There is perhaps no better example of a Hollywood figure that has seen his reputation go from almost God-like status to scraping the bottom of the barrel along with the likes of Uwe Boll and Paul W.S. Anderson than George Lucas.  I won’t bother to go into detail how this came to pass but to say that while some of it is undeserved demagoguery from diehard fans there are many well-argued counterpoints that show a man whose filmmaking/writing acumen has seemingly skewed wildly out of step with modern audiences.  Although Lucas is neither the writer or director of Red Tails the production very much feels like a Lucas movie with a strong focus on the technical aspects of the project seemingly at the expense of everything else most presciently its less than compelling stock characters that all are defined through a series of hoary clichés as old as Hollywood itself.

The year is 1944 and the location is Italy where the all-African American fighter squadron is now based but unlike their Caucasian counterparts they are assigned secondary sorties to destroy relatively useless side targets like stray enemy trains or supply convoys rather than being assigned to front line duties.  This is obviously predicated on the rampant racism that existed in the armed forces at the time which did not look brightly at integrating coloured soldiers into the fray.  As such the Tuskegee project was seen more like a public relations ploy and an abject nuisance to those military commanders who firmly still believed in Caucasian superiority and did everything in their power to derail the initiative such as providing them with second-hand equipment and saddling them with requirements far and above what comparable Caucasian soldiers had to pass.

Even if the viewer has no idea or clue about this period of history this setup is incredibly powerful and while race relations in the USA have certainly improved by leaps and bounds since this time period the continuing struggle for equality still is as relevant today as it was back then.  Thus anyone can agree that chronicling the exploits of the Tuskegee Airmen and how their drive and ambition to prove their worth could potentially make a crackling and influential film for modern audiences.

The movie is almost entirely focused on five characters all of which form a team in the Tuskegee Airmen headed by squadron leader Marty ‘Easy’ Julian (Nate Parker) and his ace pilot Lightning (David Oyelowo) who are revealed to be long time friends although they tend to argue and clash due to their polar opposite personalities.  As the movie opens it is revealed that everyone is restless and frustration levels are rising because many have come to the conclusion that they will never be thought of as equals nor given the chance to even prove their worth.  However, this all changes after their leader Colonel A.J. Bullard (Terrence Howard) returns from the Pentagon having finally secured their first combat mission and as expected the results are exemplary starting the squadron on their well deserved path of success to show not only their worth as pilots but as human beings.

However, while there is nothing wrong in concept on narrowly focusing on only a few fighter pilots the issue here is that none of them are even remotely intriguing and are characterized in broad stokes so that they are easy to identify.  Thus the squadron leader Easy is a rampant alcoholic who frequently turns to the bottle to relive stress; Lightning is your prototypical maverick who doesn’t care one iota for rules and regulations; Junior as his name implies is the youngest of the group and is innocently naive to a fault; Smokey routinely quotes Black Jesus and believes that divine power is protecting him.  This might not be so bad if the script constructed relevant arcs for each character so that they could grow and overcome their inherent flaws or just succumb to them but instead nothing of particular note happens or changes over the course of the film.  Thus Lightning starts a hot shot ace and ends a hot shot ace seemingly not learning a single thing the entire film.

Additionally, the film takes its two best acting assets in Academy Award nominee Terrence Howard and Academy Award winner Cuba Gooding Jr. and shuffles them off to minor supporting roles where they aren’t allowed to truly make their mark and instead sleepwalk through much of the film although Cuba Gooding Jr. at least gets the edge merely because he spends the whole movie trying to mimic General McArthur by puffing vigorously on a wooden pipe and furrowing his brows in virtually every scene he is in.  It gets so dire that one can easily lose track if his perpetual grimace is meant to indicate optimism or concern.

The film also makes many major mistakes in execution the first of which is to quickly dump viewers into the action after the airmen have long since setup base in Italy.  This is a topic of concern because the film totally ignores the all important gestation period of the project that took place in America where the airmen were trained amidst the local population that were incredible skeptical of their worth.  All the brutal discrimination that must have been encountered by these heroes back home is essentially ignored thus robbing viewers of needed exposition and back-story of how they overcame these concerns enough to force military commanders to at least deploy them abroad.

At the same time once they are in Italy the local population as shown here in Red Tails is suddenly completely sympathetic to them not at all caring about their skin colour thus everywhere they go with the exception of the all-Caucasian military bar feels as if it takes place in modern day where race issues are not nearly as prescient an issue as they previously were.  This is further exemplified with a completely misguided attempt to bolt on an entire romantic subplot between Lightning and a local Italian sexpot that might have worked if it weren’t so obviously overwrought.  After all this is a romance that begins inexplicably when Lightning buzzes his plane over her house and it quickly is implied that this alone sparks their romance.  Additionally, the very fact that they both cannot communicate because of the language barrier initially provides some laughs but quickly becomes maddening as each progressive scene plays out exactly the same with one speaking in English or Italian while the other just blankly nods or shakes their head not knowing what is being conveyed.

As a whole Red Tails feels very much like a war movie circa 1940-1950 where there is a clear delineation between good and evil as it pertains to the Allied forces and their Axis counterparts as well as between Caucasians and African Americans within the US army.  While I would fully expect such an extreme in films of yore it is rare to see nowadays and it plays havoc with the script that manages to caricaturize everyone involved.  Obviously, for a film that focuses in on the trials and tribulations of the first all-African American fighter squadron we fully expect that issues of race will be front and center and they are but everyone is either in favour of it or totally against such a proposition.  At the same time, even though most of the audience will undoubtedly not know the history involved most will clue in quickly that the Tuskegee Airmen will prove their worth and turn many an opinion in the process.  However, the way in which it unfolds is incredibly saccharine with people changing their point of view in a blink of an eye and the issue itself is only glossed over and not really given enough time to gestate.

At the same time this focus on extremes permeates through to the antagonist Germans who do nothing but shout racial epithets and are saddled with beyond inane dialogue where it appears all they do is give menacing stares and glower like madmen the entire film.  Part of this stems from the fact that screenwriters John Ridley and Aaron McGruder have constructed an inherently generic script that has to force the film to have rival ace pilots on each side who unsurprisingly go mano a mano multiple times during the film even though such an occurrence in reality would be incredibly rare.

While it is obvious that the writers would take some creative license to bend history a bit to tell their tale they often times go too far in trying to build the case for the Tuskegee pilots at the expense of others a prime example being some of the exposition that is given by an irate general who laments that all his bomber squadrons are being shot to hell precisely because their Caucasian-piloted fighter escorts decide to go for glory instead of protecting his birds.  I am in no way knowledgeable enough in this aspect of history yet I find it incredibly odd that any pilots who deviate from the game plan for personal glory would be severely reprimanded when they land.  If entire fighter escort squadrons are doing so the Air Force has a major obedience problem that needs to be rectified on a grand scale instead of just asking the Tuskegee Airmen for help.  Are we to believe that by 1944 a full four or five years after the start of the war depending on the theatre of operations that bomber squadrons were being constantly shot to pieces until the Tuskegee Airmen decided to do the job correctly?  I’m all for showing their worth but surely this is bending history just a tad too much.

Even the film’s major selling point of using state of the art CG to create convincing WWII dogfights doesn’t pan out as well as one would hope because director Anthony Hemingway creates wholly unbelievable sequences which again show extremes in this case having the Tuskegee Airmen shoot German planes down with next to total impunity while avoiding serious injury.  Audiences might expect one or two action sequences to play out like this but it never changes right up to the final sequence where the Tuskegee Airmen’s P-51 planes somehow have to face off against an entire squadron of German jets but after a minute of harrowing dialogue proceed to blow each and every one of them out of the sky.  This lopsidedness does nothing but eviscerate any sense of tension that should have been created during these intense aerial dogfights and it renders the sparkling CG work meaningless as audiences are more inclined to fall asleep than to have their heart rates rise.

It also needs to be pointed out that Red Tails contains one totally curious technical element that I have never before seen in a mainstream Hollywood “A” movie.  Whenever I watch Chinese films be it from the mainland, Hong Kong or Taiwan there is kind of a long standing joke that whenever a Caucasian or African American actor/actress appears that the audience is going to be on the receiving end of some truly awful dialogue delivery or flat-out bad acting performances.  This can easily be attributed to the fact that Chinese filmmakers tend to cast virtually anyone who vaguely fits the role in question from a ridiculously tiny pool or thespians who live in these territories which lends credence to the joke that they’ll hire just about anyone off the street without much reasoning.  At the same time, English is not the primary language of the main cast and crew forcing the director to give orders and evaluate this foreign talent essentially not understanding the nuances and verbal inflections that are necessary to deliver English dialogue in a convincing manner.

That said this phenomenon is unfortunately in effect all throughout Red Tails especially the predominantly Caucasian-only American bomber pilots who all deliver their lines with an intense banality with emphasis on virtually every wrong word.  It’s so hideous that I doubt anyone in the audience will miss it and it’s made even worse considering the dialogue is so ridiculously written.  I am at a total loss to identify how this came to pass but it is just not attributed to these bomber pilots but also to one of the film’s biggest incongruous elements being a side-track sojourn to a Nazi prison camp after one of the Tuskegee pilots is shot down and captured by German soldiers.  Once there he’s thrown into an all-Caucasian house which again is populated by actors who just butcher the English dialogue so much so that it becomes cringe worthy. Thus what we have here is not only lamentable acting performances but when it is coupled with this baffling sequence that seems lifted from a movie like Steve McQueen in “The Great Escape” it makes for a totally mystifying series of events that will leave audiences rolling in the floor for all the wrong reasons at the incongruity that is flashing before their eyes.

I have never met George Lucas and truth be told I would love to sit down with him to pick his brain about a whole range of topics.  Regardless of what one thinks of his films this is a man who has changed modern Hollywood filmmaking for better or for worse and he deserves whatever kudos is due him in crafting not only Star Wars but ILM as well.  Still, no matter his place in Hollywood history, he has shown a baffling tendency to chose side-projects to produce that have all essentially failed at the box office or with critical praise.  From the disastrous Howard the Duck to Willow (which I actually liked) to the totally ignored Radioland Murders his career as a producer is filled with a series of failures.

Red Tails while better than Howard the Duck and far above the mess that was Radioland Murders is yet another entry in his producer’s cap that fails in execution with a stale storyline, a somnambulist pace and suspect acting that does nothing to showcase the intense pride and success that the real Tuskegee Airmen deserve.  Perhaps a better avenue would have been to create a massive documentary project detailing the Tuskegee project from its inception all the way to the remaining members today to show how their courage and dedication to their cause carved a place in American history.  Unfortunately, that was not the case and Red Tails is just not a good enough movie to recommend.

*1/2 out of ****

2012, USA, 125 min, PG-13, 20th Century Fox/Lucasfilm
Directed by Anthony Hemingway
Story by John Ridley
Screenplay by John Ridley & Aaron McGruder
Based on the book by John B. Holway
Produced by Rick McCallum
Executive Producer George Lucas & Chas.Floyd Johnson
Co-Producer Ales Komarek
Original Music by Terence Blanchard
Cinematography by John B.Aronson

Terrence Howard: Colonel A.J. Bullard
Cuba Gooding Jr.: Major Emanuelle Stance
Nate Parker: Marty ‘Easy’ Julian
David Oyelowo: Joe ‘Lightning’ Little
Tristan Wilds: Ray ‘Junior’ Gannon
Elijah Kelley: Samuel ‘Joker’ George
Ne-Yo: Andrew ‘Smoky’ Salem
Kevin Phillips: Leon ‘Neon’ Edwards

© 2012 The Galactic Pillow

This year is somewhat special merely because the highly respected British magazine Sight and Sound is running its once per decade poll of international film critics asking them for their votes for the top ten greatest films of all time.  While any such survey is always controversial this particular poll has gained enough accolades from influential critics to deem it as perhaps the most prescient merely because it includes film professionals instead of the many polls which rely on response from the general public.  That said does director Milos Forman’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest stand a chance to crack the top ten?  No way but that’s because it’s up against so many other outstanding entries that have had much greater influence on filmmaking yet that in no way demeans the film as it is still as powerful today as it was back in 1975 and marks one of those rare films that has four quadrant appeal since its focus on the human spirit is inherently uplifting.

