Colin McMahon

Injustice on the Wii U? Nah, There's a Better Word for It

Posted on April 19, 2013 by Colin McMahon

Like many fans of both fighting games and the DC Comics universe, I was very happy this week to welcome the release of Injustice: Gods Among Us for the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Wii U. Developer NetherRealm Studios is the best in the business when it comes to fighters, at least as far as I’m concerned (granted I place a lot of importance on a strong single player campaign). It is refreshing to see a developer consistently increase in quality as their games develop (Mortal Kombat was considerably better than Mortal Kombat vs DC Universe) and judging by the reviews we have (I’ll get back to this in a moment) it looks like Injustice: Gods Among Us is another hit. So my question as a gamer becomes – which system do I get it for?

I purchased Mortal Kombat for the Xbox 360 and enjoyed it, but I would be lying if I said that the controls were the best for that system. See when it comes to fighting games: the D-pad is important. For those of you who don’t know, the D-pad is a collection of arrow keys (up, down, left, right) that is usually located near the joystick (if you don’t know what a joystick is, please look it up). While joysticks have generally replaced the D-pad in most games (it is far easier to move around a 3D environment using a joystick), the D-pad remains supreme when it comes to fighting games. Plain fact is that it is easier to move and execute special moves. Also, sad fact is: the D-pad on the standard North American Xbox 360 controller kinda sucks. Now I don’t own a PlayStation 3 or this would be the easy choice so I must ask myself: how is Injustice: Gods Among Us for the Wii U? I’m still asking this question.

This is embarrassing and a problem that has been with Nintendo since the Wii days. No one is reviewing their product. Go on Metacritic or Gamerankings , there is absolutely nothing. Both services are stuffed full of independent reviews for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions (although how many of those are copy-and-paste is another question) but still, nothing for the Wii U. I’m still undecided on whether or not this is better than how most critics handled the Wii. For those of you who don’t know what I mean by this, the Wii enjoyed many unique versions of games that arrived on its console (Thor: God of Thunder, Ghostbusters: the Game, Prince of Persia: the Forgotten Sands). These games all bared little-to-no resemblance to their 360 and PS3 counterparts. Problem was that, in most cases, when the review came in for the 360 or PS3 version, it was simply cut and pasted onto the Wii, despite the fact that they were different games. There’s a word for this behavior: laziness. It describes what is happening now.

This isn’t on Nintendo. True they deserve a lot of blame for the marketing of the Wii U (which I have already outlined here: http://redringsofredemption.wordpress.com/2013/03/27/a-rose-by-any-other-name-can-be-confusing-the-wii-u/) but Nintendo is not responsible for reviewing the games. Obviously not, how could we trust critics if they dropped all illusions that they weren’t being directly paid by the video game companies? No, there are many professional sites out there with one job: to review video games. IGN, Giant Bomb, Gametrailers? You guys had one job.

Really, it is the fanboys’ job to be prejudiced, not the critics. By not reviewing the Wii U version of Injustice: Gods Among Us, it sends the message that this version of the game isn’t as important as the other two. That’s crap and disrespectful to both Nintendo and NetherRealm Studios, not to mention the hundreds of thousands of people out there who own a Wii U. They made it and critics are paid to play it, PAID. Seriously if someone wants to send me a copy of this game for the Wii U, I will give it a full review. I’m not a professional so I don’t have sixty dollars to throw around on a version. I only plan on purchasing one copy of Injustice: Gods Among Us, I would simply like to make an informed decision.

Sad to say but reviews aren’t the only thing lacking for this Wii U version. Right now word on whether or not Nintendo will receive the DLC characters who have been promised to the 360 and PS3 is limited. There are conflicting reports. We know that is not receiving the season pass (the whole logic of the season pass will have to be discussed at another time) but apparently the Wii U box does advertise the downloaded content on the back.

If this is to be the start of a trend for third party games on the Wii U, then it is very sad. Regardless of how you feel about Nintendo’s newest product – they have created a unique experience. While Nintendo struggles to remain relevant in the video game world, it seems like no one is willing to offer them a hand. It is a system, it does exist and critics should be ashamed for their lack of response. One job guys, you had one job.

