Experience vs. Surprise

Britt Robertson as Casey Newton in Tomorrowland

Which is more important in a story, the experience or the surprise?  In our current cinematic landscape, everything is all about keeping secrets from the audience until a movie's release so not to spoil the experience, and yet so many of our modern movies and TV shows are based off of books, comic books, or video games, that I must question why this is so important.  While a good surprise can create a unique experience once, if the story in itself is not an involving experience every time you watch it, even after you've experienced all of the surprises it has in store, then the whole thing kind of falls flat to me.  Here's the bottom line, while it's good to try and preserve any surprises you might have as a storyteller for the audience, it has to be a good experience beyond that.

What really inspired me to write on this subject is just the way that almost every major movie in production nowadays tries to be so secretive about what's going to happen in their movie, and yet most of these movies are based off of pre-existing stories to begin with.  Fans know that Harry Potter dies and comes back to life, they know that the Titanic is going to sink, we know these things and yet the filmmakers and storytellers still try to keep everything like it's a big state secret.  A movie isn't a redacted CIA brief, it's something that's meant to be experienced over-and-over again.  Now, I don't want it to be misinterpreted that I don't like it when a good movie ducks when I expected it to dodge, but what I am saying is that this moment of surprise has to feel shocking every time I see it.

Alfred Hitchcock on the Set of Psycho

Take Psycho as an example.  I did not see that movie for the first time till I was probably 18, and I already knew that Norman Bates was the killer.  Ordinarily, with that surprise ruined, you'd think the movie would stink.  Actually, it doesn't.  Alfred Hitchcock created a movie, that while it was full of surprises for the first time viewers, actually stood as an experience beyond the initial shock of Janet Leigh dying midway through the movie and the reveal that Norman was dressing up as his Mother to kill.  Hitch knew that movies were experiences, not just something to be seen once, but something to be seen multiple times.

It's like a good crime TV show or a classic whodunit.  You may know who the killer is, but when the experience is also a good experience getting to that revelation, then it becomes less about who actually did it, and more about the characters and our relationship to them as an audience.  That is why I can rewatch seasons of Castle and not be bored, and on the more serious side, the first season of Broadchurch was a brilliant example of this.  Who actually killed Danny Latimer really wasn't quite as important as how the murder tore this small town apart.  While the reveal of the killer was shocking the first time, the second and third times I rewatched all eight episodes, I still was riveted by the experience because of the human drama at the core of the concept.

The Cast of Broadchurch

So what is the trick to creating a good experience on top of a good surprise?  In truth, I don't know.  If it was that easy to sum up, everyone would be doing it, but the fact of the matter is, you can't teach this sort of stuff, you've just gotta feel it when you're writing a story.  The main thing is to aim at creating an experience and not to focus so much on just that clever plot twist you may have in your mind, because you can be clever all day long, but if you don't move people, then what was the point in telling your story to begin with?  That is something I try to live by when I write a story and it's difficult.  It means taking time to examine the human impact that a big event or revelation has on your characters rather than barreling forward into more action.  It also means creating a moment of humor in the midst of grief or tension to show the truth of humanity, that life is not always a comedy or a tragedy, but actually a blend of both.  A movie that I think did this recently, in a vey superb way, was Tomorrowland.

In Tomorrowland there are many twist and turns that continue to evolve the story and take it to new places that the first-time audience doesn't always expect, but there are also moments in there that I know will still affect me in future viewings.  When our heroine, Casey Newton, first takes a tour through Tomorrowland, it's a moment of so much joy and wonder, that it's affecting.  Or when ** SPOILER ALERT ** the Eiffel Tower splits open and our heroes blast off in an old rocket ship to travel to Tomorrowland, it's another moment that is played so wondrously that I know it will be as exciting to watch each time I see this movie, the same way that the first time you see Hogwarts in the first Harry Potter always gets me.  Then there is a moment near the end where George Clooney says goodbye to an android named Athena that he has known since childhood that is one of the more touching moments of the movie.  At a point when most movies are trying to get to that big final explosion, this movie takes the time to slow down and a have a fond farewell before anything else.  That is what I mean by creating an experience.

Casey's Arrival in the Titular Tomorrowland

So in summation, am I saying that I want to know everything about a movie before it's release?  No.  But am I saying that if certain details were revealed, like say, about the new Star Wars movies, that it wouldn't really matter if the new female lead is Han and Leia's daughter as long as it's an experience and not just a twist?  Yes.  See, that's the thing, and I think that's why I wrote all of this, because of the frustration I've had in the past with movie twists that really didn't enhance the experience but hurt it.  It hurt Star Trek Into Darkness keeping the secret that Benedict Cumberbatch was Kahn, the same way that it hurt The Dark Knight Rises with the cornball twist that Joseph Gordon-Levitt was actually Robin (just call him Dick Grayson, Nolan).  I hope J.J. Abrams isn't making the same mistake again by trying to be so secretive about the real identity of so many of the new Star Wars characters.