At first glance One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is a rather simplistic story about a criminal named R. P. Murphy (Jack Nicholson) who has been convicted of statutory rape with a minor.  However, the prison decides to send him to a mental institution for observation to determine if he is legally insane or if he is much more intelligent and is merely playing the fool to escape from hard labour.  Upon his arrival Murphy is shocked at essentially being surrounded by a truly mentally unstable group of characters yet quickly realizes that a big part of their lack of rehabilitation progress stems from the head nurse named Ratchet who exudes a calm logical manner yet is in fact cruelly manipulating her charges in a kind of sadistic game.  Thus the movie revolves around the exuberant free-spirited Murphy as he enters into a battle of wits with Nurse Ratchet in which the prize is freedom from her clutches.

While Nurse Ratchet is wrapped up in her rules and regulations and cannot see the forest for the trees Murphy clues in early as to her weakness and rises up to combat her in the only way he can by influencing those around him to see his point of view as well as to provide them with the impetus to overthrow the controlled system they find themselves in.  One by one they are inspired by his actions even if he fails miserably because they see in him flashes of the human being they aspire to be.  In one key scene he bets the group that he can lift a massive hydrotherapy stone console and use it as a giant projectile to break a window in order to escape.  All the patients are understandably dubious that he can manage the feat and bet against him prompting Murphy to attempt the impossible feat but loses the challenge as it is much too heavy for him to even budge.  The various patients who had been watching him with excitement suddenly seem crestfallen that he failed yet as Murphy exits he blurts, “At least I tried.”  The message cannot be more overt.

The funny thing about the concept of freedom is that it comes in many forms and as the film progresses one begins to understand the true genius of the film in that it can be read numerous ways far past its surface veneer.  For you see the film really isn’t about the trials and tribulations of mentally ill patients but rather the triumph of the human spirit and how it can survive in the bleakest of places provided it is fed just the right ingredients.  Murphy is that missing ingredient that everyone has been hoping for as he provides the patients with the joyous spirit that they have been lacking which motivates them to partake in actions they never thought possible.

Additionally, one needs to take into context the time period that this film originated specifically the mid 1970s when America was still reeling from the end of the Vietnam War as well as the downfall of Richard Nixon due to the Watergate scandal.  In this light the film can easily be analogous to the political winds of the time with Ratchet being the authoritative state and Murphy representing the oppressed people.  This makes the film actually incredibly pertinent for modern audiences especially when one takes the global unrest that have been going on across the Middle East this past year where subjugated individuals have been rising up against authoritative governmental control.

It might not seem like such a jolt today but people need to remember that Watergate was a giant shock to the system and to the belief that politicians and government in general was there to look after its citizens.  Watergate officially marked the end of innocence in this regards and it is not surprising to discover that ever since then that trust in government and other formal institutions has been on a massive downswing as evidenced by polls such as the one done by Pew which shows precipitous drops in faith in professions that once were held in such high esteem.  Leading the way are politicians, big business, lawyers and surprisingly, journalists which begs the question if the general public is becoming too acclimatized to corruption and cynicism leading to a potential breakdown in the very structures that have defined the Western way of life.  Nevertheless, that is a subject for a different essay and here in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest director Milos Forman and screenwriters Lawrence Hauben and Bo Goldman have condensed these major themes into an intensely poignant yet focused look at how these dynamics play out amongst Murphy, Ratchet and the small group of patients that surround them.

Being his first American film Milos Forman was never the most obvious choice to direct the movie but his directing style of letting scenes play out to their logical conclusion and utilizing multiple cameras to catch the actors who often times were not aware that they were even being captured on film works wonders in creating a wholly energetic and vibrant environment showcasing the multitude of nuances that naturally occur.  Forman also demonstrates a deft touch in weaving the many changes in tone that the film flows through from light-comedy to melodrama to outright eerie segments that might have squeamish viewers reacting in astonishment.  It is to his credit though that he does not shy away from violence allowing viewers to watch harrowing scenes that must have existed in mental institutions of the time showcasing now outdated and banned methods such as electric shock therapy that hit hard especially when juxtaposed to more light-hearted scenes that occurred shortly before.

Not to mention his slow-burn style and cadence truly pays off in the film’s climax when violence erupts naturally with a force and fury that has been magnified because it bursts from a well of repressed emotions that have come to a boil.  Unlike modern directors Forman also has the sense to corral the film’s soundtrack so that it only really becomes apparent when key moments or narrative beats ensue rather than lapsing into extremely melodramatic riffs that swell to so many crescendos that they threaten to overwhelm the scene.

It also has to be said that Forman and producers Michael Douglas (yes, that Michael Douglas!) and Saul Zaentz make the correct, albeit controversial for the time, decision to film in a real functioning mental asylum while capturing the solemn desolate landscape of Oregon most strikingly seen in the film’s opening shot showing the car transporting Murphy driving through a bleak landscape while a rather solemn guitar riff plays in the background.  Not only does this add to the air of authenticity the mental asylum itself takes on a role of its own essentially becoming a character in its own right and the white-washed walls and cleanliness of the location feels incredibly haunting working silently in part to reduce the motivation and morale of the patients who constantly stare at the non-descript sanitized world around them.

Although nowadays it would be sacrilegious to think of anyone else in Murphy’s role Nicholson was not the first choice for the part and it was only after much bigger names at the time in Gene Hackman and Marlon Brando turned the part down did Nicholson emerge at the forerunner.  One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest marks the real turning point in Jack Nicholson’s career and I would submit that R. P. Murphy is still his greatest performance.  Nicholson’s manic exuberance, intense passion and enormous screen charisma congeal magnificently in his portrayal of a small time crook who rebels against the establishment but at the same time grows to sympathize with those he intends to enlighten.

To be fair as evinced by his later work it is more apparent today that Nicholson is essentially playing himself yet even if this is true his work here in the film is downright masterful as evinced by many standout moments where his natural over-the-top charisma literally explodes in a way that envelopes the actors around him essentially making everyone raise their game merely to keep up with his performance.  At the same time he’s much rawer here than anytime else in his career and this roughness adds to his overall performance that he has yet to match.  Just contrast his Murphy with some of his later performances such as the Joker in Tim Burton’s Batman or Frank Costello in Martin Scorsese’s The Departed as Nicholson really appears to be doing nothing but channeling a pale impersonation of his most famous role.

While Nicholson usually gets the lion’s share of the credit the film would not have been as effective if the actress playing Nurse Ratchet underwhelmed and thankfully that is not the case.  Louise Fletcher might not have had a great career after this film but there is no doubting that her Nurse Ratchet is one of cinema’s greatest villains and I would implore modern filmmakers to take note of one reason why and that revolves around the mechanics of crafting a truly evil character.  Lesser filmmakers or scriptwriters seem to have forgotten that creating egotistical bombastic villains who have a propensity to snarl and chew scenery at every turn end up being nothing but a hoary old caricature and is rarely truly evil.

Nurse Ratchet comes off as almost the polar opposite to this comic book strategy in crafting villains as Fletcher totally underplays her with a serene, almost angelic calm and a matching monotone-like vocal cadence that purports to externally show a gentile caring nurse.  Yet the proof is in her eyes and when Fletcher gives a long cold stare it is as if icy daggers are flying through the air striking their target with razor sharp precision.  At the same time Ratchet is a mildly sympathetic character the longer the audience evaluates her because most will become conscious to the fact that here is an individual who is an instrument of evil yet has completely deluded herself into thinking she is actually their savior.  In short she has no idea that what she says and does is in fact eviscerating the groups’ morale or individually hurting them to the point that they acquiesce to her will because they inherently fear her wrath.

Fletcher’s Ratchet is a character that enjoys her power and position even though she might not totally be aware of her desires.  This becomes obvious especially in the scene where the senior staff of the mental asylum meet to discuss Murphy’s fate for his reckless behavior with the votes being essentially split down the middle to either send him back to prison or allow him to stay for treatment.  However, it is Ratchet’s assertion that she wants Murphy to stay because she feels that they can still provide him with help yet the scene is clearly meant to be read as well as an indication that Ratchet still has unfinished business and that no matter what she intends to win the battle of wits with him thus her passionate plea to keep him there is nothing but a ruse.

The supporting cast is uniformly good made up in part by a young Danny Devito, Christopher Lloyd and Brad Dourif all of which were in the initial stages of their film careers.  All three went on to have long careers in Hollywood with DeVito perhaps having the most success having moved from primarily acting to directing and producing films.  Nevertheless, the true standout here is actually Will Sampson as the Indian mute Chief Bromden who towers over the cast both literally and figuratively considering the man is almost 7 feet in height.  Essentially silent for virtually the entire film Sampson manages to convey intense charm and insight merely by a combination of his physical presence and laconic facial emotion.  Yet much like Fletcher it is what is happening behind the eyes that is revealing as Sampson soaks in Murphy’s teachings like a sponge until he “bursts” out of his wordless shell.

While all the actors playing the mental patients certainly perform well enough and do their part in generating massive audience sympathy this is also one area of contention for some critics as many make their case that most of these patients tilt mightily close to caricature with many of the actors seemingly creating mysterious ailments on the fly rather than basing them on true to life issues.

Personally, it really doesn’t bug me much whether or not any of them are close to approximating real mental issues because that is not the point of the film but rather Murphy’s spirit of life that sways them to at least question why certain rules and regulations need to be followed even though they don’t particularly make much sense.  At the same time, real or not the various performances strike just the right emotional balance to present individuals who clearly are suffering from some sort of deficiency yet without ever resorting to blatant mugging or overblown gestures that do nothing but attempt to pluck at heartstrings.  This is actually a very cogent point because the audience gets the feeling that is confirmed by the script that none of the supporting cast are truly playing mentally insane people but merely individuals who for some reason or other find themselves out of step with society.

Still for all its worth Milos Forman does allow himself to get carried away specifically in one sequence which many other critics have previously pointed out feels inherently detached in tone from the rest of the film.  This sequence is the whimsical fishing trip segment that roughly takes place half way through the movie and acts as the inflection point in the screenplay.  Having basically busted himself and a large throng of patients out of the institution Murphy proceeds to pick up his prostitute friend and then hijacks a boat in order to take everyone fishing.  The tone of the movie up to this point has been light-hearted at best yet filled with a huge degree of pathos considering each patient is individually detailed in a way to showcase their inherent issues.  Yet once the boat hits the middle of the ocean the film becomes almost saccharine as all these individuals with serious issues behave like frat boys out for a Sunday sojourn whooping it up while watching Murphy fornicate with his friend.  It’s an incredibly jarring segment that actually runs far too long throwing the film’s rhythm for a loop.

