Kong’s Cityscape. SF-TH Inc, 1-21. doi:10.4000/resf.565
Fatherhood
Is Kevin Hart´s Fatherhood good? For what feels like the first time, am I actually following the trends rather than writing about movies that are no longer relevant. Fatherhood is the new Kevin Hart movie starring…… Well, Kevin Hart for one, and some other people. But, I hear you ask, is it any good? Well,
Is Kevin Hart´s Fatherhood good?
For what feels like the first time, am I actually following the trends rather than writing about movies that are no longer relevant. Fatherhood is the new Kevin Hart movie starring…… Well, Kevin Hart for one, and some other people. But, I hear you ask, is it any good? Well, let’s find out.
Let me first preference a couple of things. The first thing is that I am not the biggest fan of comedies and especially American comedy. There are only really a small handful of American comics that I find tolerable and Kevin Hart is not one of them. I can’t say that I really like any of his specials that much, and when he appears in movies the stick of being the short angry guy wears off quickly. I guess I am not a fan of his particular style of comedy.
You might think that makes me ill-fitted to comment on a Kevin Hart work. This is idiotic for several reasons:
The first is that if it were only fans of something or someone who was allowed to comment or critique then we would have no quality control. Everything would just get good reviews and no one would be willing to change their mind.
The second reason is that I believe it is important to be transparent about what I like and don’t like beforehand. I make my bias perfectly visible so that you can take it with a grain of salt.
I also feel I can judge the work more as a whole by not being influenced by my blind love of Kevin Hart.
Wait, was there a movie I should talk about?
Fatherhood opens with a funeral; it is not clear who has died. The identity of the person is revealed a little later. It is always good to keep an audience guessing by asking a question “Who died?” and then instead of answering it straight away, the movie gives you time to ponder who it could be.
Now if you read any plot summary anywhere you know it is about his wife and the mother of his child who has died, instantly killing the idea I was just talking about. So, yeah, his wife dies after giving birth to their child and now he is all alone and has to take care of the child himself.
The movie is about how hard it is to be a single parent raising a kid all by himself. Throughout the movie the main guy, who I already forgot his name, just a second while I google it…… Matt. Matt brings himself down and keeps talking about how the kid would be better off if it was her mother who had lived and not him. He talks about how he is a failure and how he is a bad parent who has no idea what he is doing. The people around him then remind him how good he is and how hard he is trying and so on. He keeps bringing himself down, only to have others cheer him up. This happens the whole movie and it is super tedious.
He has two friends whom both try so hard to be the “funny sidekick type” except, they are not funny, not even close. One of them is a guy named Oscar with no hair and no eyebrows. I don’t know if this is supposed to be a joke, in which case I don’t get it.
If there was one word I would describe this movie with it would be sabby. Everything, from the acting to the music is this over-sentimental bullshit. It is like we are never given room to feel, we are always told what to feel and this is a mistake for these kinds of films. The music and insert songs always try to convey this “FEEL SOMETHING NOW” kind of vibe and in turn, it has the opposite effect.
He also argues with his mother-in-law all the time because of course, that is what you are supposed to do in these kinds of movies I guess.
Matt also has a boss who delivers the only joke I found funny. He talks about how he has three babies and then it cuts to a wall with three pictures of emo kids and he says well, they are not babies anymore. The idea that all his kids grew up to be emo is an indication that he does not know what he is doing as a parent.
Speaking of the boss has no idea what is going on. He tries to send Matt to Croatia for business. Matt then askes “Why don’t you send Oscar he speaks Croatian” the boss then says “he does? I don’t care, I am sending you” WHAT!?!!?!?!? WHY?!?!? The only reason he would send Matt is to force another stupid conflict, just like when he breaks up with his new girlfriend, who has the same fucking name as his dead wife. Can you tell I hate this movie?
In conclusion! The movie tries so hard to be “feel good” that it kind of has the opposite effect. With excessive use of sabby music and acting. The comedy is not funny and everything else about the movie feels mundane and boring. I can not recommend this to anyone, but the biggest Kevin Hart fan.
