Colin McMahon

Where are Catching Fire's Academy Nominations?

Posted on January 23, 2014 by Colin McMahon

Adaptations are now the norm of major Hollywood production. Very few truly original films are released to the public and that is true of this year. From Iron Man 3 to 12 Years a Slave to (of course) the Hobbit: the Desolation of Smaug: adaptations dominate the box office. Many of them, including the three I just mentioned, were positively received and earned Academy recognition for their efforts. Yet there is one missing from the list that many, including myself, feel has been overlooked. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire took in major dollars this year and earned its share of nominations, yet received no Oscar notice.

At first glance this appears improbable. One needs look no further than the casting to find an area worthy of Academy recognition. Jennifer Lawrence has already won an Oscar and received a nomination, this year, for her work in American Hustle. Granted, her performance in that movie is powerful, but in Catching Fire she is the soul of the movie. Suzanne Collins wrote her Hunger Games trilogy from the perspective of Katniss Everdeen. In the book, the reader was treated to a multitude of nuances and perceptions from Everdeen’s thoughts: everyone knew what she was thinking. Lawrence didn’t have that in the film. She made up for it in raw acting talent. The audience is able to feel all of Katniss’ emotional (as well as physical) struggles, thanks to the talents of Jennifer Lawrence.

There is no scene in this movie where Lawrence does not cement her talent as a lead actress.

Her work isn’t the only in the film to stand out. Unlike its predecessor, The Hunger Games, Catching Fire makes excellent use of its supporting cast. Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland, Stanley Tucci and Philip Seymour Hoffman all shine in their respective parts and easily could have merited Academy consideration. Best Supporting Actor is a tough category this year, filled with many (including Michael Fassbender and Bradley Cooper) strong performances competing. Catching Fire‘s omission from this category is understandable but still regrettable.

The real snub is the script. Audiences have already seen what a mediocre treatment of Collins’ writing looks like. They were treated to it in 2012 with the release of the Hunger Games. The result was a semi-entertaining film (thanks only to Jennifer Lawrence) that failed to deliver on any of the emotions or characters from the book. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is flawless by contrast. As someone who read the book, there was little I noticed that was missing from the adaptation. Whenever a book is adapted into the movie, scenes must be smartly written to avoid losing their substance and Catching Fire is a prime example of adaptation done right. There is no wasted scene in the movie: there isn’t time for one. The film’s only weakness, its cliffhanger ending, is still reflective of its source material.

This film does not rely on acting alone to generate emotions. There are many powerful moments thanks to the script.

A last category to look at for nomination would have been the visual department, specifically “Costume Design” and “Makeup and Hairstyling”. Catching Fire does not have any enormous computer-generated creations to gawk at yet the movie still delivers many images that are visually striking. Again, it is startling because the audience has seen it done wrong in the previous film. Katniss Everdeen really does look like the “girl on fire” this time around and all the districts are given more personality through their wardrobe choice. With some suspect films taking nominations in these categories this year, it is sad to see Catching Fire left out in the cold.

At the end of the day, the Academy Awards are just that: awards. They are only more glorified by the amount of press coverage they receive. In the past, the Academy has omitted many great films from its “prestigious” recognition, including recent works like Wall-E and the Dark Knight. Films do not need Oscar wins to be memorable and there is little doubt that Catching Fire will be remembered as anything less than what it is: a fantastic adaptation of a thrilling novel. It is just a shame that the film Academy forget to notice it.

But seriously, how did this movie earn an Oscar nod before Catching Fire? — But seriously, how did this movie earn an Oscar nod before *Catching Fire*?

Find this and more great articles at Culective.

It's Actually Better the Second Time Around: Korra and Mako

Posted on January 22, 2014 by Colin McMahon

Like many people out there, I am a huge fan of the Avatar: the Last Airbender animated series. Also like many people, I was really excited when the creator’s of said show announced their new, sequel project, The Legend of Korra. However, you may remember in another article that I wrote, that I expressed my feelings on some rather serious concerns with this new series. Much of the great character writing that had highlighted the first show was missing and The Legend of Korra suffered quite a few problems that held it back from being anything close to great, at least in taking the first season by itself.

And then there's these two. — And then there’s these two.

One of my chief problems was the relationship between protagonist, Korra and non-existent character, Mako. I’ll try not to repeat myself too much here: I simply never felt the relationship worked. Mainly because Korra (being hot-headed, quick-tempered, loves-to-argue) did not make sense to match up with Mako (more serious, level-headed, dumps-his-first-girlfriend-as-soon-as-she’s-poor… didn’t-really-have-much-character-beyond-that). Yes, you could understand an initial attraction, but a long term relationship seemed a more outlandish idea than bending the elements.