Also where is this? Is this coming for the Wii U? Note: the Wii U d-pad is actually pretty good and should do fine on its own. — Also where is this? Is this coming for the Wii U? Note: the Wii U D-pad is actually pretty good and should do fine on its own.

Thoughts? Comments? Am I full of shit or onto something? Let me know now in the feedback section of this article.

Marketing Method: Man of Steel

Posted on April 17, 2013 by Colin McMahon

Who doesn’t love hype? By its very definition it instills excitement. Some directors are better at it than others. Probably the best out there at the moment is J.J. Abrams (who doesn’t remember trying to figure out what was in the train for the trailers to Super 8, let alone the mad race right now to discover Benedict Cumberbatch’s identity in Star Trek into Darkness). Good marketing lays the foundation for blockbuster film. However marketing, like any tool, can be a double-edged sword. There are plenty of good films that suffered from poor trailers (Stardust, Scott Pilgrim vs the World) which failed to properly convey the tone of the upcoming film. Many times these poor trailers try to capitalize on another popular property rather than focus on the strengths of the film they should be trying to promote. There is no better example that comes to my mind for this than Beowulf. Neil Gaiman and Robert Zemeckis’ thoughtful deconstruction of the heroic ideal was instead neglected in favor of conjuring a 300-esque style of masculine action (“I am Beowulf” is used to the exact same effect as “this is Sparta” in the trailers). This style of marketing always does a disservice to the movie it represents. Sadly, something similar to Beowulf is currently occurring with the upcoming blockbuster, Man of Steel.

Watch the trailers for Man of Steel. There are three of them, the teaser: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wArmHSPIvlQ, the first trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVu3gS7iJu4, and the one that was very recently released: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6DJcgm3wNY. I’ll wait.

Looks good doesn’t it? Let’s talk about that teaser though. Kinda bizarre right? Clearly designed with the intention of not immediately revealing its identity right away. Looks more like a trailer for Superman: Deadliest Catch rather than the high-flying epic of Man of Steel. I joke of course but the fact remains: the teaser is constructed in such a way as to convey that you are watching a personal drama first and a superhero movie second. As I stated before, the fact that he’s Superman isn’t made abrupt until the final seconds of the teaser. Interesting approach… wait, hasn’t it been done before? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu2ecPMX0kI

Yep. Looks like the Man of Steel is using the same agent as the Dark Knight. Really, in terms of emulation, you could do a lot worse than Nolan’s Batman trilogy. Also there are a lot of similarities in terms of creative staff. While Zack Snyder is directing Man of Steel, the script was penned by Jonathan and Christopher Nolan, with final version coming from David S. Goyer. That is essentially the exact same writing team as Nolan’s Batman films. Also, all movies were made using Nolan’s own studio: Syncopy Films. Oh and Hans Zimmer is once again in charge of music (although that has only effected the marketing of the most recent trailer).

I know this is a fan mockup but it does shed light on similar design used for promotional photos.

So this is a good thing, right? Equating Snyder’s Superman with Nolan’s Batman? Yes. As I said before, there are a lot worse marketing strategies for Man of Steel to emulate. There is sense in comparing Superman and Batman, DC Comic’s two star superheros, as similar people. Both Batman and Superman went on a journey, both grew as people. Both faced challenges in a world that was unsure of how to receive, both… actually they are very different people.

Don’t get me wrong: Superman and Batman are both heroes, both stand for good and both do everything in their power to make the world a better place, yet their methods are completely opposite. Any good drawing of Superman will have the Man of Steel bathed in sunlight, standing proudly over a grateful city. Drawings of Batman put the Caped Crusader in the shadows; he is hiding from the public eye, doing a job that he feels must be done regardless of public opinion. These two approaches visually reflect the characters’ different philosophies.