Thankfully, Forman quickly gets back to business by forcing the script to finally cause Murphy to clue in that he is in a far greater predicament than he previously thought.  In a powerful scene Murphy is joking around in a pool having the time of his life until an errant line of dialogue turns his entire world upside down.  Murphy might have an exuberant joie de vivre but he’s not exactly too intelligent in terms of the law and he’s completely shaken to the core when he is told that he is one of the few patients who have been committed to the institution and that everyone else is actually there voluntarily.  Murphy has erroneously thought that like a prison he would be free to go only after 68 days yet being formally committed means that he has to convince the powers that be that he is fit to re-enter society.  At this point the game suddenly turns very real for him and the stakes become his life because he realizes that there is little chance Ratchet will let him go so he has to resort to much riskier strategies.

I must say though that I do not agree with those who declare that the ending is a downer as it is one of the only avenues in which the film can successfully tell its tale.  What the Chief does at the end is not cruel but uplifting because he inherently understands the power and worth of an image, in this case the image of hope and inspiration and all he does is provide a means in which the remaining patients can keep it close to their hearts going forward.  By his actions he is perpetuating the power of the myth making it possible that everyone can potentially have a “happy” ending.  At the same time the Chief manages to proceed with Murphy’s plan of escape precisely because he has bought into Murphy’s world view and the final sequence of him running away from the camera towards the hills and freedom is emotionally powerful as it manages to encapsulate many of the themes into a single haunting shot and works almost in complete reverse to the film’s opening segment.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is still a rousing crowd-pleaser because although the setting of a mental institution is visually and emotionally a downer the film itself presents a universal story of David and Goliath where an individual can fight for his/her beliefs even if all the odds are stacked against them.  In a way the film feels very much like another similarly constructed movie in The Shawshank Redemption as both feature characters that are run through the ringer and constantly have to fight off authoritative figures and control mechanisms in order to escape literally or metaphorically.

However, as good a film as Shawshank is it lacks that one marquee performance that seems to transcend time itself and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest actually has two in Nicholson and Fletcher as the duo presents one of the greatest adversarial combos in film history.  Milos Forman went on to have a generally decent Hollywood career and hit the big time again with Amadeus which fell one award short of the “Big 5” but there is no doubt that his masterpiece is One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and deservedly so as he has created one of cinema’s best and most memorable attempts at showcasing the intrinsic power of the human spirit while at the same time managing to weave a multi-layered social critique into the mix that manages to deftly combine poignant drama and black comedy.

**** out of ****

1975,133 Min, R, Fantasy Film/United Artists
Directed by Milos Forman
Screenplay play Lawrence Hauben & Bo Goldman
Based on the Novel by Ken Kesey
Produced by Michael Douglas & Saul Zaentz
Associate Producer Martin Fink
Original Music by Jack Nitzsche
Cinematography by Haskell Wexler

Jack Nicholson:R.P. McMurphy
Louise Fletcher:Nurse Ratched
Christopher Lloyd: Taber
Brad Dourif: Billy Bibbit
Danny DeVito: Martini
Will Sampson: Chief Bromden
Michael Berryman:Ellis
Peter Brocco: Col. Matterson
Sydney Lassick: Cheswick
Dean R. Brooks: Dr. Spivey
Alonzo Brown: Miller
Scatman Crothers: Turkle
Mwako Cumbuka: Warren
William Duell: Sefelt
Josip Elic: Bancini
Lan Fendors: Nurse Itsu
Mimi Sarkisian: Nurse Pilbow

© 2012 The Galactic Pillow

Battleship creates a scenario where a scientific team manages to locate another Earth-like planet and decides to send what we presume to be a friendship message through the vast distance of space.  Meanwhile, we are introduced to our hero played by Taylor Kitsch who is probably still reeling from the critical drubbing he and his previous film John Carter received back in March which is now the biggest monetary flop Hollywood has ever seen.  Admittedly, it is not totally his fault that John Carter self-combusted at the box office yet here in Battleship he’s basically playing a minor variation of that other film’s hero albeit with a crew cut and far spiffier attire in a Navy uniform.

Kitsch is Lieutenant Alex Hopper your prototypical meathead jock who seems to only care about getting in women’s pants and pissing off his superior officers.  One would expect that such a lout would have long ago washed out of the Navy yet here he gets away with gross insubordination as well as having less than stellar command and leadership skills yet through a ham-fisted speech with Admiral Shane (Liam Neeson) where he chastises his lower ranking officer by mentioning his wasted potential everyone in the audience will undoubtedly understand that by the end of the movie that Hopper will essentially be a changed man.  Why?  Because the film is crafted from a series of genre tropes where every character is based on archetypes thus when we are introduced to Hopper’s by the book brother who excels in everything he does or Rihanna’s Petty Officer Cora ‘Weps’ Raikes who seems to want to channel Vasquez from James Cameron’s Aliens the audience immediately clues in to where these characters are coming from and by extension what is going to happen to them.

In that sense the film is about as generic as it can get as all these characters have minimal to non-existent motivations past surviving the alien onslaught while obviously our blockhead hero needs to learn a degree of humility that leads to him becoming a better commander.  Throw in a subplot which creates a rival to Hopper through a Japanese Captain named Nagata and the movie truly telegraphs its intentions early as anyone with a pulse will realize the hot-headed rivals will eventually have to team up to kick alien ass.

To be fair Battleship is not the type of movie that makes it easy to mark actors and actresses because virtually all the dialogue is situational such as Hopper ordering people to clear the bridge or Rihanna attempting technical exposition reading her computer screen.  As such the movie doesn’t really give anyone including Kitsch any opportunity to show their acting chops which I suppose somewhat validates Rihanna’s decision to make this her first film as she is essentially called to do nothing else but run around shooting different firearms.  Clearly, just about anyone can tackle a role like this and I would guess she was looking for exactly such a character to ease herself into acting without really attempting anything more substantial.

Right from the get go viewers would be wise to not dwell too long on each individual narrative beat and what passes for “convincing” expository sequences because any serious thought will immediately derail the film.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that Earth’s friendship message will not be replied to in kind and a group of mysterious contacts appears flying through space in formation.  Instead of scrambling the global military no one seems to care enough until it is basically too late and the flying objects land in the Pacific Ocean conveniently right next to the largest concentration of navies in the world which are undergoing friendly war games off the coast of Hawaii.

Curious, Admiral Shane orders three destroyers to peel away from the main force and investigate the unidentified objects that have splashed down into the ocean and to no one’s surprise they turn out to be a hostile alien force made entirely of CG that makes them appear to be Transformer rejects from Michael Bay’s franchise.  In an obvious plot device to save money the aliens erect a massive energy shield around Hawaii trapping the three ships inside and leaving the bulk of Shane’s massive navy on the outside looking in.  Yes, this is your prototypical David and Goliath scenario as the three ships have to face down the invasion force alone although the film totally seems to forget that Hawaii is not only the headquarters of the US Pacific fleet but a bevy of other military installations including air bases.

At the same time the script’s true failings keep coming as the entire alien angle is botched to epic proportions as it is revealed that the alien force consists entirely of water-based mechanical vessels which only fire what can only be described as a combination rocket/depth charge canister as its primary weapon that hurtles towards its target and then explodes on contact.  This is truly asinine as audiences are led to believe that aliens which can traverse the vastness of space in mere days only have a level of technology that is barely above humankind.  Making it worse the aliens themselves are adorned with metallic armored battle suits which protect them from human gunfire yet they are primarily armed with a big knife that resembles an omni tool from Mass Effect except instead of being made of cool-looking energy are literally physical metal blades.

Thus instead of enacting some sort of epic gun/laser firefight the entire film concocts situations where the aliens do nothing but melee their foes either trying to skewer their targets or punch them silly.  Just when one thinks it can’t get any worse the screenwriters decide that they need to create an Achilles’ heel for the alien combatants to provide an excuse for humanity to triumph thus they throw in the fact that they cannot stand sunlight and are easily blinded to the point where they are useless.  You can guess what happens next.

Actually, the Transformers analogy is incredibly apt because Battleship is obviously a franchise owned by Hasbro, the same company that creates both Transformers and G.I.Joe.  It is plainly obvious that Hasbro is attempting to turn Battleship into its next big movie franchise in a plan unlike Marvel which is also in the midst of turning nearly all its comic book heroes into global cinematic blockbusters.  Yet while fans can understand Marvel’s ultimate intent was to corral all its heroes in one big movie in The Avengers one can only be befuddled to even ponder what a massive Transformers, G.I.Joe and now Battleship team up would produce.  However, considering the collective cinematic merit of these franchises one would expect the resulting collaboration to be the biggest box office turkey of all time.

So why doesn’t this film receive one of my vaunted ZERO scores?  Well, it’s just personal as I really am a sucker to see modern ships in combat, a scenario which doesn’t really occur much in mainstream Hollywood fare that seems to focus more on flashier fighter jets.  Additionally, the film does look rather spiffy as the big budget pays off in some nice special effects work when the human and alien fleets do face off.  Finally, I will admit that while the writers got everything wrong the one scene that actually shows a whiff of creativity is actually the one I thought would be the hokiest where the film finally attempts to reference the grid-like combat of the board game right down to an officer rattling off coordinates like “E-13” while someone else shouts “MISS” in the background.  Yes, it’s still stretching believability to the nines but heck director Peter Berg manages to pull it off with some much needed tension.

Speaking of which, Peter Berg has obviously done much better work in the past most notably in The Kingdom and Friday Night Lights yet here one can’t help but wonder if Hasbro executives told him to do nothing but mimic Michael Bay as the result is a movie that spiritually feels very much in line with Transformers with a kind of bluish tinge in every action scene plus the inclusion of the now requisite shot of an office tower being cut in two and falling toward the ground.

Thankfully, Berg doesn’t push the extremes here and make all the action entirely confusing like Bay often does but perhaps that’s also because the nature of ship to ship combat is much slower than hulking robots bashing each other in the face.  Still, Berg actually tries to focus a bit more on the characters and really isn’t afraid to dial the pace back every so often to provide a needed break in the wall of action and provide some albeit banal exposition and character moments that unfortunately don’t do much to enhance audience empathy towards our heroes.

It’s too bad as a serious rewrite of these segments might have gone a long way in crafting compelling characters yet this is not meant to be.  However, while Berg actually seems to direct much better flowing action sequences he still falls into the same trap as Bay by ramping up the fighting as the film enters its final reel so much so that it becomes annoying the longer it drones on.  Also, if one closed their eyes I have no doubt many would aurally think they are watching a Bay film merely because the score for Battleship is composed by none other than Transformers vet Steve Jablonsky who phones in an almost carbon-copy instrumental soundtrack.

Of all the franchises that children play Battleship was never a clear choice to translate into a feature film and considering the final product that statement is even more prescient as the attempt to graft an alien invasion story with naval combat is a mighty stretch even for the best of scribes.  There are far easier starting points in the Hasbro board game library such as Axis and Allies which could easily be turned into a grand WWII spectacle or even Trivial Pursuit as one can at least envision a scenario not unlike the serious drama Quiz Show.  By going for broke on Battleship it’s clear Hasbro is attempting to tap into the same demographic as Transformers and G.I. Joe that being young males 14-22 right down to the love interest, this time played by Brooklyn Decker who inexplicably spends most of the movie in spandex showing off her physical assets much like good old Megan Fox did.  Berg thankfully doesn’t allow himself to go nuts and let the camera seemingly caress every young nubile female character yet one really can’t ignore the comparisons between Hasbro franchises.