Part of what makes this season an improvement is that they begin to define the character of Mako and give him some much needed personality.

So let’s get into season two, set a full six months after season one and Korra and Mako are still together… somehow. The audience gets the sense that not much conflict has happened in this time, which makes the idea of the two of them surviving together more believable. The peace is not long to last though as wild spirits show up and tensions arise between Korra and the two parental male figures in her life: Tenzin (her mentor) and Tonraq (her father).

In comes Mako to diffuse the situation… with expected results. Korra explodes at him and the two get into a heated argument, every time. Mako even admits that he doesn’t feel comfortable expressing himself around Korra, asking essentially if she would to hear his opinion or simply something she would agree with. The signs are there that the relationship is not in paradise but… it keeps going.

This is the common pose of the season for Korra and Mako.

Meanwhile Bolin has entered into a relationship with Eska, Korra’s cousin from the Northern Water Tribe. Eska is very obviously manipulative, controlling, and all-around crazy so Bolin naturally seeks advice on how to end the relationship. He goes to his older brother and the two have a conversation that is one of the smarter scenes in the entire season. Mako advises Bolin to simply break off, that dragging out a bad relationship is like allowing a leech to hang onto skin. Great advice but the audience wonders if Mako should be listening to himself talk.

Poor relationships are actually a common theme in the season as it is revealed that Aang did not have the best relationship with his children.

Here is where the great realistic writing reenters the series. Mako is communicating thoughts that he is already subconsciously feeling but having trouble expressing directly: his brother’s crappy relationship echoes his own but is not his, so he can see it clearer and be more objective.

It’s not hard to see where this is going: eventually Korra and Mako get into a serious fight and Mako announces that he is finished. Korra goes off and does some Avatar stuff (losing a chunk of her memory in the process… boy I hope that doesn’t arbitrarily create drama later) and Mako rekindles his relationship with Asami. Why Asami is so quick to take him back is beyond me but at least the two of them have some chemistry together.

The final argument that breaks up Korra and Mako. Told you it was a common pose.

But anyway, remember how I mentioned that Korra lost a bit of her memory? Guess which part exactly. So Korra comes back, thinking everything’s fine and Mako… rekindles that relationship as well, dramatically hurting Asami in the process.

Asami looking both hurt and angry at Mako's inability to be mature and decide his relationships. — Asami looking both hurt and angry at Mako’s inability to be mature and decide his relationships.

I know I prefaced this as “arbitrary drama” but I actually think that the writing staff deserves a lot of credit for accurately portraying bad relationships: sometimes they’re hard to get out of. Mako dodges the harder conflict in favor of an easier one but just ends up creating more problems for himself.

Korra, of course, regains her full memory at the end of season two and confronts Mako about the break up. Here is the first moment where Korra genuinely becomes the strong character she has been purported to be all series. She is the one to directly come out and state that they, despite loving each other, do not work as a couple and that they are romantically done.

“I think we both know that this… us… doesn’t work” – Korra “You’re right. I’ll always love you, Korra.” – Mako “And I’ll always love you.” – Korra

This is a powerful moment that shows how much Korra has evolved since the start of the series. She has matured and is learning to calm her temper, while also learning to trust her instincts as a person and not just as the Avatar. Mako, by contrast, is revealed as the less mature of the two: someone who still needs to learn how to be more direct with his feelings and take more responsibility for his actions.

Again, I cannot praise the romantic writing (at least in regards to Korra and Mako) enough this season. First and foremost: this is a show intended for all audiences and Korra is a wonderful role model this season. Too often media (television shows and movies in particular) goes only the dramatic route of ending relationships – just look at Disney’s Frozen for an example of that. The Legend of Korra takes the more complex approach: the idea that two people can love each other but not be right for one another. Korra and Mako are not done as friends and they are not done in each others lives.

There was no drama, no unnecessary turn of character traits. No one became evil. The Legend of Korra has started writing its characters as people, and that bodes really well for the remaining three seasons.

Also they brought back Uncle Iroh, that's just awesome. — Also they brought back Uncle Iroh, that’s just awesome.

Remember That Animated Return of the King Movie?

Posted on January 20, 2014 by Colin McMahon

Whether the criticism is fair or not, Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug has certainly received its share. I stand by my initial review of the movie yet I can definitely understand where people are coming from. In making three movies, the only thing Peter Jackson has proved so far is that two films would have been enough. There and Back Again will have to prove itself this Christmas. Yet whether that film is good or not, the base criticism will remain: it isn’t the book. At the conclusion of this trilogy there still will be no faithful, live-action adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s book. It seems that The Hobbit was just destined to be swallowed up by Lord of the Rings, the epic film trilogy that preceded it.