So while comparing Snyder’s Man of Steel to Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy is good on certain levels (superhero movies that are more than just superhero movies), there is a danger. These trailers, especially the first two, give the impression of serious realism. Inherent problem: Superman is not realistic. When you’re dealing with a character who can fly into outer space and blow up a comet with his laser vision after taking a nuclear missile full to the chest – you’re not dealing with something that can happen every day. That is a strength of Superman.

Let me stop right here before people go assuming: realism is not necessary in order for the character to be relatable. Grounding the fantastic in the real world always helps, and Man of Steel definitely appears to be doing that. The two later trailers make it clear that the main focus of this film will be Superman adjusting to and being accepted by the real world (what General Zod is doing intruding into these trailers is beyond me – guess we need that villain fight). But Superman himself is fantastic, that is part of his identity. Too much of an attempt to make him into your average everyday man is not going to work out well.

What do I mean by that? Superman was raised as a human, he does have emotions so of course he is average. No. First two points are valid. Superman is raised as Clark Kent, he does feel but he is anything but average. The character of Superman goes beyond his red cape and boots. He is the ideal best of humanity in a physically superhuman package. Does that mean he doesn’t struggle, of course not but it is internal. Superman is never going to go on a bender or sink into month long depression. He is more subtle than that. This is partly what makes Superman a very hard character to present on screen. The challenge is essentially the same as presenting the fully human yet fully divine character of Jesus Christ.

If you think representing Jesus on film is easy - please name all the successful Jesus films. — If you think representing Jesus on film is easy – please name all the successful Jesus films.

So everyone has a challenge. The filmmakers have a challenge and marketing has a challenge. How do you portray Superman? They have elected to go the route of Batman. The result has been a trailer evolution that started off with us being introduced (in the teaser) to a man who was unrecognizable as the Man of Steel. Only now, in the most recent trailer, does Superman begin to emerge. Still there are aspects of the newest trailer that seem counterproductive to the nature of the film. The black and white text that punctuates certain frames now looks out of place whereas before it enhanced the sombre mood of the first two trailers. Speaking of that: why is Superman sombre? Batman is sombre, Superman is hopeful. It has taken them three trailers to get that right.

One last thing that speaks to these early trailers not doing the film justice comes in the form of the early review. Check out this first review of Man of Steel (don’t worry, there’s no spoilers): http://www.joblo.com/movie-news/scoop-early-screenings-of-man-of-steel-reveal-more-about-the-tone-action-and-superman-kicking-all-kinds-of-ass. Any time one of the bullet points is “it’s not nearly as dour and serious as the trailers suggest”, that pretty much declares that marketing has made a mistake.

Christopher Nolan has already proven himself a visionary in terms of storytelling. He and his brother have also shown a tremendous amount of understanding in relation to the characters they portray. They understood Batman, they knew what was essential to his character and what was not. That is how they were able to create their own Batman universe that felt every bit as ture to the character as the comics. I have full faith that they possess the same understanding of Superman yet Man of Steel‘s marketing has not convincingly shown that. So far what has been demonstrated is that they understand Superman in Batman’s terms, using Batman’s tools. Not the smartest way to go.

As I said before, trailers are no indication of film quality. A great film can have a crappy trailer likewise a poor film can be very well marketed. So please don’t mistake my critiques of Man of Steel‘s marketing to be any more than that. I don’t hate Superman, I don’t think Man of Steel will be a shitty movie and you shouldn’t be excited to go see it. I simply feel that these trailers have not presented Superman in the best light because they’re too busy sticking to the Dark Knight’s shadows.

Oooh so dark and edgy. Superman should never be defined by darkness.

Thoughts? Comments? Am I full of shit or onto something? Let me know now in the feedback section of this article.