True Memoirs of an International Assassin
The quest of exploring original Netflix movies is still on, and today I have a masterpiece, a hidden gem, a masterclass in comedy, except that’s all a lie this movie is terrible. “True Memoirs of an International Assassin” is, first of all, a bit too long of a title. It’s annoying to type and say.
The quest of exploring original Netflix movies is still on, and today I have a masterpiece, a hidden gem, a masterclass in comedy, except that’s all a lie this movie is terrible.
“True Memoirs of an International Assassin” is, first of all, a bit too long of a title. It’s annoying to type and say. I know, the nitpicking starts early, but there is so little to like about this film, I might as well start small and end big.
The movie stars Kevin James (the one and only) as a writer trying to finish his book. He writes about some generic action hero type. Having trouble finishing the book he steals a real-life story about an ex-military type named “the ghost”. His editor publishes the book as non-fiction and lo and beholds now everyone thinks he is the ghost. He is then drafted by a revolution in Venezuela to kill the president.
If you think this idea sounds fun let me assure you, it is not. If you think it sounds stupid then you sir are one hundred percent right.
First of all the idea that EVERYONE would think that Kevin freaking James would be a legendary soldier is laughably stupid. He is so not “The Ghost” that the film in concept doesn’t make sense. At no point is no one saying “isn’t he a little heavy to be the ghost?” which would be the right thing to ask.
There are way too many things going on and there are too many factions interacting. There is the President, his general and his men, A Russian gangster, the revolutionaries, the CIA, and his companion who just shows up out of nowhere to save him. This makes the movie a total mess.
The Russian guy falls victim to one of my least favorite tropes ever! The killing your own men troupe. It was cool when Vador did it that one time, but other than that it really pisses me off every time I see it. No one is willing to work for you if you are notorious for killing your own guys.
The CIA seems totally incompetent, indifferent, stupid, and corrupt. Maybe it would be funnier if I was an American and had some knowledge of them, but I am not, so I don’t think it’s that funny.
The plot is also terrible, as I said before his companion just shows up and saves him when it is convenient. She is also WAY too hot for this role. I am not saying policewomen can’t be attractive, but here they just gave a supermodel the role and it is super distracting.
At one point they infiltrate the president’s party in order to assassinate him. One of the revolutionaries named one is there undercover as a waiter. He brings the president some food. Now, the question is, WHY DID HE NOT POISON THE FOOD? It’s so obvious that it hurts. Also, how easy is it to infiltrate the party? And how did he do it? WHO CARES! Things just happen for convenience otherwise there would not be a film.
The true identity of the ghost is also exceptionally stupid and obvious.
I am going to take a break to talk about what I did like about the movie before going back to bashing it.
The main character writes a scene, the scene will then play out with him as the main guy. When he can’t figure out what will happen next, the characters in the scene are idle too. This is actually a pretty funny idea. It is also funny to see the scenario in his head fail. The opening action scene is also kind of hype.
HOWEVER! The whole idea behind the film is that he has to live his own life instead of making stuff up. The problem is that the whole premise of the film is so fictitious that the “real” story and the fake one get mixed up. After he is conducted it all spirals into this mess where nothing is believable at all. He also just learns how to fight at the end by just, you know, watching the action around him, I guess.
I do like Kevin James, I think he has a lot of natural charm and comedic timing. He just chooses bad projects, or maybe he just accepts what is given to him, I don’t know. Just know that every time I see him in something I root for him.
I decided to watch this film for my quest in determining the quality of original Netflix movies. As I was watching it, it suddenly hit me. I have seen this thing before, and wouldn’t you know it, I had in fact seen it before. It left no impression on me at all. The movie is not just bad, it is also forgettable and that is the worst a movie can be.
Final thoughts: it’s bad, don’t watch it.