If only it could have been like that animated version that was created by Rankin/Bass back in 1977. That adaptation was nearly spot on (for those Tolkien fans out there who haven’t seen it – do so). If only Rankin/Bass had continued adapting Tolkien stories, maybe then we’d have a complete set of faithful adaptations. Well, they did do one other – just one other. The Return of the King was released in 1980. Yes… The Return of the King… because nobody has time for beginnings and middles anymore. Actually it had a lot more to do with the fact that there was an animated version of the first part of The Lord of the Rings released around the same time (also check that one out… it is interesting to say the least – more on that later). Anyway, point is they tried their hand at Lord of the Rings… and it felt way too much like the Hobbit.

For starters, examine the cover they went with for the DVD release. Notice anything? Hobbits and dwarves, front and center. Now it’s understandable to put Frodo and Sam on the cover as they are two of the main characters in both the book and the film. Where is Aragorn you may ask? Not important: at least not as important as those two dwarves, neither of whom is Gimli by the way. Also, is that a dragon in the upper corner… what?

In some cases: covers can be misleading. After all, they are the product of marketing campaigns and not the filmmakers. Suffice it to say: the marketing was trying to make this resemble the Hobbit as much as possible. Sound familiar?

Fun fact: there is actually a hobbit on this poster!

So marketing is on the same page. But how is the Return of the King content-wise? It is not an epic. Not by any stretch of the imagination. This version of J.R.R. Tolkien’s masterpiece is framed as the simple story of two hobbits simply walking into Mordor. Yes, Aragorn is in the film but is barely featured in it. Legolas and Gimli are cut altogether and there is very little focus on the battles. In fairness, for being only 98 minutes long, the film does manage to include an awful lot, it is merely simplified.

For the record, I always like how they made the Witch King look in this. Too bad the rest of the Nazgul look laughable. — For the record, I always liked how they made the Witch King look in this. Too bad the rest of the Nazgul appear laughable.

In watching Rankin/Bass’ version of Return of the King, the audience really does get the hobbit-sized version. The story is revealed to us by the hobbits after all (with the aid of a minstrel, hired by Gandalf, cause why not) so they naturally take center stage. The more epic parts of the story are barely touched upon because hobbits are not interested in that sort of thing.

This is a photo of everyone who has a major role in the film. Sorry for the small size but please note: half of them are hobbits.

Back again from the Hobbit are the musical numbers. I am aware Tolkien included songs in his work but can someone please tell me on what page can “Where There’s a Whip There’s a Way” is found? Seriously, I used to love that song as a kid: totally my jam.

My point is this: all of this has happened before and all this will happen again. Tolkien, and books as a platform, enjoy an advantage that films, particularly blockbusters, do not. They can change tone. The Hobbit is nothing like the Lord of the Rings. It was written long before Tolkien ever envisioned Sauron or the Nazgul or anything like that. It didn’t matter because the Hobbit was written first. Peter Jackson never had that luxury.

Rest assured, the hobbit bromance is in tact.

If he were to make a version of the Hobbit as it was originally created, then non-Tolkien fans would have had a few questions, namely: where is Gandalf throughout most of this movie, it seems kind of convenient that he just vanishes and appears as plot dictates. Why does the all powerful ring have no effect on Bilbo Baggins (who wears it for long stretches of time in the book). What was the dwarves’ plan for dealing with Smaug? Why does no one in Lake Town think it’s a bad idea for thirteen dwarves and a hobbit to go wake up a dragon? Why are the elves such jerks (still a valid question)? Why does Bilbo even care about these dwarves (seriously, if you think Thorin is an ass in the movie…)?

Anyway, I’m not making excuses for Jackson’s epic. “Why is there an elf-dwarf love story” is also a valid question.

There is a weakness in Hollywood that success merits only additional success. The child-friendly version of the Hobbit created by Rankin/Bass was a huge hit, therefore a child-like version of Return of the King is the way to go. An epic version of the Lord of the Rings was a masterpiece so Bilbo better get epic with it. The good news is this: the books still exist and will always exist. People will keep falling in love with the story and maybe one day Hollywood will get it right. If not, you can rest comfortably knowing that, after it’s all done, some rapid fan will edit down Peter Jackson’s trilogy to one movie and release that cut. After all, it didn’t take long for Jar Jar Binks to vanish from Star Wars.