The F*ck am I Watching? Girls Bravo

Posted on April 15, 2013 by Colin McMahon

Ever had that day where, no matter how productive you try to be, you end up on the couch (or in front of the computer) watching something for several hours? Doesn’t really matter what it is or even if it’s good: you just feel like watching something. That was me yesterday. Netflix to the rescue. And yesterday was a strange day as I visited a section of Netflix that I usually stay away from – the anime section. Not that I hate anime, I grew up in the 90s on Toonami (Dragonball Z and Tenchi Muyo all day son), it’s just that I find the genre very bizarre in subject matter yet rather bland when it comes to characters archetypes and storytelling structure. But anyway, this is not a day to talk about my overall feelings on Anime, oh no. Today’s subject is much more provocative. I speak, of course, about a little show called Girls Bravo.

It’s a comedy… I think. Here’s the basic plot rundown as I understand it: Yukinari Sasaki (You-can-marry-Sasaki) who is so terrified of women that he has developed an allergic reaction to them. He’s short, puny and completely devoid of any real fire or passion in his life. Boy, now doesn’t that sound like a protagonist you can get behind and identify with? Anyhoo this guy teleports through his bathtub (I’m not kidding) to another planet that’s right by Earth (still not kidding) called Seiren (Saren, like in Mass Effect). Of course this planet turns out to be 90% attractive female populace because that’s realistic and the naked girl he startles in her bath (yes, full drawn bewbs in this show, lots of ’em) quickly becomes his new best friend. Nothing says friendship and romance like surprising a girl when she’s naked in the bath, fellas out there take note.

So on this new planet, since men are so scarce, Yukinari is naturally a sought after prize. All the women are literally chasing after him to be his wife (side note, I would love to see radical feminism’s reaction to this show). So Yukinari and his new best friend/love interest teleport back through the bath water and return to Earth. By the way this new girl, Miharu (she has a last name but who cares) has pink hair, three dots on her head and loves to be naked. Her other talents include cooking, eating food and being socially awkward (you should see her eat a banana). This is the main love interest in a Japanese show – what does that say about their culture? No comment.

So basically Yukinari and Miharu are joined by several other attractive women characters (all of whom are attracted to Yukinari cause why not) and the hilarious, highly-sexual hijinks ensue.

Okay, going to go left to right with the names. Koyomi, Tomoka, Miharu, Lisa, and Kirie. There, now you know that "Lisa" is Japanese for "Lisa". — Okay, going to go left to right with the names. Koyomi, Tomoka, Miharu, Lisa, and Kirie. There, now you know that “Lisa” is Japanese for “Lisa”.

This show rotates between pretty absurdly funny and cringing levels of awkwardness. There is one character in particular that I feel I must mention as he could not exist in any western show. Fukuyama (he has a first name but again, who cares) is the only other major male character present in the show so far (I’ve only watched the first 8 episodes – I feel slightly dirty admitting that). He is rich, powerful and a level three sex offender. Excuse me and my western views: he is the show’s pervert. That’s right ladies, in this show you have your choice between no passion or perverted passion. You’re spoiled. But I feel that pervert doesn’t do it justice. Hang on, let me show you:

He does that. A lot. And every character just dismisses it: he’s a pervert, he’s a scoundrel. He’s actually a really funny character in the show (well, it’s funny watching them beat the life out of him). But really, kinda in today’s culture, I don’t know how to react to this. Obviously this is not a show for children but still, this is someone who could not exist outside of Japan. This character type is actually common in most animes that I’ve watched. It’s usually an older male (Master Roshi, you old devil) yet still: nearly always there. The question becomes then: WHY!? But I digress, just be aware those of you out there who, you know, consider women to be people – this show does not appear to follow that logic.

So this is today’s guilty pleasure. I haven’t decided yet if I like the show. I do think it is entertaining (I haven’t been bored, I can say that). There’s twenty-four episodes in total so it’s short like most programs from Japan. If you can put morality aside and switch your brain off, it’s funny. If you’re curious as to what another culture views as entertainment, it’s enlightening. If the thought of objectifying women really offends you, go watch Avatar: the Last Airbender. I don’t know if it says more about the show or me, but I’m going to finish the series. The fuck am I watching? Girls Bravo.

Never has an image summed up a series so well.

Thoughts? Comments? Am I full of shit or onto something? Let me know now in the feedback section of this article.