blake johnson

There is a recent addition to my list of TV shows that I am watching: Battlestar Galactica (for the curious, the only other shows I watch regularly are 24 and Smallville). I have been reflecting recently about what makes this show so compelling to me after various conversations at Christmas parties and with my sister. I guess that it starts with the rather epic nature of the show. The biblical allegory to the 12 tribes of Israel and their Exodus from Egypt anchor the show in something we know, and lend the show a sense of history. It is sci-fi (and therefore futuristic) but somehow still seems “old”. The producers emphasize this sense by choosing a kind of retro look for the set design (which makes the show feel a bit like Star Wars).

I also like that none of the characters are perfect. Each of them is flawed: some are selfish, some are hurt, others are desperate. It makes the characters seem more real. It also means that there isn’t a definite “hero” of the show, because every character has a sort of fall from grace, but they are still likable and I find it easy to sympathize with their problems.

I re-watched the miniseries with my sister last night. She said that she found it very slow, which may be true, but the content of the miniseries is quite devastating. I think the slower pacing is necessary at the beginning to let the viewer cope with what they are seeing (I would probably find the show to be flippant/disrespectful of the loss of human life if it rushed past the death of the majority of the human species). Fortunately, though, the pace really picks up with the following episodes.

One final thing I’d like to add (which was pointed out to me by Phyllis) is that I think one of the great successes of the show is its balance between tragedy and salvation. I mean, you start out with most of the human race being wiped out, but 50,000 people survive. Then, things continue to go poorly for the survivors, but before the show becomes completely depressing, something good finally happens. This back-and-forth motion of the show makes it particularly compelling.

So, take my advice and go rent/borrow/buy season 1 if you have not yet seen any of the show. Ignore the packaging because for whatever reason the producers market the show as hard-core sci-fi, when in fact it is some of the most accessible sci-fi ever made. Anyway, just get it, you’ll like it.

I saw Superman Returns on opening night last week, and I have to say that I loved it. I am heavily influenced by the fact that I am simply a Superman fan (I religiously watch Smallville), but there was something about this movie which transcended the usual summer blockbuster. Some of this had to be that the movie had slow and beautifully framed segments to offset the action. For example, in one such section Superman brings Lois Lane up with him so that she can see all of Metropolis. The sequence is stunningly beautiful.

This movie takes the Superman movies in a different direction than they have gone before. Whereas Superman 1 and 2 focused on Superman’s humanity and his struggle in dealing with that in relation to his relationship to Lois Lane, this latest movie shows Superman as a man apart, really, as a savior. The Christ analogy is hard to ignore: a vastly superior being sends his only son to earth to save mankind, and a crisis ensues which causes the son to sacrifice himself so that others might live. NYTimes writer Manohla Dargis clearly thinks this was overdone: “It’s hard to see what the point is beyond the usual grandiosity that comes whenever B-movie material is pumped up with ambition and money”, but I disagree. I think it is a perfectly valid metaphor and serves to anchor the modern mythology of Superman.

Something that I was really pleased with was the degree to which this latest installment played homage to the earlier movies. This started with the opening credits, which are a close approximation of the style of the credits of the originals. An aspect of the first movies which worked really well was that the dialogue was really hammed-up. The actors played their parts like they were on a theatre stage, and this definitely helped sell the idea that it was a comic book. That is continued here, but I will agree with NYTimes that Brandon Routh is no Christopher Reeves. Don’t get me wrong, he does a fine job as Superman, but as Ms. Dargis puts it:

Part of the charm of Mr. Reeve’s interpretation was that a guy this impossibly handsome, who literally towers over everyone in the office, could hide behind a slouch and oversize eyeglasses. It was absurd, but then so too was the idea that a powerful extraterrestrial would hang around Earth to take the kind of abuse perennially heaped on his human half.

In any case, go see this movie. You will enjoy it.

I used to think that Boston Legal was just another law drama like Law and Order, only cheesier and less interesting. However, I got sucked in during an episode about a case on video game addiction. Since then I’ve been surprised to discover that this show actually confronts serious issues and has something meaningful to say about them. Take this example from a couple episodes ago during the closing balcony scene (usually the best part of the show, imo):

That’s what troubles me, this notion that we have to take sides in this country, now. You’re either with us or against us, republican or democrat, red state or blue state… No one looks at an issue and struggles over the right position to take anymore. And yet our ability to reason is what makes us human. Lately we seem so willing to forfeit that gift of reason in exchange for the good feeling of belonging to a group; we all just take the position of our team. I’ve certainly done it and hated myself for it.

If you are as excited as I am about the 3rd X-Men movie, then you’ll want to watch this 7 minute sneak peak. I have been “preparing” myself for the movie by reading the phoenix saga ark of the comics which John generously provided me with.

Strangest movie I’ve seen in recent history. The movie completely abandons standard elements of movie-making such as plot, dialogue, pacing… instead there are just a series of images and music that tell the story of John Smith and Pocahontas falling in love (lots of long shots of faces, shots of running through fields, and so on). The music very much mirrored the imagery, with the main theme being a single measure that was repeated over and over again at different volumes and with different instruments. I will admit that it was extremely beautiful, but its beauty was so static and unchanging that it could not hold my attention for the entire 2 1/2 hours.