Bottom line is, if the characters aren't likable on their own esteem, I don't care if they're Han and Leia's children or not, cause keeping this all a big secret for the sake of creating a better experience when the movie comes out is actually a load of crap.  The movie will be a good experience because it tells a good story with real human moments and not because it had a clever plot twist, and that understanding is something that a lot of movies forget in their attempts to surprise, and that's why if I have to choose one over the other, I will choose experience every single time.  So strive for experience over surprise fellow writers, because movie history has shown that it doesn't matter if we know that the boat sinks at the end as long as people care about the characters.

Movie Review: "Tomorrowland"

The latest Disney film, Tomorrowland, is a wonder of imagination, breathing with more originality than the title leads one to believe.  As a matter of fact, this film has very little to do with the Disney parks other than the concept of what Walt Disney always wanted Tomorrowland to represent.  While there is a very fun excursion to the 1964 World's Fair where Disney premiered the "It's a Small World" ride, that is where the Disney connection ends and the real story begins.  So what is the titular Tomorrowland exactly?

Well, Tomorrowland is a city in a parallel dimension to our own where some of the brightest minds -- both creative and scientific -- convened to try and create a better future for our tomorrow.  In the film, teenager Casey Newton (played very likably by Britt Robertson) is given a tiny pin with the Tomorrowland logo on it that when she touches it she is presented with visions of Tomorrowland.  These visions set her on a quest to figure out what this amazing place is that she is seeing, and on that quest she meets an android girl with some pretty awesome martial arts moves named Athena, a cadre of robots hunting Casey down trying to keep her from uncovering the secrets of Tomorrowland, and a grumpy George Clooney, who portrays Frank Walker, a former child genius who once lived in Tomorrowland but was exiled.  Frank is the only one who can take Casey there, and thus their adventure to reach Tomorrowland shifts into high gear.

Few movies nowadays have the breadth of imagination that this one has, not to mention its sense of optimism for the future.  Yes, the world is ultimately at stake here from annihilation (but would it be an adventure film if it wasn't), and yes, the movie probably wont appeal to all, but to anyone who still dares to dream, Tomorrowland is the old-fashioned sci-fi adventure film you didn't know you've been waiting for.  

Director Brad Bird has crafted a film that mixes mystery, wonder, and suspense beautifully with touching human moments between characters, both man and machine, and some wonderfully executed comedic beats as well.  This is the kind of movie that I grew up on, the kind that Disney used to make and should make more of.  I could easily have seen Fred MacMurray in the George Clooney part and Haley Mills as Casey, that's how old school Disney this film feels to me.  With that said, George Clooney proves to be a worthy successor to MacMurray, and Britt Robertson really proves herself here as a leading lady.  It is Robertson's awestruck reactions and well-timed comedic chops that sell the wonders of this movie and grounds them in humanity.  From top-to-bottom, Tomorrowland just works.

The musical score by Michael Giacchino is one of his best in years, mixing his usual style with that of an old-fashioned adventure film score that really sells all of the epic, beautiful, and wondrous moments that this film features.  Then there are the fellow cast members, with Raffey Cassidy being a particular standout as the android girl, Athena.  The warmth and charm that Cassidy has as Athena really contradicts the traditional portrayal of robots onscreen and actually makes you believe that maybe our future with robots is not annihilation, but actually to live side-by-side with them.  Ultimately, that's what this movie is all about.

Tomorrowland is a movie about the future and about recapturing our collective sense of optimism as a race.  As a whole, we are too pessimistic and cynical.  The news that is reported is all mostly negative, the movies that we watch are all dystopias about death and destruction more than they ever are about hope.  This is the idea that Bird and company wanted to get across with Tomorrowland and they do so brilliantly.  Add on to that the idea that anyone can be special and change the world if they just have a dose of optimism, and I really think that Walt Disney himself would have loved everything that this movie says and does.  So if any of this sounds appealing to you, go see Tomorrowland.  You wont regret it.

I give Tomorrowland a 9 out of 10!

Movie Review: "Avengers: Age of Ultron"

Lightning rarely strikes twice and that is the first thing you've got to understand about Avengers:  Age of Ultron.  The Avengers was one of those one of a kind moviegoing experiences, and while I don't think Age of Ultron ever tops its predecessor, it is a really awesome movie in its own right.  Filled with wall-to-wall action and more probing character exploration, Age of Ultron is what Serenity was to Firefly (pardon the Joss Whedon comparisons, but the guy did write and direct all of the aforementioned films and TV series).  Age of Ultron is darker and more serious-minded than The Avengers, and yet there are enough one-liners and awesome comic book panel-worthy moments of mayhem that keep the film entertaining.