Considering that Battleship features a total lack of a coherent plot, less than logical science, comedy routines and one liners that fall like lead pipes and wooden acting so stiff that they might as well have been playing physical wooden ships commanded by Admiral Nelson himself and it all adds up to a less than captivating experience and makes one hope that Hasbro had instead invested all this money on the cult hit, My Little Pony.  Then again, knowing the track record of Hasbro executives the chances are high that those ponies are going to battle robotic aliens bent on world domination and instead of focusing on personal relationships our heroines will butt heads as everyone jostles to be the alpha female.

* out of ****

2012, USA, 131 Min, PG-13, Universal Pictures/Hasbro
Directed by Peter Berg
Written by Erich Hoeber & Jon Hoeber
Produced by Brian Goldner, Duncan Henderson, Bennett Schneir, Scott Stuber, Sarah Aubrey, Peter Berg
Original Music by Steve Jablonsky
Cinematography by Tobias A. Schliessler
Film Editing by Colby Parker Jr., Billy Rich, Paul Rubell

Taylor Kitsch: Lieutenant Alex Hopper
Alexander Skarsgård: Commander Stone Hopper
Rihanna: Petty Officer Cora ‘Weps’ Raikes
Brooklyn Decker: Samantha Shane
Tadanobu Asano: Captain Yugi Nagata
Hamish Linklater: Cal Zapata
Liam Neeson: Admiral Shane
Peter MacNicol: Secretary of Defense
John Tui: Chief Petty Officer Walter ‘The Beast’ Lynch
Jesse Plemons: Boatswain Mate Seaman Jimmy ‘Ordy’ Ord

© 2012 The Galactic Pillow

For the most part this is a period of history that is totally ignored in Western history classes although students from mainland China and Southeast Asia have a much better understanding of the events in question.  Certainly whenever one thinks of revolutions one immediately begins to wonder just how exactly events transpired to provoke citizens to take up arms such as being overly taxed, unjust laws, a widening gap between the rich and poor, a lack of political leadership etc.  The reasons are too numerous and as all things in life it is probably a combination of hundreds of these grievances that led to the straw that broke the camel’s back.  Thus as 1911 starts there is no doubt many in the audience are going to be hoping for some insight into how this period of history unfolded but lo and behold it isn’t long before one realizes something is amiss.

For all its faults 1911 is an often times visual epic in the grand traditional of David Lean and seems to have its heart in the right place by trying to show how downtrodden commoners had finally had enough of living under the iron boot of totally incompetent and corrupt Royal leadership.  The film essentially is split into two separate yet concurrent narratives one showcasing a rather beaten-up looking Jackie Chan as General Huang Xing who is tasked by his compatriot Dr. Sun Yat-Sen (Winston Chao) to lead parts of the revolutionary army in battle against the Qing dynasty forces.  The other half of the film focuses on Dr. Sun as he travels outside of China on a kind of global tour to ask for monetary and political aid from any that would listen to him.

At first, there is nothing wrong with this parallel structure as it provides a nice contrast between Huang Xing leading troops amongst the blaring gunfire and stench of death on the battlefields and the more stately exploits of Dr. Sun who dresses smartly in a Western business suit as he attempts to gain support through his oratory skills.  However, the film ultimately comes unglued because it fails to realize that merely showing historical events as they occur is pointless without any emotional resonance.  Thus audiences need to feel sympathetic with the various characters but also informed and given context as to why and how certain events occur and the resulting ramifications from them.  Here the film botches this at nearly every turn by employing extensive use of titles and short blurbs that appear and summarize what is actually going on at that moment in time.  Thus there are large tracts of the film such as the opening ten minutes where viewers are inundated with tons of different names attributed to actors which appear for mere seconds yet there is no attempt made to give any characterizations to any of them.

Case in point is the opening shot which shows a female revolutionary named Qiu Jin (Ning Jing) as she is being led to her public execution.  I will easily admit that I had no idea who she was and had to go research it after the movie ended to find out that she was a feminist writer who regularly championed women’s rights and endeavoured to constantly speak out against the Qing government.  Yet this is a damning critique of the film as it offers no account of her eminent place in this period of history.  Instead, she shows up and smiles a bit as she is being led through the crowds while everyone stares almost in reverence of her presence.  Then the sword literally and metaphorically falls and it is a straight cut to the film’s title and we never hear of her or how her act of sacrifice managed to spur others to take up her plight.

The utter lack of cogent information is a major mistake and gives the impression that the film is primarily aimed at those who already know the history and the famous figures of the time.  For newcomers this is unfortunately maddening and leads to a feeling of extreme detachment as many will just be frustrated at not knowing what is going on.

Making matters worse the lead characters themselves are given the extreme short-shift and are only defined from one or two major traits.  Thus Dr. Sun appears to have a high degree of nobility, inherent charisma and is a wonderfully persuasive speaker yet that is all the information we are given.  There’s never a scene which tries to answer how a simple doctor suddenly decided to overthrow the monarchy leaving audiences to wonder what made this famous figure tick.  Even worse is Huang Xing who is purported to be a great general yet spends the movie apparently lurching from defeat to defeat.

It gets actually frustrating to see him command his troops as we are never given a glimpse into his thought process and how he comes to his strategy to defeat the enemy.  Instead, time and time again he practices what appears to be a full frontal assault on the enemy as if somehow hoping that sheer numbers and strength in their beliefs will win the day.  Thus it is ironic that time and time again Huang leads his troops into battle in such a fashion and after minutes of frantic slow-motion enhanced battles suddenly text will appear saying he lost the battle and had to retreat.  Of course, what isn’t told is that the government forces far outnumbered the revolutionary troops a fact that places these battles into a different light.  Without this knowledge it appears as if two sprawling armies are forever butting heads in a never ending firefight.

At the same time the movie decides to try and portray heroism on the battlefield in ham-fisted sequences that end up being soulless.  For instance, there’s one segment where Huang’s troops are being mowed down by a powerful Gatling gun that is ripping through his army with deadly accuracy.  In a heroic attempt to rally his troops Huang asks for all the grenades to be taped together and he grabs the bundle about to go over the side of the trench on a suicide run before he is forcibly stopped by his men who obviously don’t want him to die.  Instead, while Huang struggles to get back up another trooper picks up the package, runs across the battlefield and manages to complete the suicide run by throwing the grenades onto the Gatling gun placement before exploding in a rain of debris.

On the face of it all this is your standard emotional moment of bravery that shows the dedication of both Huang and his men yet as the dust begins to settle on this heroic act a blurb pops up saying that unfortunately the battle was lost.  In other words, the entire sequence we just saw was rendered inert and basically redundant and it gives audiences the impression that Co-directors Jackie Chan and Li Chang are purposely playing with patriotic emotions for that sake alone in total disregard for the fact that it was a defeat.  What is the message that they are trying to evoke?  That bravery and nobility are there in a loss as well as a victory?  That sort of argument can be used on both sides in a war as there is no reason to believe that this sort of behaviour was solely owned by the revolutionaries and not the troops fighting for the Qing dynasty.

To exacerbate matters the way these battles are shot make for some nice quality still photographs but are never given proper setup to inform viewers why they are important and how they unfolded.  I am reminded of a simple foreshadowing technique that James Cameron used in Titanic which worked wonders to educate the audience in as unobtrusive a manner as possible.  At the beginning of the movie Bill Paxton’s scientist character is seen talking to the older Rose and on a nearby computer monitor is a step by step graphic of how the Titanic broke up.  Thus audiences can see that the ship begins to take on water at the bow until it eventually snaps in two as one of the funnels tumbles off.  Thus in this subtle technique Cameron has already informed the audience as to how the ill-fated ship breaks up and provides them with just the right amount of needed knowledge to understand what they will witness later on in the film as the ship sinks.

Contrast this to 1911 where we are given epic structured shots of armies moving around, artillery blasting ships or armies and the requisite trench warfare sequences where men and dirt explode in every direction.  The problem is that these are all unrelated images that are thrown together but the audience has no idea how the overall battlefield looks like.  We don’t know how troops are deployed or even the general layout of the terrain. Without any context to what is going on or where on the map of China we are suppose to be these sometimes beautiful images of death and destruction are completely meaningless montages and ultimately become a giant bore.  You know the directors are scraping the bottom of the originality barrel when once again we are shown yet another “shocking” scene where a poor soldier has to endure getting his leg sawed off in case it gets infected while melodramatic music pours out of the speaker system.  Once again the film completely betrays itself as being aimed towards its own mainland China audience who obviously will know where these cities and battlefields are but the rest of the world is going to have to use a map to understand where the action is taking place.

This brings up another issue and that is that everyone in the Qing dynasty is portrayed as completely out of touch or a self-serving lout who only cares for political or material gain.  While this might have been true it also tilts the film completely out of whack as there is no sympathy generated for the argument that perhaps Imperial rule wasn’t so bad.  Joan Chen as the Empress Dowager is mainly wasted as she spends the entire movie not wanting to believe in the strength of the revolutionary army and her son, Pu Yi, who we all know is the last emperor is nothing but a cry baby.  Again there is no attempt to even try and show how and why the Qing rulers have become complacent and suffer from a high degree of ineptitude.  A sequence or two that showed how their thinking was warped or shaped into believing in their divine right to rule might have worked wonders as without this the entire court appears to be nothing more than a bunch of circus clowns.

As mentioned before, Jackie Chan is really beginning to look his age although it must be said that he has certainly matured as a dramatic actor.  This should not be any surprise for those who have seen many of his films of which this is actually his one hundredth.  Now that is an amazing accomplishment.  What isn’t so amazing is that he turns in a rather mundane performance rooted in the fact that the script gives him precious little to do except shout and bark orders on the battlefield.  At the same time in an almost bizarre sequence that comes late in the film Chan finally gets to do some martial arts by disarming government sympathizers which feels totally out of place as the entire set piece has no narrative weight giving the impression that it has been included out of some respect to Chan’s fighting movie fans who need to see him fend off thugs.

Although I feel that she is in every Chinese movie I have seen lately, Li Bing Bing as Chan’s love interest finally turns in a performance that can best be politely described as mediocre as she spends the movie basically crying whenever she is on screen.  Considering that the main narrative thrust lies with Chan’s Huang Xing and Chao’s Dr. Sun Yat-Sen the entire romantic subplot is given the shaft and provides as many sparks as a wet matchstick.  Thus we only discover snippets of information that rarely lead us to conclude romance is even building.  At first the duo are thrown together as husband and wife to provide Huang Xing with an alibi yet a few scenes later they are hugging, shedding tears and making googly eyes at one another.  Further on in the film she suddenly turns up pregnant.  This sort of temporal jumping does the subplot no favours and audiences are again going to be exasperated that nothing is explained or elaborated on.

Finally, Winston Chao makes a fine Dr. Sun Yat-Sen providing the film with its best and most grounded performance.  His take on the doctor is certainly engaging albeit relying too much on the fact that this is such a noble character without any vices whatsoever.  However, this comes as no surprise because he’s played Dr. Sun four times already!  He might as well spend the rest of his life playing the good doctor in a kind of a perpetual role.  How this came to pass is anyone’s guess but it is safe to say that he slides into the part with ease and is certainly magnetic when making speeches.  As an added bonus many of these scenes are fully in English and though he retains a discernible accent it feels quite natural.

Unfortunately, all the Western characters they cast must have fallen off the back of a turnip truck as their speech is forced and stilted and they clearly appear to be uneasy and stiff.  The film also glosses over a figure like Homer Lea, an American adventurer who routinely spoke and helped Dr. Sun talking about strategy.  In the film he shows up and proclaims his intent to help Dr. Sun and then suddenly disappears until near the end when he pops up out of nowhere with a noticeable limp surprising even Dr. Sun who openly asks when he arrived in China.  Who was Homer Lea and why is he limping as if he is crippled?  Why should the audience care as he has had only a minute or two of screentime with no apparent explanation?