What your name (kimi no na wa) does better than anyone
It finally happened. I liked a Makoto Shinkai movie! I never thought this day would come since I find most, if not all his films either unbelievably doll or shallow. His films are often pretty, I will give you that. However, He tries so hard to be “emotional” or try to evoke emotions. It never
What your name (kimi no na wa) does better than anyone Read More »
It finally happened. I liked a Makoto Shinkai movie! I never thought this day would come since I find most, if not all his films either unbelievably doll or shallow. His films are often pretty, I will give you that. However, He tries so hard to be “emotional” or try to evoke emotions. It never really worked on me. SO, with that being said, why is this movie so good? What does he do better this time? The answer may surprise you.
Your name does something better than any other anime or maybe even any other film. What is it? Well, you have to find out later. I am not going to just tell you right away now am I?
The movie is about a young girl who lives out in the countryside. Her name is Mitsuha Miyamizu. She wishes one day to be a handsome boy from the city. One day she wakes up and wouldn’t you know. She has indeed swapped bodies with a handsome, bland boy named Taki Tachibana. So the story is basically a freaky Friday thing (or Kokoro Connect). They live each other’s lives and become closer throughout the movie.
Here is my first problem with Your Name. I think the romance comes a bit out of nowhere and was not properly developed. (half the film Taki is going after someone else) This is a shame since the emotional scenes that hit later in the film are really well made and pack an emotional punch. The two scenes that hit me were. Towards the end, Mitsuha falls and looks at her hand (you all know this scene).
The second is the actual ending when they see each other in their separate trains. The ending also ties beautifully together with the beginning. Where they both wake up crying and do not know why. In that regard, the beginning of the film is enhanced on a repeat viewing.
The characters are unfortunately not that interesting, both in terms of design and personality. This is a bit of a problem since romance anime is about liking the main characters and rooting for them to be together. The characters themselves are not really what makes the film good. What is good are the scenes surrounding the characters. There is the vibrant and energetic montage of them living each other’s lives. Taki’s fever dream in the cave. When Mitsuha finally stands up to her father, and so on. There are plenty of very well-made and memorable scenes. Compared to his other works, the scenes and story are actually engaging for once.
The visuals have always been Shinkai’s “strengths”. I think he goes a bit overboard in most of his films. Where the animation and the background are so overdone. This leads to a form of visual chaos and unclarity (see five centimeters per second). I find my eyes being strained while watching. Your name avoids this problem entirely. The backgrounds are pretty while not being distractive. The meteor shower is beautiful, but the film does not linger too long on them. Giving the viewer time to breathe and to take everything in. From the tranquil countryside to the urban cityscape.
The plot is not that great either, sorry but it’s true. If you think about the plot for more than half a second it all starts to fall apart. The story is full of plot holes and inconsistencies. The most prevalent plot hole is, of course, the fact that neither of them realizes that when they switch bodies, they are also going forward and backward in time. This plot hole takes an amount of suspension of disbelief that can be a dealbreaker for most. That is not to say the story itself is bad. The story has a lot of small pieces that Shinkai leaves for you to pick up on. An example would be that the grandmother indicates that this whole Freaky Friday thing has happened to her in her youth. She does not say it explicitly though, and that is kind of wonderful.
Okay, it’s time for me to reveal what your name does so well. Are you ready? Drum roll, please.
Insert songs! The music, in general, is okay, but the insert songs single-handedly elevate the film to a new level. All the scenes I have talked about in this review are all made better by the songs. The songs yumetourou, zen zen zense, sparkle, and nandemonaiya all add so much to the film. When the music builds and explodes in an emotional climax (see the ending scene on the trains, or when she looks at her hand) I simply can not avoid tears. And for a moment, my otherwise cold heart is filled with warmth. The way the song kicks in at the perfect time. The song hits when the emotional beat of the scenes is at its highest.