In Age of Ultron, Tony Stark creates an artificial intelligence known as Ultron in hopes of being able to establish a peacekeeper for Earth that would make the Avengers obsolete.  Of course, as with just about everything Tony Stark seems to touch, things go awry and Ultron takes possession of a series of robotic bodies and believes that the only way to true peace is through evolution, which means the demise of all human life on Earth, especially those pesky Avengers.  What follows is this ragtag team that we saw come together in the first film falls apart and then has to rebuild themselves all while duking it out with Ultron and a pair of superpowered twins from Eastern Europe, Quiksilver and Scarlet Witch, who have allied themselves with Ultron.

The greatest thing about Age of Ultron is it further cements the idea that these Marvel movies have really become like one really big TV series that you just have to wait every six months or so for each new episode.  These things have very much become a machine with each entry being as impressively put together as the last, and when you couple that with the comfort of seeing characters you know and love reunited and bickering with one another, there is no way on Earth that you cannot enjoy the film.

Seriously, if you are reading this, you're not really wanting a full lowdown because you are already going to see the movie regardless, so what do you really need to know?  All you need to know is that Avengers:  Age of Ultron is worthy of the Marvel brand.  It is entertainment of the highest order with a story that manages to further challenge our heroes and force them to really decide where their priorities lie.  While majority of the Marvel heroes did not want to become heroes, they did rise to the challenge when called because of a sense of responsibility, and the way Age of Ultron ends effectively answers the internal question that each of our heroes face.  So what are you waiting for, get to the theater and see this movie as many times as you know you're going to see it.

I give Avengers:  Age of Ultron a 9 out of 10!

Movie Review: "Cinderella"

Sometimes it's just nice to see a movie where you know what's going to happen and that level of comfort allows you to just enjoy the ride and not worry about anything else.  That is exactly what Disney's new live action Cinderella does.

There are no major changes to the story:  Cinderella (the extremely likable Lily James) still lives with her evil stepmother (played deliciously by Cate Blanchett) and her two stepsisters (Holliday Grainger and Sophie McShera), who do not allow her to go the ball.  Alas, in steps Cinderella's Fairy Godmother (Helena Bonham Carter), who grants Cinderella with a pumpkin carriage and a ball gown with two glass slippers so that she can meet Prince Charming (handsomely played by Richard Madden).  It's a simple story, told in a very grand fashion visually, but never overturning the story to meet a more modern viewpoint, which is a breath of fresh air in this time of revisionist fairy tales.

Director Kenneth Branagh really keeps the story simple and yet opulent at the same time thanks to the amazing team of behind the scenes wizards at his disposal.  The sets, the costumes, the cinematography, the music, it's all exceptional, and it is that ability to unite great talents under one person's purview that makes Branagh a desirable director for these Hollywood studios.  However, the true star of Cinderella is screenwriter Chris Weitz.

Weitz's script is the glue that holds the film together and makes it work, because in our jaded modern age, it would have been easy to have tried to flip the story around and make it to where Cinderella doesn't need the Prince to save her, etc. and so forth.  What Weitz does is rather stick to the traditional story and finds the human justifications as to why these characters act and feel the way that they do.  Even the evil stepmother has motivation, and so does Cinderella, for why she has not ever runaway from home.  The idea that Cinderella lives looking at the world not as it is, but as it could be through courage and kindness, makes her a strong character internally.  Weitz also makes Prince Charming a character beyond simple good looks and charm, which is something that a lot of fairy tale films have always struggled with, even the good ones.   I especially like the way that Weitz shows Cinderella changing Prince Charming's world view through her kindness, making him a stronger man.  Of course, a screenplay would be nothing if it weren't for the actors.

What allows this film to really connect is that you actually like Lily James as Cinderella and Richard Madden as Prince Charming.  It is hard for actors to sell love at first sight, and their chemistry is wonderfully adorable, allowing you to root for the two of them to be together forever.  In so many ways, it is those simplistic ideas of true love, kindness, and courage, that makes these fairy tales still so enjoyable and life affirming centuries after they were first told.  Anyone with a heart and some optimism can be swept away by this film if they just tear down those stone walls of cynicism within and let it.  I firmly believe that, so do just that and see this film.

I give Cinderella a 10 out of 10!

Is Hollywood too Franchise Crazy?