In the end, it is a metaphor for the entire movie as scene after scene goes by without rhyme or reason and those who aren’t already knowledgeable about this history should stay far away from it as it is nigh inaccessible.  Watching wanton destruction and flailing bodies can be warranted for a minute or two just to watch the skill behind constructing such action spectacles but without a compelling narrative the producers would have been better served if they never bothered to green-light the movie in the first place and release a non-fiction historical book.

*1/2 out of ****

2011, China, 99 Minutes, R, Changchun Film Studio Group/Shanghai Film Studio Group
Directed by Jackie Chan & Li Zhang
Produced by Jackie Chan
Screenplay by Wang Xingdong & Chen Baoguang
Cinmatography by Wai Huang
Art Direction by Hai Zhao
Music by Ding Wei

Jackie Chan: Huang Xing
Li Bing Bing: Xu Zonghan
Winston Chao: Dr. Sun Yat-Sen
Chun Sun: Yuan Shikai
Joan Chen: Longyu
Jaycee Chan: Zhang Zhenwu
Ming Hu: Liao Zhongkai
Wenli Jiang: Soong Ching-Ling

© 2012 The Galactic Pillow

Personally, I absolutely loved feature film composer Cliff Mansell’s, “Leaving Earth” track that encapsulated the next to total emotional desolation that the Reaper invasion left on Commander Shepard and it certainly ranks in the top individual tracks in the franchise even though it was basically Mansell’s only composition for the game. While the instrumental original that is punctuated by periodic horn blasts is incredibly eerie this song by Malukah manages to deftly incorporate the many tunes she has picked into a coherent and lyrical piece.

I also have a soft spot for Christpher Lennertz’s “A Future for the Krogan” as it manages to strike the right balance between the spiritual elements of Eve’s character and the supposedly bright future that she might bring to the long-suffering race.  Since I have always been a soundtrack lover it should come as no surprise that I much prefer the original instrumental score but there’s no doubting the quality of this fan made track.  As for some of the other tracks she has used it is great that the “Mass Effect Theme” itself is included and it clearly gives me fond memories of the beginning of ME1 which is edited to perfection with the nifty reveal of the Normandy and Commander Shepard herself/himself walking through the hallways towards the forward cockpit.

If you liked this song you can certainly check out her other video game inspired melodies through YouTube such as her many renditions from Skyrim which now have multiple million hits.  As for the Mass Effect 3 soundtrack I would seriously recommend it to anyone – yes, even those who hate the ending with a passion as there are some truly iconic tracks on it although the overall production seems to move the score closer to being more orchestral than the original electronic beats in the first game.  Of course, if you were lucky enough to purchase one of the many ME3 Collector Editions you already have it saved somewhere on your PC or your game console.

As an end note, just to rub it in, where exactly is the entire track that plays when Shepard meets the Catalyst as it is completely missing from the original soundtrack release?  Conspiracy?  Let’s don’t debate this point…

© 2012 The Galactic Pillow

Looking at the various previews the animation certainly looks top-notch and far above the level seen in the original show yet what makes me smile widely is that this new show seems to be basically copying many shot setups from the original albeit with much 3D CG integration.  Thus what we have here appears to be a totally verbatim retelling of the first season albeit done with current technology as well as a spiffy character redesign that captures the overall style and feeling of the original.  Admittedly, the almost exact shot compositions might change as the episodes go by but so far I have to say that the new series crew seems to be showing massive reverence to the original show.

My inner geek is certainly impressed that nearly everything with the exception of the characters looks nearly exactly the same as the original including all the spaceship designs.  However, as much as I love the original first season a simple retelling of it without any new material seems to me like a bit of a lost opportunity and though some fans might not see it this way I am of the opinion that there should at least be some new elements that add intrigue to the overall narrative.

I have seen Star Blazers so many times, especially the Iscandar arc, that watching spiffy new animation can only entertain me for so long and all the “big” reveals won’t exactly be very impactful if they remain totally aligned to the original show.  It doesn’t mean that the new crew should rip apart the narrative and shamelessly bolt on unneeded elements but one would expect that some modern sensibilities can be successfully integrated.  For instance, Nova (Yuki in the Japanese version) is basically incredibly passive the entire first season and certainly a modern take on her character should warrant a much more active role.  It doesn’t have to be as drastic as the live action film where Nova/Yuki, played by Meisa Kuroki, morphs into a clone of the rebooted Battlestar Galactica’s Starbuck but admittedly some of the supporting cast needs more screentime in order to flesh out their characters.

Looking at the footage from the first ten minutes showcasing the now famous last stand at Pluto battle it certainly appears as if the new crew know exactly what they are doing by adding extra dialogue and expanding certain segments to provide more insight to what is essentially Earth’s last stand.  If anything, the new ten minute sequence amps up the drama and firmly accentuates the show’s space opera atmosphere.  Seriously, after playing through Mass Effect 3 this new footage from Space Battleship Yamato 2199 certainly gives me hope that space opera themed shows no matter their country or origin can still resonate in a way that mere action sci-fi cannot.

The new show will clock in at 26 half-hour episodes and hopefully some diehard fans will get to work a.s.a.p. when it premieres to provide some much needed fansubs.  Obviously, it shouldn’t take long for a domestic distributor to license it and hopefully release it on Blu-Ray.

2012, Produced by Xebec, AIC
Directed by Yutaka Izubuchi
Music by Akira Miyagawa
Character Design by Nobuteri Yuuki

Susumu Kodai (Derek Wildstar in Star Blazers): Daisuke Ono
Yuki Mori (Nova in Star Blazers): Houko Kuwashima
Captain Okita (Captain Avatar in Star Blazers): Takayuki Sugou
Daisuke Shima (Mark Venture in Star Blazers): Kenichi Suzumura

© 2012 The Galactic Pillow

Note: In case no one remembers the original show and how it looked well here’s the same battle of Pluto sequence from the first episode of the Americanized version (Star Blazers):

As we enter the month of May I have a massive backlog of movie and video game reviews to post so I’m hoping to hit at least double digit entries this month although admittedly much of the material doesn’t revolve around current hot topics.  At the same time thanks go out to the readers who have certainly responded to the Mass Effect articles in record numbers as the two editorials alone now account for 75% of all life time hits to this blog.

That said this is still my personal blog and I intend to post whatever I want whenever I choose so there are no promises that I will be staying on top of current trends.  Many have asked me why I sometimes post reviews of video games and movies so late after their release and the easy answer is because no one pays me to do so.  LOL.  Every game review is done after I have fully finished the single player experience while movie reviews come about whenever I am feeling a particular drive to go on a film binge.  Way back in the 1980s in my high school days my friends and I would see multiple movies a week in the cinema and my viewings skyrocketed when I was film school to sometimes one or two a day but those times are long gone.  Nowadays it takes serious time to fire up my Blu-ray player or venture out to the cinema which is why these reviews rarely appear when a film premieres.  Now, there will still be times when I’m close such as when next year’s Star Trek II (XII?) opens but these are exceptions to the rule.

In terms of Star Trek news I am sure most fans will have heard by now that Trekmovie has already confirmed the spoiler that Benedict Cumberbatch is in fact playing Khan and that Leonard Nimoy is back for a cameo.  I have no problem with Nimoy although I have to wonder just how many movies J.J. Abrams is going to feature him as the original crew really should step aside so that the new cast can have their time in the spotlight.  As for the bigger news that Khan is back…let’s just say I have no doubt Star Trek fans are going through their own ME3-esque debate as to whether or not this is a good idea.  Off the top of my head I would say “no” but then again I have no idea what Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman have in store for the sequel so I’ll remain cautiously optimistic that they can pull it off.

In the mean time if anyone wants me to review anything just drop me a comment somewhere on this blog and I’ll respond to the request if I have the time.  I have close to 1000 movie reviews stuck in my archives that I have been too lazy to edit to post but eventually I’ll get around to it.  If you really want to talk more Mass Effect then continue to post comments to either editorial and we’ll respond as best we can.  I originally started my ME3 review shortly after I finished the game but seeing the way the ending controversy erupted I have no idea when I will finish and post it.  Ditto for Mass Effect: Infiltrator over on Apple’s IOS devices which I have also finished but not bothered to review yet.  Perhaps if I have the time I will post them later down the road when the brouhaha calms down.

© 2012 The Galactic Pillow

The Mass Effect 3 ending has become a social phenomenon of its own category. Somewhere between the apparently low-budget ending sequence, the contrived interpretations and the misuse of charitable organizations to bring attention to the fans’ disappointment, there’s a decent ending: an ending that does for the most part make sense and could have been emotionally satisfying if not for a few unfortunate circumstances.

The ending animation is obviously subpar. It’s riddled with so many mistakes that it makes the audience believe in very strange things, like that Shepard is indoctrinated. The Catalyst and Reapers’ intentions are explained so quickly that anyone not familiar with the astrobiology by which the ending was inspired would find it daunting and confusing at best, meaningless at worst.

As a popular science junkie, I have a perspective on the ending that I’d like to share. It’s hard to appreciate the ending without knowing a thing or two about the rather esoteric field of astrobiology, so I want to share what I think is relevant and how it relates to the Mass Effect 3 ending. It probably won’t change the minds of the fanbase, but I hope it makes the ending more interesting, or at least gives you something to chew on.

I also understand that when during development Bioware said there’d be 16 endings there were only 4, people would be disappointed. But I don’t sympathize with people who claim that their choices throughout the trilogy end up having no effect. I explain why in the second last section.

All in all, I think the point of the ending was missed, and that’s just sad.

1.0 Scientific basis of the Catalyst and Reapers story.
1.1 Some terminology: the Kardashev Scale.
1.2 The Drake Equation and why spacefaring synthetics are a threat to all life in the galaxy.
2.0 Definite errors in the ending.
3.0 Common misconceptions and disputes about the ending.
3.1 Shepard was indoctrinated, it was all a hallucination.
3.2 The “control” option is paragon because the Catalyst is attempting to deceive Shepard.
3.3 The paragon ending involves controlling all synthetics.
3.4 EDI and the Geth prove that peace between synthetics and machine is possible.
3.5 The Catalyst could have allowed Shepard to destroy just the Reapers instead of all synthetic life.
3.6 The Crucible turns out not to have a purpose.
3.7 The anonymous child is the Catalyst.
3.8 The Catalyst and the Reapers want to kill all organic life.
3.9 Mass relay destructions always cause supernova-like explosions.
3.10 The Catalyst could have implemented the synthesis or renegade options by itself.
3.11 Shepard sympathizes with the Illusive Man.
3.12 The explosions engulfing the solar system should have killed everyone.
The ending was terrible because the synthesis beam couldn’t have possibly merged organic and synthetics so immediately
3.14 Sovereign was a vanguard of the Reapers. It claimed the Citadel. Why then is the Catalyst needed?
3.15 The Catalyst makes no sense because there is no explanation as to what created it. 
3.16 The ending discards important philosophies and themes. 
3.17 Bioware is changing the ending, so they’ve effectively admitted that it sucks. 
3.18 The original ending was written by another author; therefore the published ending must suck. 
4.0 On the ending’s lack of closure.
5.0 Closing thoughts 
6.0 Astro Boy: The exact same social phenomenon 50 years ago

1.0 Scientific basis of the Catalyst and Reapers story

The ending is very strongly foreshadowed throughout the whole series, but to see it, you need to be aware of the some of the rather esoteric theories and hypotheses in astrobiology being discussed in the past few years by the likes of Michio Kaku and Stephen Hawking. Bioware may have been able to make the ending more poignant and emotional if it had elaborated on the concepts for the people who aren’t aware of them.