If you have read this review, you might have found my opinion to be all over the place. For everything good about the film there are two things I don’t like. That’s true. The plot and the characters are not that great. BUT! I feel like we have lost something. We have put character development and a tight plot on a pedestal. Making it the most important thing in a story. We have lost something in our search for finding a matrix in which we can evaluate art. We have this one size fits all approach. If you ever find yourself saying “a good story must have X.” Then you are already missing the point. Art is different and unique; it will hit people differently.
It’s true. The characters are bland as a piece of white paper. There are giant plot holes that make for a mess of a film. So why do you like it so much? you might ask. Well, it’s quite simple. I find myself thinking of your name a lot. I think about it more than most anime films, to be honest. Every time I hear a song from the film I get a little emotional. I find myself returning to it more and more. Over time it has stayed with me, it lingers. Art is an experience, you can talk all you want about bad writing and bland characters. If you get something out of it every time. If you keep thinking about it. Then you know you have found something truly special.
The truth is. You don’t really choose the art you like, it chooses you.
Pom Poko The Forgotten Ghibli Film
Why is no one talking about Pom poko? Okay, if there ever was a ghibli movie that went under the raider it would be this one. Directed by anime great Isao Takahata, this movie is not talked about at all. The film seems to get lost in the ocean of great Ghibli films. Why is
Why is no one talking about Pom poko?
Okay, if there ever was a ghibli movie that went under the raider it would be this one. Directed by anime great Isao Takahata, this movie is not talked about at all. The film seems to get lost in the ocean of great Ghibli films. Why is that? What is it about this piece that just never seemed to break through? Well, let’s explore it further and see if you can find out.
Pom Poko is about shapeshifting raccoons. These raccoons are actually the mythical creature “Tanuki” who you would have seen if you have watched the anime Uchouten Kazoku. These Tanukis are trying to keep the humans around them from tearing down the forest in order to build a city. So it’s a man vs nature kind of theme we got going here. From the perspective of nature.
First, the things I liked. The Ghibli is great, you know it, I know it. There is really no need in discussing it further. The Shapeshifting itself is well done. It flows well and feels nice to watch. The movie is also kind of funny. It is not laugh-out-loud funny, but it gave me some chuckles. The humor is mostly connected to the act of shapeshifting. There is a parade-like thing toward the end of the film. And the visuals and feel of that scene are insane. The shapeshifting is, however, not clear at all. They can change form alright, but they can also manifest physical things like clothes. It makes little to no sense.
The music is nice. Nothing special, but it does the job.
The characters are hard to distinguish from each other. Some of the Tanuki are unique, but I can’t say that I will remember them in a week. The visual design of the Tanuki masters is excellent and I enjoyed them a lot.
The story is not that structured, the Tanuki are just going through the motions. It kind of makes sense since it follows “wild” animals. However, the film is kind of long, and the loose structure does not help it. I found myself looking at my watch more than I would usually do. The story is also only seen through the perspective of nature. It seems so hamfisted since the nuances are gone. Having a man vs nature theme only really works if you show both sides (like in Princess Mononoke). It becomes so bad that one of the Tanuki just looks at the camera and talks about the message of the film at the end. This is horrible and works against the film.
There is also a narrator who more or less constantly talks throughout the movie and it becomes super annoying really fast. There is also a portion of the film dedicated to two of the main cast establishing a family. I thought this subplot took time away from the important part of the film. Mostly because the characters are so forgettable that it is hard to care.
So yeah, the film is not talked about because it is kind of bad. It is funny that Takahata´s other movies were very underplayed and subtle, whereas this film goes the other way.
Hmm….. I feel like I have forgotten something….. I wonder what it could be. Oh yes, balls. Here I am talking about testicles. There are so many of them in this film, it’s quite a feed. They shapeshift their balls and fight with them. At one point they fly with them. They make them into a carpet. The ways in which they use their balls in the film are kind of creative. All the males are drawn, his testicles just hanging out. They don’t have a penis, so a creative decision was made to only draw the balls. I guess it’s to show the feral part of the Tanuki but then go all the way.