That's a question that many have asked for much of the past decade, one in which I think has been answered more than adequately by the movie studios producing only franchised properties and not many, if any original scripts that have no sequels in mind.  In truth, there isn't much I can say on the subject that hasn't been touched on by other sources, but I am going to try.

Yesterday, news broke that Dan Ackroyd and director Ivan Reitman have developed a production outfit, Ghostcorps, at Sony Pictures.  Their goal is to produce more than this new all girl Ghostbusters, but another all male Ghostbusters starring and produced by Channing Tatum, and possibly directed by Joe and Anthony Russo (Captain America: The Winter Soldier).  All of this is being done in the hopes of setting up a Ghostbusters Cinematic Universe, like what Marvel has done.  Personally, I have never been a big Ghostbusters fan.  I've always loved the concept, but the original movies never really did anything for me.  I know there are a lot of Ghostbusters fans out there and I respect that they want to see new films in that universe, just like how I want to see new Star Wars movies, of course with both Star Wars and Ghostbusters, do the majority of people below the age of twenty really care about these new films?

Growing up, I knew of so many people who had never seen a movie made before they were born.  The Hollywood studios are so enamored by the past success of these franchises that they aren't thinking too much about their current market viability.  I am not saying that new Ghostbusters movies can't be successful, nor am I saying that these new Star Wars movies aren't going to be box office juggernauts, but we've already seen many studio franchises implode by trying to mimic the Marvel strategy of each movie in a franchise connecting to one another.  Sony has recently had to make a deal to join the Marvel Cinematic Universe after their latest attempts at creating an independent Spider-Man universe didn't work, the same with when DC hoped Green Lantern would start a  DC Cinematic Universe that failed and they're now taking a second bat at with Man of Steel and Batman v. Superman:  Dawn of Justice.  What irks me about this way of making movies, is the studios are already planning sequels and spin-offs just because of the brand's notoriety without actually making a good movie first to see if they can pull it off.

Here's the thing with franchises, there is a reason the franchises that work are popular.  They are familiar and people pay money to feel comforted.  I mean, that's why I look forward to every new Marvel movie and it's why I think Avengers: Age of Ultron will still be the biggest box office hit of the year (yes, even bigger than The Force Awakens).  I love comfort, I mean I am the first to tell someone that I hate change, but as is evidenced by what DC and Warner Bros. have done with their movies, and Sony with Spider-Man, they are just going to keep trying to shove these franchises down our throats until they strike gold after millions, possibly billions of lost dollars, just to have that one mega hit the size of The Avengers.  What if the Hollywood studios took that money they blew through and invested it in an original idea?  Where would our current movie landscape be if back in the Seventies, Alan Ladd, Jr. and 20th Century Fox didn't take a chance on George Lucas's space opera, or if Dan Ackroyd, Harold Ramis, and Ivan Reitman didn't get the funding to do their original comedy blockbuster about busting ghosts?  Two big Hollywood franchises wouldn't have ever existed and the studios would be in a lurch right now.

In so many ways, this is the hardest time in movie history to get an original screenplay produced that is not based on a pre-existing book, comic book, video game, toy, cartoon, TV show, movie, or even amusement park ride.  Look, as I've already said, I love stuff based off of things I already know I love, but I'd also like to see some new stuff as well.  You know why fans complain about the changes made from the book to the film?  It's because they've already experienced that story.  However, when Star Wars first hit in the Seventies, no one was complaining because they didn't have another source to compare it to.  That's the thing that these studios are missing.  Yeah, when these book and comic book adaptations work, they make the studios a lot of dough, but when they fail they typically go up in flames and hemorrhage money.  Now, while it would be easy to also point out big budget movies that were based on original scripts that failed at the box office, at least it wasn't something we had seen before and they tried.  How are we going to create the franchises for the future if we try to stick to the same old, same old?

I think that's the bottom line that I've been trying to get at this whole time.  I have nothing against franchises, because anyone that knows me will tell you that I am obsessed with Marvel and Star Wars and want as many of those movies as possible, but I also want to see new stuff.  I want to see the next big, original sci-fi or fantasy epic that can rival Star Wars.  I mean, J.K. Rowling didn't become a billionaire by writing a character that already existed.  No, she made her billions by creating a boy wizard that would have not existed had she not created him and his world.  I think the way that things like Harry Potter or The Hunger Games can come along and capture the collective imagination shows that there are people out there still with their eye on creating original stories, but the studios need to let the filmmakers know that they are willing to not just let novelists be the originals, but that they are also willing to let the filmmakers play with some new ideas.  Just because George Lucas is a filmmaker doesn't mean he has any less of an imagination than J.K. Rowling.  Alas, we'll just have to live with this current state of moviemaking for now.  It will take more of these franchises imploding before things change, but I have hope for the future.