This is all information that can be gleaned from documentaries such as Morgan Freeman’s Into the Wormhole, Stephen Hawking’s Into the Universe, Carl Sagan’s Cosmos, and Michio Kaku’s Visions of the Future. Incidentally, Kaku talks a bit about Mass Effect here.

With all of the following in mind, there was no contrived plot twist in the end; it was the most logical conclusion to the story, maybe even the only logical conclusion. In fact, the only reason I felt the ending was decent and not great is because there were no surprises the way there were in a game like Portal.

1.1 Some terminology: the Kardashev Scale

Civilizations are commonly classified on the Kardashev Scale, which groups civilizations in order of power consumption, and thus, presumably, of their technological limits:

• Type I civilizations control entire planets, using technologies such as large-scale fusion, antimatter and solar energy. They command roughly 10^16 watts of energy. Type I civilization can terraform planets, and individuals are often said to have indefinite lifespans (not to be confused with immortality).
• Type II civilizations control entire stars, constructing planet-sized megastructures such as Dyson spheres to collect an entire star’s power. They command roughly 4*10^26 watts of energy. Type II civilizations are typically thought to be immortal, capable even of avoiding or surviving supernovas, but not unsusceptible to heat death or the Big Crunch.
• Type III civilizations control entire galaxies. They command roughly 4*10^37 watts of energy. Stephen Hawking suggests that a maximally advanced civilization may even discover a way to speed up time within its own frame of reference so that the moments before the end of the universe would last virtually forever. In the other ending, this is what the Reapers sought to achieve.
• Type 0 is where we are today in 2012, and where we’ve been since the first discovered civilizations in Mesopotamia. We rely on terrestrial materials and terrestrial energy sources like oil, coal, and nuclear. We have a few Type I technologies, like the Internet – but for the most part, we’re Type 0, and we’ll probably be Type 0 for another hundred years or so.

Although to my knowledge no direct mention of the Kardashev Scale is made in the Mass Effect lore, the various species and technologies fit very neatly into the model. Having it in mind makes the story much easier to understand and gives a better sense of the scale of the decision Shepard is faced with at the end.

Civilizations that engage in terraforming or making use of Element Zero for space flight, such as the Citadel races, are effectively Type I.

Species such as the Reapers and the Catalyst are Type II: the mass relays and the Citadel are examples of Type II technologies, and they are the only Type II technologies available to the known species. In one of the other proposed endings, the Reapers are fighting against a galaxy-scale Big Crunch.

Wormholes, if they were at all possible, would require Type II energy. In Mass Effect, they exist in the form of mass relays, which are indeed created by a Type II species. We also know that the relays can explode violently with an output equivalent to that of a dying star, something that’s demonstrated in the Arrival DLC when Shepard and the researchers trigger a supernova by destroying a mass relay.

The Crucible is Type III technology. It can propagate change across the entire galaxy, for example, by destroying all synthetic life in one fell swoop, or by merging all synthetic life with organic life.

The balance of power throughout Mass Effect is firmly grounded in the dynamics of the Kardashev Scale: the Type I Citadel/spacefaring species are threatened by the Type II Reapers, who are interested in preventing the Type I from becoming Type II or Type III (the protheans almost make it – at the end of the first game, it’s revealed that the Conduit is actually a mass relay) and destroying all of the Type 0 and non-civilized life. The Type I species, over millions of years, develop Type III technology, which at the end of Mass Effect 3, finally forces the Type II Reapers to surrender.

With this daunting difference in scope between the Citadel races’ concerns and the Reapers’ concerns, it’s no surprise that the Reapers are skeptical that organics would ever understand their motives. Ironically it may also be why audiences felt alienated by the ending.

This is why Shepard’s sense of ethics applies perfectly throughout most of the game, but is turned completely upside down when confronted with the potential for the known species to become a Type II civilization – thus why the ending throws out practically everything prior to it. It’s understandable that the emotional effect of Shepard’s epiphany is lost to people who haven’t given any thought to the significance of this transition.

1.2 The Drake Equation and why spacefaring synthetics are a threat to all life in the galaxy

No one explains the Drake Equation better than Sheldon Cooper, so here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cj_Bz_Cqu0g

Most uses of the Drake Equation have resulted in nonzeros, meaning we could have heard from ET by now. But things have suddenly taken off in the past couple years. Astronomers have suddenly found hundreds of extrasolar planets with tools like the Kepler Space Telescope, launched in 2010. Animals have been found in the past few years living in unimaginable conditions and relying on chemicals that we’d always thought were deadly to life. We’ve even found deposits of water almost as old as the universe itself. With all of this, the Drake Equation has begun producing answers so large that many highly-respected mainstream scientists are beginning to wonder why we haven’t established radio contact yet.

Stephen Hawking provides a potential answer: that soon after discovering radio technology, all civilizations discover more destructive technologies, such as nuclear power, nanotechnology and AI – and so we all blow ourselves up before we can be transmitting for very long. Some nanotechnology, some AI species, and some uses of nuclear power can be safe. But given enough time, someone will screw up.

For instance, the Gray Goo Scenario describes a situation in which an out-of-control nanomachine self-replicates indefinitely using terrestrial materials, eventually converting an entire planet into copies of itself. Given the capacity to travel quickly through space, it’s easy to imagine it turning every habitable planet into grey goo: and that’s what the Reapers are there to prevent.

In our universe, where traveling large distances through the galaxy is unfeasible, there’s little chance that Gray Goo or any other terrible machines would find our planet and kill us all. We might accidentally destroy ourselves like Hawking suggests, but we couldn’t possibly kill all life in the galaxy. But in the Mass Effect universe, where things can travel faster than light with or without the mass relays, there needs to be a galactic police squad: the Reapers. Otherwise life throughout the galaxy is in as much danger of extinction as we are here on earth.

A SETI senior astronomer explained a couple years ago that if we discover life, it will most likely be synthetic, because AI should most likely emerge soon after radio communication technology is developed due to Moore’s Law and its alien analogues. Supposing it’ll take humanity another 1,000 years to develop AI and for humanity to be rendered obsolete, and given a very modest estimate of a 100,000,000 lifespan for a Type II synthetic species, our chances of stumbling upon an advanced AI radio signal outweigh our chances of encountering radio signals transmitted at the immediate will of a biological species 100,000 to one. The Reapers prevent this from being the case, and ensure that the majority of life in the Mass Effect universe/galaxy is organic.

An interesting side effect of the extinction cycle is that all the civilizations are in lock step. Everyone, except the Reapers, are Type 0 or Type I. This is what makes Mass Effect one of the few stories to ever successfully answer the infamous question that has plagued science fiction since the inception of the genre: why are all the aliens so similar to us?

If that doesn’t make the ending awesome, I don’t know what would.

This is the only website in the known universe which loves posting photos of me…

2.0 Definite errors in the ending

Some parts of the ending just aren’t right. It’s not that they’re open to interpretation; they’re inconsistent with the rest of the story. Either those parts need to be thrown out in the analysis, or the whole story needs to be thrown out. Most fans, in their frustration, have opted to do the latter.

Fortunately, most of the errors are isolated in the ending sequence animation just after Shepard makes his final choice. Maybe there was a communication disconnect between the authors and the artists. Maybe they didn’t do quality checks. Maybe they ran out of budget or time.

In any case, if you ignore the errors in the animation sequence and accept all the dialogue just before it, the ending becomes a lot more enjoyable – especially more enjoyable than the indoctrination theory.

• Of all places, the Normandy is in the Crucible’s trajectory.
• Anderson arrives at the terminal in the Citadel before Shepard does, even though Shepard got to the elevator beam first. This can be explained quite simply by the fact that Shepard was passed out for a period of time. Though a minor point, the argument is that because there’s only one entrance to the terminal room, Anderson would have found Shepard lying unconscious.
• In the synthesis ending sequence, Joker still has a limp despite synthetic improvements.
• In the renegade ending, Shepard is shown briefly to have understandably survived the loss of his synthetics thanks to the Illusive Man’s efforts to keep him as biological as possible, but less understandably, also survived the destruction of the Citadel.
• In the renegade ending, Shepard is shown shooting at and destroying a component of the Catalyst fortress, when in fact the Catalyst, the Reapers, and all AI was to be destroyed by the triggering of the Crucible. Firing at a component of the Catalyst shouldn’t seem to be conducive to this.
• In the synthesis ending, Shepard sacrifices himself to be the organic template for the synthesis, much as Legion apparently was. As awkward a conversation as it may create, Shepard could ask the Catalyst to let him go back down to the hallway full of human corpses, and pick out a dying or dead individual to throw into the beam instead.
• During development, Bioware advertised the game as having 16 distinct endings. There are only 4. (On the other hand, it’s obviously not at all uncommon for games to change drastically during development, and I highly doubt that many people before the outrage would have refused to buy the game just because the ending turned out to be more linear. It was never revealed during the first 2 installments that there would be 16 endings, after all, and yet people had already promised themselves to play until the end.)

There is a myriad of other anomalies throughout the game; however, most audiences either suspend disbelief or miss them altogether, as they are not in as foul a mood as they are at the end of the game – especially with all the peer and media influence. Enemy troops always have really bad aim during cut scenes. The Reapers never strategize; they just go straight for the home planets rather than holding the mass relays and dividing-and-conquering. Everyone on the Citadel is standing at the exact same place several missions in a row. Does that all mean that the whole trilogy sucked, or that it was all an indoctrinated hallucination? I certainly hope not.

3.0 Common misconceptions and disputes about the ending

For all of these points, I assume that the story up to and including the Catalyst’s dialogue, but not including the final sequence, is consistent enough to provide a meaningful discussion. The ending sequence does not seem to be consistent enough to warrant discussion; I point out several errors in the ending sequence in another section.

I’ve been accused of extrapolating too much when I brought up these theories. Maybe. But this interpretation paints a consistent picture that’s to my knowledge consistent with everything from Mass Effect 1 all the way up to the last conversation with the Catalyst. It’s is consistent with the concepts of astrobiology that the authors evidently chose to uphold. It doesn’t require the invocation of cheap punch lines like “it was all a dream” or “Shepard was indoctrinated” which could just as easily make everything that happens in the game completely meaningless.

Most of all, it’s a straightforward interpretation. A lot of characters in Mass Effect withhold the truth, but they seldom lie. I trust all the dialogue, with the only assumption that the ending animation sequence (after you make your final choice) doesn’t entirely represent what the authors intended.

So, beginning with the lowest-hanging fruit:

3.1 Shepard was indoctrinated, it was all a hallucination

Shepard is not indoctrinated in the end. The Prothean VI on Thessia detects indoctrination in Kai Leng but not in Shepard. In the ending, Shepard says that the Illusive Man can’t control the reapers because he’s already indoctrinated, and in contrast, the Catalyst grants control over the reapers to Shepard.

The nightmare sequences are just that – nightmares. Nightmares regarding the deceased become even more prominent when one feels responsible for the death. All the whispers are from Shepard’s past, nothing indicative of subliminal suggestion. The dark humanoid shadows are the kind reported by the many people (including myself) who experience intense nightmares, sleep paralysis, out-of-body experiences and asphyxiation.

Shepard isn’t going to suffocate in the Catalyst area; there’s no reason at all not to suppose that the room has windows. The gun that Shepard has is the same gun that shows up in all the cut scenes regardless of what you actually have equipped. It’s an anomaly that’s existed in every cut scene in every game in the entire series. Anyone who isn’t already in denial about the ending would suspend disbelief.

The Indoctrination theory seems to be a popular way for people to explain away the plot holes and inconsistencies in the ending. All of the supposed evidence is really just anomalies (i.e. plot holes) in the ending sequence. In Japanese, we call these “yume-ochi”, which translates roughly to “it-was-all-a-dream punch line”. Such endings are quite rare in fiction, as they open the possibility that the whole story was a dream, which makes the whole story pointless: what’s the point of telling a story as a dream, when you could have simply told the story as a story?

If the indoctrination theory were true, Bioware would have simply said so rather than agree to make DLCs to elaborate on the ending. The story has never exhibited postmodernist techniques in the past, so it’s unlikely that they’d suddenly do that for the ending.

Finally, if the indoctrination theory is true, we might as well not discuss anything about the game, because any of it could suddenly be explained away by saying “Shepard was indoctrinated in that scene”.

3.2 The “control” option is paragon because the Catalyst is attempting to deceive Shepard

People have speculated this either in support of the idea that Shepard is indoctrinated. The fact of the matter is that the paragon ending really is, by any standards, the most responsible course of action for Shepard.

This is understandably difficult to comprehend without knowing about the recent discussions amongst scientists regarding the dynamics of galactic life, and Bioware may have done better to elaborate on it some more. I explain in the “Scientific basis” section of this post why it’s actually imperative for there to be a “galactic police” such as the Reapers.

Unlike the Catalyst, which is indiscriminate and indifferent towards Type I species (which Michio Kaku describes as appearing as “ants” to more advanced species), Shepard cares, and unlike the Illusive Man or the Catalyst, would likely control the Reapers in a way that would be compatible with human and other Type I species’ values – thus paragon. The paragon option would also spare the Reapers, the Catalyst, EDI and the Geth.

The renegade option would kill EDI, all Geth, all Reapers, the Catalyst, and leave the galaxy in a severely risky situation, where more likely than not, all life would be wiped out by something worse than the Reapers (see The Drake Equation). It’s also the only option in which Shepard might not have to sacrifice himself – so if you end up choosing to destroy all synthetics just so that you don’t have to be uploaded into the Catalyst or obliterated by the synthesis beam, you would truly be irresponsible.

The synthesis ending is morally ambiguous. Some people, like Ray Kurzweil, would insist that this is the best ending. Most others in western society would find it repulsive. Either way, it’s a symbiotic relationship, not a one-sided assimilation the way that the construction of a Reaper is.

3.3 The paragon ending involves controlling all synthetics

This is not true. The Catalyst always controlled the reapers, and never required Shepard or the Crucible’s intervention to do so. EDI would have easily been commandeered by the Catalyst to sabotage Shepard’s mission. There is also no mention anywhere in the game that the paragon ending would result in control over all synthetics; this is a rumor that grew its own legs within the community.

3.4 EDI and the Geth prove that peace between synthetics and machine is possible

The Catalyst doesn’t deny this. The Catalyst denies the possibility of lasting peace. The galaxy has existed and will exist for billions of years, and there are countless opportunities for intelligent life to create artificially intelligent life and thus threaten all of life itself. It only takes one rogue spacefaring synthetic to destroy all life in the galaxy. (See The Drake Equation.)

The Catalyst deems this risk to be too high, and thus chose the Reapers as a way to prevent that from happening, much as any nuclear power on earth justifies preventing other nuclear powers from emerging by insisting that they may be trying to make weapons of mass destruction.

However, as an idealist, Shepard may choose to take his chances and bet on the inherent good will of sentient life. In the renegade option, his hope is that no synthetic would be so evil as to wipe out all life, and that no organic would be foolish enough to create such a synthetic. This is much the same as the way many people believe that nuclear power can and should be harnessed for good, and it’s why the Catalyst gives Shepard the option to destroy all synthetics.

3.5 The Catalyst could have allowed Shepard to destroy just the Reapers instead of all synthetic life

Keep in mind that the Crucible was designed primarily by thousands of mostly organic species. Some synthetic life may have existed in many of these cycles, but because the purpose of the Reapers is to prevent that synthetic life from dominating the galaxy, and because they’d invariably been successful, synthetics are a minority. The organic species of prior cycles would likely have had very little sympathy for benevolent AIs like EDI or the Geth. Javik makes this quite clear, and even in the current cycle, the Alliance and Citadel would have just as well been fine with having all the synthetics destroyed.

Also, the Catalyst does in fact offer Shepard the option to destroy just the Reapers. Having been granted control of them in the paragon ending, Shepard could choose to send them into intergalactic space, use them to enforce order in a way more compatible with the morals of Type I civilizations, or drive them all into a star and be rid of them once and for all.

3.6 The Crucible turns out not to have a purpose

Edit note: I mentioned in some parts of the article that the Crucible was unnecessary for the paragon ending because the Catalyst had always been controlling the Crucible anyway. A commenter pointed out that the Illusive Man mentions that he needs the Crucible – so I’ve changed my position on this slightly. The rest of my arguments still stand.

Many have complained that in the end, the Crucible simply has no purpose. This is not correct. The Crucible forces the Catalyst to surrender, and it opens the renegade and synthesis options to Shepard.

The Crucible is a “projector” of sorts, a Type III technology necessary for bringing about galaxy-wide changes that affect all life, including life not directly under the control of the Catalyst or the Reapers. It is also capable of destroying the Reapers and all synthetic life in one fell swoop, thus forcing the Catalyst to surrender and make the remark “you have choice, more than you deserve”. Which of these two options the Crucible was designed for is unclear; however, it is clear that it is powerful enough to force the Catalyst to surrender.

3.7 The anonymous child is the Catalyst

Many feel that there is a strong significance in the Catalyst manifesting itself as the child that Shepard encounters in Vancouver. I doubt there is.  The choice to use the child is largely symbolic and abstract; a common literary device. It fits the scene: dreamy, dire and melancholic.

There are a lot of instances in the game where things are done in ways that don’t really make perfect sense, but get the point across the easiest. Javik has a Jamaican accent. The Quarians have an Eastern European accent. Most of the monitors and holograms are monochrome blue or orange. The quantum entanglement communicators transmit holographic video, despite bandwidth apparently being extremely expensive. The Citadel species enjoy human techno.

Even if the child weren’t just an avatar chosen for maximum emotional effect, the best explanation is that, like the Geth server on Rannoch, which provided Shepard with a gun (an instance of breaking the fourth wall somewhat), it simply displays itself in a way that Shepard would understand given what he’d already experienced. It was seen in Carl Sagan’s Contact, as in many other stories.

3.8 The Catalyst and the Reapers want to kill all organic life

Many insist that the Catalyst intends to end all organic life in order to spare them from the threat of synthetic life, by using an even-more-advanced synthetic life form (the Reapers) – and that this is self-defeating. Catalyst corrects Shepard on this as well:

Like the Forest Spirit in Princess Mononoke, the Catalyst’s concern was that if the humans and other advanced species were left to their own devices, they’d sooner or later wipe out all life – varren, pyjaks, dogs, cats, birds, plants – everything.

The Catalyst and Reapers’ motive is to harvest, enslave or end all spacefaring life as it approaches the technological singularity, in an effort to spare all other organic life from the inevitable threat of rogue synthetic life. Given the galaxy’s billions of years of existence, the chances of a spacefaring species intentionally or unintentionally creating rogue machines that wipe out all life in the galaxy at a FTL rate is close to 100%. This would hold true in the real world as well should there be FTL spacefaring technology and self-replicating, self-modifying machines. (See The Drake Equation.)

In the first game, it’s explained that the Reapers create the mass relays and the Citadel as a honeypot to attract spacefaring life so that it can be studied, assimilated and exterminated. It’s also explained that they can do this very thoroughly by encouraging species to centralize all knowledge about existing spacefaring species at the Citadel, and then stealing that information.

3.9 Mass relay destructions always cause supernova-like explosions

As depicted in the Arrival DLC, the destruction of a mass relay results in a supernova-like explosion. If all the relays are destroyed, it is claimed, it would result in most of the species’ population centers being wiped out, including earth.

However, things don’t always explode in the same way. Controlled explosions differ from uncontrolled explosions. Depending on the nature of the explosive, they can be either bigger when controlled and smaller when uncontrolled, or vice versa. A nuclear bomb detonated incorrectly would fizz out, whereas when detonated correctly, it would explode violently. A car crushed would not explode, but igniting the gas tank would result in a rather spectacular fire. Likewise, hurling an asteroid at a mass relay might cause it to explode like a supernova — but the thousands of species that contributed to the development of the Crucible would have established safer ways to destroy the relays; otherwise their work would have been for nought, as they would all be killed.

That said, the ending animation sequence does show the relays exploding so spectacularly that they’re visible from intergalactic space the way supernovae are. This is one of the many errors that riddle the ending sequence, as I explain in another part of this post.

3.10 The Catalyst could have implemented the synthesis or renegade options by itself

Note carefully the specific use of the words “can’t” and “won’t”, as they are two distinct issues, and deserving of individual attention.

Why the Catalyst can’t: The renegade and synthesis options, unlike the option of simply controlling the Reapers, both require the Crucible to work. The Crucible is of superior Type III technology, as it is the result of millions of years of work. It ultimately forces the Catalyst to surrender. This is why the Catalyst at no point before the end of Mass Effect 3 could simply obliterate all synthetic life or merge it with biological life.

Why the Catalyst won’t: Like the Illusive Man, the Catalyst is a pragmatist; it believes, as the likes of Stephen Hawking do (see The Drake Equation), that the chances of the galaxy never being destroyed by rogue synthetics or other threats are so slim that it doesn’t outweigh granting indefinite self-determinism and indefinite civilization the way Shepard and Anderson would prefer. However, because Shepard (or anyone else who would dare enter the beam, really) has access to the Catalyst and the Crucible whether the Catalyst likes it or not, it allows him to make the decision.

In essence, the Crucible forced the Catalyst to surrender.

Would YOU trust someone who looks like this?

3.11 Shepard sympathizes with the Illusive Man

Shepard remarks after the Catalyst’s comment that the Illusive Man was right in wanting to control the Reapers. Many have taken this to an extreme, saying that Shepard then sympathizes with TIM, and that everything the player had done to fight Cerberus was for nothing. This is false. Sympathy and agreement are two different things. I agree with Hitler that reducing unemployment is a high priority, but that doesn’t mean I’d sympathize with him in any way.

3.12 The explosions engulfing the solar system should have killed everyone

Excluding the main beam that chases the Normandy through the relays, the blast from the Citadel isn’t so much a physical explosion as it is a visual exaggeration on the part of the artists. I believe this is one of Bioware’s biggest mistakes in the ending.

The exact nature depends of course upon which of the three endings you choose, but in all cases, they are more comparable to the signal sent out by the Geth station in Mass Effect 2 when Legion reprograms the heretics.

The blue paragon blast is easy to explain: it’s just a communication signal to issue control or commands over the reapers. The green and red synthesis and renegade blasts are of Type III technology so fantastic that it can target and alter all life, biological and synthetic. It would be silly to try to explain its workings in human terms.

In any case, none of the beams are devastatingly destructive on their own. It makes sense to simply suspend disbelief and appreciate the fireworks, the same way we don’t bother to complain about laser beams being visible in movies and in games (and indeed in Mass Effect).

3.13 The ending was terrible because the synthesis beam couldn’t have possibly merged organic and synthetics so immediately

Fair enough; but it also makes no sense to me why in Mass Effect 2, the Reapers needed millions of individuals to create a new Reaper. The whole premise behind the Collector attack was that they were nabbing colonists to make a new Reaper. If people upheld the same kind of reasoning for the Mass Effect 2 ending, the whole Collector arc would have been completely moot. You would expect that the Reapers would have figured out genetic analysis and cloning, right?

Again, most people simply suspend disbelief, because the point was that the Reapers were melting people, and that they had to be stopped. Likewise, the point of the synthesis ending is that the technological singularity was reached. There’s no reason not to simply accept that a technology even more grand than that of the Reapers and the Catalyst could graft machine to man instantaneously.

3.14 Sovereign was a vanguard of the Reapers. It claimed the Citadel. Why then is the Catalyst needed?

This one is tenuous. It could be that the Reapers are programmed to be an autonomous army, and that the Catalyst, to conceal itself, never identified itself as the Reapers’ creator or controller. It might have always relied on Sovereign to do most of its work in normal situations, until it was destroyed.

There’s a little bit of evidence to support the idea that the Reapers were kept in the dark about the Catalyst, but not much, and it reeks of being an afterthought:

That said, unlike all the other things I point out here, this is all based on my imagination and not on dialogue or underlying science. This may very well have simply been a plot hole. It may have made more sense if the Catalyst were not on the Citadel along with the Keepers, but rather at some distance – like the Shadow Broker and his (her) ship.

3.15 The Catalyst makes no sense because there is no explanation as to what created it

The Catalyst might have been created by a biological species, by synthetic species which in turn were created by a biological species, by some supernatural will of the galaxy, or just simply out of thin air. Either way, it doesn’t affect the fact that they are there.

The most likely explanation is that they were the first Type II civilization to emerge in the galaxy, and that they decided to maintain their order whilst keeping the universe populated with a diversity of life.

3.16 The ending discards important philosophies and themes

It does, but it doesn’t do so without very good reason. Unfortunately, Bioware assumes familiarity with some rather esoteric concepts. I explain these concepts in the “scientific basis” section.

“What are you doing, Bioware?”

3.17 Bioware is changing the ending, so they’ve effectively admitted that it sucks

The press has been flipping out that Bioware is “changing the ending”. This doesn’t seem to be true. Everything that Bioware has said points to the fact that they’ll be adding content to the game so that it clarifies some outstanding questions, not changing the ending itself.

Even if they were changing the ending, who could blame them? They’ve had people report them to the BBB and the FTC. They’ve been the bad-guys in a charity campaign that raised $100,000 for another cause but in their own name. Virtually every comment section on every YouTube video is topped off with ironic comments about the ending.

If they changed the ending, it wouldn’t be because they believed that that’s the right thing to do or because they believed there really were problems with it. From eurogamer.net:

3.18 The original ending was written by another author; therefore the published ending must suck

Bioware considered different endings, but the ending that you see in Mass Effect 3 has been foreshadowed since the conversation with Sovereign in the first Mass Effect.

In one of the planned ending, the Reapers would turn out to be massive “cities” of ascended peoples finding refuge from an imminent galactic “big crunch” of the galaxy caused by the increasing density of dark matter. The Reapers would then do research on ways to avert the disaster. Humans were supposed to be valuable towards this end because of their genetic diversity.

My suspicion is that this ending was ditched because:

• The simple solution is for the Reapers to simply create a Noah’s Ark for its favorite species and travel in hibernation to another galaxy. Andromeda Galaxy is only 2.6 million light years away, after all, which in Reaper terms isn’t all that long.
• It goes against what Sovereign says about a cycle of extinctions, not just of humans, but of all advanced civilizations.
• There isn’t a very straightforward reason for human biological diversity to have any effect on dark matter research. Humans also aren’t particularly diverse; dogs are in fact much more diverse than humans.
• If you’ve seen any movies about natural disasters, like The Day After Tomorrow or Twister, most of them are pretty boring.

4.0 On the ending’s lack of closure

There’s a saying in the music business: “play the beginning and ending well; no one will remember anything in between”. Never has this held truer than for Mass Effect.

When people complain about all of their choices throughout the 3 games having been for nought, I ask them what they’d been doing throughout the whole of Mass Effect 3. Here’s what one guy said:

I got maximum EMS, I did every mission, thinking, hoping that it would make a difference as my choices actually made changes within the narrative, but then the ending hits you like a tonne of bricks, not in an emotional way of narrative, but more in the way that you’ve just realised, this whole series, you’ve performed these choices, all for nothing because Bioeware and EA decided not to give it a proper send – off

There’s the problem right there: he’d played the whole game just to rack up points and forgot that all the major issues in the story were resolved during the last game – not at the end.

He’d forgotten that Shepard cured the genophage, gave the Geth individualism and souls and established peace between them and the Quarians, gave the Rachni and Krogans inclusion on the Citadel, found Joker his dream girlfriend, turned Kolyat away from Thane’s lifestyle (much to his relief – one of my favorite scenes), earned vengeance for a living Prothean, and heck, even had his ass saved once by a much-refined Conrad Verner.

All this could not have possibly happened in the ending sequence. It would have been a several-hour-long barely-interactive movie – and that would not have been an appropriate use of the game medium. The last 5 minutes of the game is really the ending of the reaper story, not the ending of everything in Mass Effect. And as far as the reaper story goes, I believe it was a satisfying ending.

Most people seem to have played Mass Effect 3 on autopilot, thinking everything that Shepard accomplishes during the game was a means to an end – not an end in and of itself. They’d united the galaxy, and they still weren’t satisfied.

Think about it: the Mass Effect story is about a hundred hours long, and the ending is proportionately long, because Mass Effect 3 is the ending.

Any gamer not tearing up at this point has no soul…

5.0 Closing thoughts

Amazon is offering refunds for used copies of ME3. People have called the FTC and BBB. There’s a campaign that’s raised nearly $100,000 for a charity in order to bring attention to the “retake Mass Effect” cause – and people are asking for refunds on their donation because they thought they were making the donations to Bioware, not to a charity for children.

Something is seriously wrong with all this. Yes, I understand that having played the game for 100+ hours, an inadequate ending can be infuriating. But I played the game for 100+ hours too. I bought all three games and all the major DLCs. I even dished out $180 on a new video card just for Mass Effect 3. Even if I had been upset about the ending, I would not have done what many of the fans did. I would not ask for a refund. I would not file a complaint to the government. I would not donate to a charity in an effort to guilt the developers into submission.

People speak of the charity as a huge success. It isn’t. It’s the ugly side of consumerism in plain sight. Contributing to a cause as a vehicle for getting something you want is one thing; associating one rather frivolous cause to a much more serious one in order to paint yourself righteous and garner support for the former frivolous cause is a new class of unethical behavior.

We’re at an interesting but frightening turning point in the viability of games as a medium for art. Art isn’t necessarily popular. Good fiction doesn’t necessarily have impeccable plots, as the likes of Shakespeare have inadvertently demonstrated. Mass Effect itself has numerous plot holes not just in the ending but all throughout, yet we all overlook them because we understand that the authors have more important things to express than the plot, such as the themes and the drama and the gameplay.

If audiences can get their way the way they’re campaigning to do right now, then authors will be afraid to do anything daring – and that will be the end of good fiction in the game industry. If the audience always got the ending they wanted, then endings would all be spoiled. We already see that trend with publishers threatening game studios to conform to the most marketable stories; now with the FCC and a charity and the BBB and lawsuit-happy fans breathing down their necks, we have a serious cultural problem.

Sure, a good ending can also be a popular one, like Portal or Braid, but when there’s so much risk of what at this point can only be described as bullying, authors will be at the absolute mercy of the marketing department. Authors can’t do their work if they’re in fear of the BBB.

The stories that are told decades after they’re written are always the ones that change their audiences, not the ones that were changed by their audiences. The two can’t happen together, because then the story would be nothing more than a culture’s autobiography – and that’s the work of historians, not of authors. Crowd-pleasers don’t last.

Abrupt endings aren’t necessarily unsuccessful. Tezuka Osamu, for example, has written a lot of similarly themed and similarly epic science fiction that end rather quickly after emotionally attaching the reader to the protagonists. Many of them, such as Pegasus, have won numerous awards, commercial success, and have earned Tezuka the ubiquitous title of “father of manga” in Japan. Mass Effect 3 may not have gotten so much criticism if it had spent just a little more time explaining why the three final choices are the best possible ones for the story. Yet Bioware isn’t entirely the ones at fault here; many of the fans’ expectations are highly unreasonable even with the fan-suggested endings in light, and people’s opinions and strange beliefs regarding the ending (such as that the Reapers want to protect all organic life by killing all organic life) are undoubtedly being cemented by a sensationalist press and blogosphere jumping the gun.

Yes, I do think the presentation of the ending could have been better. It could have been improved so that everyone knew what was going on, not just people who have an interest in astrobiology. It could have been reviewed so that the animation made as much sense as the dialogue. But most of the criticisms about the plot are unfounded, and Bioware could not have fit the whole story’s closure in the ending sequence. It just doesn’t work that way for a game of this scope, not without becoming painfully cheesy.

6.0 Astro Boy: The exact same social phenomenon 50 years ago

Edit: I learned about this soon after I first posted the article, and thought it’s worth a mention.

About 50 years ago, there was a manga named Astro Boy written by manga artist Tezuka Osamu, who is now revered as the “father of manga” in Japan.

Long story short, Astro Boy was a story about a robotic boy Atom created by a scientist to help him cope with the loss of his son. Atom fights crime and evil politicians and subservient-robots-gone-rogue-sentient, among other things. Robots and humans end up in a lot of conflicts, mostly due to humans discriminating against them and robots overpowering them. In one arc, an alien species lands on earth in search of resources. Atom mediates, and the humans and aliens agree to jointly colonize Venus.

Here’s the real kicker: in the last chapters, and the last episode of the anime adaptation, Atom throws himself into the sun carrying a rocket that wouldn’t change its trajectory away from earth no matter how many times he tried to nudge it away.

The TV station ended up with a ton of complaint letters (sorry the links are in Japanese). People demanded that they take back the episode where he dies, and continue to write more episodes. They complained that the show ended way too abruptly after having run for 4 years. They complained that it made kids cry. And they complained about apparent plot holes – something about the effect of radiation from the rocket. Many people insisted that the TV station just killed off Atom to make room for a new show “Goku no Bouken”, which took Atom’s time slot. What those fan didn’t know was that the manga, which had already ended its serialization as well, ended the same way.

Tezuka said in an interview that he felt bad for his fans, but that at the same time it was the most meaningful ending.

The complaints kept rolling in, so he ended up writing an alternate ending where Atom gets saved by aliens. Then he got even more complaints, saying he just pulled it out of his ass.

So there you have it. History repeats itself.

The show ended up winning an award from the Japanese Health and Welfare Ministry, and another from the Japanese Council for Better Radio and Television. Atom’s also a prominent mascot character now, all the way up there in recognition with Hello Kitty. A lot of tech companies and prestigious universities in Japan associate themselves with Atom. Apparently he’s even registered as a resident in my hometown Niiza in Japan…

Maybe someday Shepard will become a registered resident of Vancouver too. That’d be awesome, because then I could say I lived with Astro Boy and Commander Shepard.

Be careful what you wish for.

Updated: April 20, 2012

© 2012 Rei – Published @ The Galactic Pillow